Voting in Delaware is Legal Again!!!!!

[Binger]

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/rest ... n-november

Democratic lawmakers introduce the vote-by-mail bill after failing to win Republican support to amend the constitution. A constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote by each chamber in two consecutive General Assemblies. The first leg of a constitutional amendment to eliminate limitations on absentee balloting cleared the legislature in 2020, after initially being defeated in the Democrat-controlled Senate, but the second leg failed to win the necessary majority in the Democrat-led House last year.

Voting by mail is not real voting. Coronavirus vaccines do not prevent transmission and they do not work. And ranked voting disenfranchises some voters in the final rounds.

But hey, at least a judge made voting legal in Delaware again!!!!!

[Gunnar]

Voting by mail is not real voting. Coronavirus vaccines do not prevent transmission and they do not work. And ranked voting disenfranchises some voters in the final rounds.

None of the above is supported by the preponderance of the available evidence. It is nothing but flat, unsupported and often rebutted PRATS (points refuted a thousand times) right here on this very forum, whether you like it or not.

[Binger]

Voting by mail is not real voting. Coronavirus vaccines do not prevent transmission and they do not work. And ranked voting disenfranchises some voters in the final rounds.

None of the above is supported by the preponderance of the available evidence. It is nothing but flat, unsupported and often rebutted PRATS (points refuted a thousand times) right here on this very forum, whether you like it or not.

A judge in Delaware disagrees. But hey, if this forum has refuted it by golly, then that is really something.

[Gunnar]

None of the above is supported by the preponderance of the available evidence. It is nothing but flat, unsupported and often rebutted PRATS (points refuted a thousand times) right here on this very forum, whether you like it or not.

A judge in Delaware disagrees. But hey, if this forum has refuted it by golly, then that is really something.

One judge in Delaware! Wow! I'll bet we can find lots of judges, both conservative and liberal, who disagree with that judge. How about the preponderance of the more than 100 judges, both Republican and Democrat, including even Trump nominated judges, who were involved in the 63 or so lawsuits he lost claiming widespread election fraud?

[Dr. Shades]

And ranked voting disenfranchises some voters in the final rounds.

By that logic, non-ranked voting disenfranchises everyone who voted for the candidate who didn't win.

[Binger]

And ranked voting disenfranchises some voters in the final rounds.

By that logic, non-ranked voting disenfranchises everyone who voted for the candidate who didn't win.

No. The opposite is true.

Ranked voting repeats the competition and drops the choices of the last place vote-getter in each sequential round. Meaning, the fourth place candidate will not be included in the second round and the third place candidate will not be included in the third round.

Some voters may not have ranked all four candidates. Some voters may have ranked the last two without consideration of whether they would appear head to head.

Thank god for the folks of Delaware, this disenfranchising option does not apply yet. For now, actual voting is legal in at least one state - Delaware. I would totally vote if I lived there.

[Gunnar]

Pros and cons of ranked choice voting.
After having looked at pros and cons of ranked choice voting, I find the pros much more persuasive than the cons. I will continue to be pro ranked choice voting.

[Binger]

Pros and cons of ranked choice voting.
After having looked at pros and cons of ranked choice voting, I find the pros much more persuasive than the cons. I will continue to be pro ranked choice voting.

The fact that there are cons is relevant. Changing elections, especially with an egregious and manipulative change to ranked choice disenfranchisement contests, should not be done lightly and it should not be done to favor an ideological agenda.

[Gunnar]

Pros and cons of ranked choice voting.
After having looked at pros and cons of ranked choice voting, I find the pros much more persuasive than the cons. I will continue to be pro ranked choice voting.

The fact that there are cons is relevant. Changing elections, especially with an egregious and manipulative change to ranked choice disenfranchisement contests, should not be done lightly and it should not be done to favor an ideological agenda.

The mere fact that there are cons is not necessarily relevant. People list cons to everything imaginable, women's suffrage, wearing open toed shoes, religious and racial equality, letting homosexual or political opponents vote or even live, environmental protection, etc. As I said, I looked at both the pros and cons listed at the site I linked to above, and I found the cons to ranked choice voting pathetically weak and very easily and devastatingly shot down.

[Binger]

The fact that there are cons is relevant. Changing elections, especially with an egregious and manipulative change to ranked choice disenfranchisement contests, should not be done lightly and it should not be done to favor an ideological agenda.

The mere fact that there are cons is not necessarily relevant. People list cons to everything imaginable, women's suffrage, religious and racial equality, letting homosexual or political opponents live vote, or even live, environmental protection, etc. As I said, I looked at both the pros and cons listed at the site I linked to above, and I found the cons to ranked choice voting pathetically weak and very easily and devastatingly shot down.

Well, great. And in the meantime, a judge saw cons and laws and stuff and made voting in Delaware legal again.