like imagine this

imagine you're a lawyer

and arguing your point to a judge,

and reference arguments that judge made years ago

Yeah

I doubt it will get to the supreme court or if they will even hear it however

I'm not saying there's a huge conspiracy, but some things do cast doubt

like why republican poll watchers were denied meaningful access

or for instance, the curing of mail in ballots for some counties, but not allowing ballots to be cured in other counties within the same state

@Adam135, you just advanced to level 5!

Thats a very deep conspiracy

@james j, you just advanced to level 2!

not really, the treatment of ballots was actually defined in Bush v Gore

that they must be treated equal among all counties within a state.

pursuant to the 14th ammendment

I'm not saying they were deliberately not allowing ballots to be cured

but just that in some counties they did allow and others not

I thought you were trying to say trump got these people to intentionally kick out poll watchers so they could levy allegations to invalidate the results based on something they orchestrated

The whole poll watchers having meaningful access was dismissed in court

that might be so, but it still doesnt look good

There were republican watchers in the room

Its a frivolous case

meaningful access means within 6 feet

As ordered by Justice Alito,

wait no that was a separate issue regarding the deadline extension

The poll watchers trump keeps referring to were the watchers off the street you signed up to watch

but yes, they were in the room, but they weren't able to physically identify ballots from a reasonable distance.

No the judge in that case asked were there republican poll watchers in that room , the lawyer replied “there was a non zero number of republican poll watchers in the room” . Then the case was dismissed

It's basically a simple gentleman's rule, like in boxing, how before one coach can wrap the fighter's hands, the opposing coach must come over and witness it to ensure good faith and then mark it before the gloves come on.

I'm not disputing whether or not they were in the room, I'm disputing whether they were actually able to witness and identify ballots being cast.

Its a frivolous case that got tossed. They were allowed to be within 6 feet after however that is not enough to invalidate those votes

I mean, answer me this, what reason would you have to not allow opposing party poll watchers to observe ballots being cast?

Coronavirus

and yet those same standards weren't even remotely followed for other poll workers

Spacing

People constantly breaking the 6 feet rule and being obstructive

but a court order said they must be allowed within 6 feet.

Yes after

If the entire republican case of invalidating votes is based on this 20 foot rule its a weak case.

It isn't, it's simply to cast doubt and pack the courts with litigation

and look at what happened with Wayne County, yeah they withdrew their lawsuit because they have sworn affidavits of 2 board members who want to rescind their certification vote because their initial choice to certify was under duress.