8
luckyfunk13 8 points ago +8 / -0

I didn't expect this to happen tonight....

Dean

Neither did we, Dean. Neither did we.

1
luckyfunk13 1 point ago +1 / -0

But, with as many eyes or on this letting them spin and twist is very telling...

3
luckyfunk13 3 points ago +3 / -0

No way they do. I doubt they expected just the zoom call to fill up.

5
luckyfunk13 5 points ago +5 / -0

We're going to have to adopt the manual with the changes we've made tonight.

Glancie

So, exactly what Dean said you motherfuckers were doing.

4
luckyfunk13 4 points ago +4 / -0

You're creating an environment of distrust here.

Dean

Damn straight. Drop some more MOABs.

4
luckyfunk13 4 points ago +4 / -0

The county entities make the decisions on what the statute is.

Uh, no. At the same time saying "we don't have the authority to override a "local health edict"

Get fucked.

4
luckyfunk13 4 points ago +4 / -0

So how far we've come in a matter of a few hours...

Dean

Garble. Gah. Screech. REEEEEE

Dems

What will the manual be? Nov 2018?

Dean

We never voted on an asterisk.

Dean

We haven't agreed on an interpretation of the statute or a requirement of a statute that's not there.

Thomsen

We couldn't agree with the staff. That's not new, now. Relatively new, in the past year. They made a decision to go court on this before they filed the petition. It's going to go to the court. Look. That's all.

Thomsen - went full-Biden.

3
luckyfunk13 3 points ago +3 / -0

Is that the screeching? I thought she sounded like a modem negotiating. 28.8, advertised as 56.

13
luckyfunk13 13 points ago +13 / -0

Let's try to be consistent here.

Dean

Good luck, and God speed, sir. You're talking to Dems.

8
luckyfunk13 8 points ago +8 / -0

They know this recount manual by heart.

also same bitch

They won't know what manual to use.

Also Dems

There will be so many calls, and that's what we're trying to avoid.

PICK A FUCKING LANE

2
luckyfunk13 2 points ago +2 / -0

AHHHH. Fuck it, then. I'm flip-flapping and flopping. I slapped a fiiiiissssshhh.

2
luckyfunk13 2 points ago +2 / -0

One sentence stands (has very little impact)

One sentence removed (removes "case-by-case" ruling on who board of canvassers can remove for disruptive behavior)

Now, they're on to "Examine Absentee Requests if Unable to Determine Number of Absentee Voters" section

6
luckyfunk13 6 points ago +6 / -0

Oh shit - if the covid arguments were long.

Determining target absentee counts and total possible valid absentee via requests and logs... Why did I not make popcorn during the break?!

3
luckyfunk13 3 points ago +3 / -0

So, I need some clarity here. Are you telling me you made 1 glass of wine last for 2 hours?

How? Seriously, I really need to know. How big is this glass?

2
luckyfunk13 2 points ago +2 / -0

Can't weigh in on "solidly" - she hasn't said enough or led the charge.

2
luckyfunk13 2 points ago +2 / -0

Frankly, I don't think we need it. It may be redundant. We can remove it

Thomsen - he's really tired...

Glancie wants to keep it. Glancie may have been kicked in the head by a horse - dunno.

Thomsen: It's not worth fighting over, for me.

Yep - really fuckin tired.

I can withdraw my motion if it's not going to pass anyway.

Glancie

1
luckyfunk13 1 point ago +1 / -0

This paragraph should be good - insertion:

Refusal to comply with reasonable health and safety protocols as established by the board of canvassers during the recount could disrupt the recount but the board of canvassers should address these situations on a case by case basis.

This is added to:

If any observer engages in disruptive behavior that in the opinion of the board of canvassers threatens the orderly condeuct of the recount, the board of canvassers shall issue a warning and if the observer does not cease the offending conduct, order the observer's removal.

Glancie motioned. Thomsen seconded for "purposes of discussion"

2
luckyfunk13 2 points ago +2 / -0

thanks. I wanted to choke-laugh on whiskey. it fucking hurts now.

8
luckyfunk13 8 points ago +8 / -0

6-0 in favor of motion to give up on "balancing public health" sentence!!!!

+1 Bob/Dean/Marge

6
luckyfunk13 6 points ago +6 / -0

If that's going to get us past page 5 and it's 9 o'clock, i don't have a problem with it.

Thomsen - just gave in. Who called it? Saw a few saying he'd break first.

3
luckyfunk13 3 points ago +3 / -0

We've trusted the staff and our clerks. And it's worked. Now we're micromanaging every sentence.

Thomsen

Real statement: "We've been able to cheat for years and now you guys are fighting back. REEEEEEEEEEEEE."

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›