Democracy died on 2020-11-04, so I have been paying no attention to elections, electoral integrity laws, and all that.
But, due to normalcy bias, lots of people have:
“Normalcy bias” is, if it exists at all, an overcorrection for the fear-driven bias that causes conspiracy theories to be so widespread. Which is exactly what you are falling into.
In other words, everyone can just accuse everyone else of being biased all day, and still be no closer to figuring out the truth. This is called bulverism, and is not a rational argument strategy.
In the run up before the 2020-11-03 election, the Democrats massively escalated all their regular routine fraud, sufficient to deal with a massive Trump landslide
But instead of a massive Trump landslide, they got a colossal Trump landslide, so in the early hours of the morning of 2020-11-04, halted the counting, and proceed with hasty, panicked, and incompetent last minute fraud. Which last minute fraud was only applied to the federal election results, with the result that a lot of states went Republican at the state level
Exactly how powerful do you think the Democrats are? If they can halt the vote counting and replace all the ballots, then why not just replace all the ballots at the start and skip all this mess? Why leave room for error?
And, theoretically, the states control the election process. So those freshly minted Republicans think they are onto a good thing. So, a bunch of election integrity laws
You are correct in recognizing that there is a problem here. There’s a lot of spots where the law of the United States makes it kinda unclear who, exactly, is allowed to do what. For example, there is an amendment to the Constitution which claims that: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Let’s be honest here, those phrases are broad as fuck. It’s totally reasonable to interpret this amendment as granting the federal government the power to meddle in the voting process, to ensure that every citizen has the opportunity to vote, but that’s because this amendment grants the feds the power to meddle in all sorts of things. And this is pretty typical for Constitutional amendments; they usually aren’t very long, and a lot of what they mean in practice gets decided in Supreme Court cases.
So the states are supposed to be “in charge” of elections, but the federal government gets to pass laws restricting how they’re run in the interest of making sure everyone has an equal opportunity to vote? The whole point of a properly-run election system is to ensure that everyone who’s eligible has their voices heard! What meaningful decision-making is actually left for the states, if they aren’t allowed to do anything that, in the feds’ opinion, would unfairly hamper availability?
About the only thing left is the actual counting system, with state-level movements such as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, and it’s pretty controversial whether they’re even allowed to make a minor change like that! Major changes in how they’re governed, like not having a state congress at all, are even less likely to fly… and yet, the States are supposed to be “in charge” of the elections.
Most people don’t want to be lawyers, and this is the sort of reason why. The consequences of your actions are often quite grave, and they wind up hanging on trying to adapt phrases from 1868 to situations that might not have been obvious to the people who wrote them. I think in this case, it’ll be pretty obvious who’s in the right, but it isn’t always so clear-cut, and even good, common-sense decision making can be slowed and confounded by power struggles.
Also, a whole lot of laws against critical race theory
The laws on critical race theory appear to be having absolutely no effect.
No shit they had no effect. While some teachers might have been motivated by CRT, none of them actually taught it in primary school. It’s a fringe, left-wing theory.
Those laws are pure, conservative virtue signalling. They outlawed something that no sane primary school would have done anyway — CRT would fly over the poor kids’ heads if they tried!
Law has ceased to matter. The laws on election integrity are likely to be similarly ignored. Only Republican scrutineers backed by physical violence are likely to have a significant effect on election outcomes. To attain a fair and honest electoral outcome, Republicans would need to deploy the methods that Julius Caesar and the NSDAP used attain a fair and honest electoral outcome. Such methods are likely to produce a fair election only once
But it looks like the Republicans are going to try another ride on this merry go round. It will may well be their last ride. I count my survival prospects much better than theirs
Bla bla bla the sky is falling, the sky is falling!
Cry me a river, little chickenshit.