Hey, there! Log in / Register

Court to Massachusetts Republicans trying to block mail-in voting: You lose

The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today that the state can go ahead and mail out applications for voters who want to vote by mail in the fall elections, tossing a bid by what's left of the Massachusetts Republican Party to block mail-in voting.

Because the law allowing such voting requires the Secretary of State's office to get the applications in the mail by July 23, the court did not explain today why the Republicans are wrong and why there's nothing unconstitutional about letting voters exercise their franchise via the Postal Service, but promised a detailed explanation soon:

It is now hereby ORDERED that judgment shall enter in the county court for the Secretary on all claims in the plaintiffs' complaint. The plaintiffs' request to enjoin the Secretary from putting the VOTES act into effect is denied.

Although time constraints dictate the issuance of an immediate order, a full opinion explaining the court's reasoning will follow in due course.

Case docket, which includes filings by Republicans, including their candidate for Secretary of State, who is running mainly on a campaign against child oral sex and cross dressers reading stories in libraries, as well as Secretary of State William Galvin's replies.

The state had initially allowed mail-in voting because of the pandemic, but this year Gov. Baker signed a new law making it permanent.

Topics: 
Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

So let me get this straight.

Mass GOP wants to stop people from voting by mail
But Gov Baker, a Republican himself, voted to keep it permanent.

Hello? Anyone home over there at MassGOP.. your own damn face for the party in MA didn't support it. Your lawsuit doesn't have a lot of merit.. and makes you look foolish.

oh wait... republicans. nevermind. got it.

up
Voting closed 0

Charlie Baker is politically to the left of 1996 Bill Clinton, maybe even 2000 Al Gore. He has more in common with 2008 Obama than he does Trump or anyone else running on a GOP ticket.

You'd think the national party would notice. Much like Manchin has figured out how to get elected as a democrat in WV, Baker has found the secret sauce for MA.

I don't understand why Mass GOP would rather be eliminated from the state than have plausibly viable candidates. But the same could be said about Democrats in red states.

up
Voting closed 0

Charlie is often a RINO. This much I know.

But its still the same 'party'. You'd think by this point, with MAGA and all.. some of these "decent" (I use that term very losely here folks) GOPers would leave and just form a new party. Some of the money would follow.. it wouldnt be as bad as they think. Plus the whole 'we're different' might be a selling point to gain new voters.

But then again.. are they that 'different'?

up
Voting closed 0

and plausibly could even have won re-election by that path. Other New England governors have won this way. But he chose to end his term instead.

(I would really want ranked-choice voting in a scenario like that one, to ensure that Diehl doesn't squeak through a three-way race with 35% of the vote.)

up
Voting closed 0

Charlie stayed Republican because he raised a boatload of money for the local and National GOP. By doing so, he would have expected that national money and extra support from super pacs and ad blitzes.

As an independent, not only would Baker need to make up that money differential himself, all that national GOP money would go to Diehl and Baker would be a target of the far-right attack ads.

I think thr Baker-as-Independent in 2022 path would have been a lot more difficult than people realize. If he wanted to go that way, then he should have made that pivot in 2018.

up
Voting closed 0

Even with the baggage of the GOP and a failed MBTA, Baker would have mostly coasted to a third term as Governor without changing parties or becoming an independent. He's wallop Diehl in a GOP primary. It would be fun to watch.

I can't figure out why Baker didn't want to stay in the job but I also don't care.

Good luck, Healey. May you follow in footsteps of Dukakis and passionately support public transportation in ways not seen in generations.

up
Voting closed 0

is a sheep in sheep's clothing, and at heart, a prototypical condescending North Shore Yankee.

up
Voting closed 0

Who knows exactly how a primary would have actually played out, but at one point Baker trailed Diehl by 20 points in the polls and was super underwater with Mass GOP favorability/unfavorability.

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/10/20/geoff-diehl-has-leg-up-on-charli...

[a] survey of likely 2022 Republican primary voters found 30% view the Republican governor favorably compared to Diehl who polled between 29% and 50%. Of those surveyed, 21% were still undecided, according to a press release.

Of those same voters, 54% said they had an unfavorable opinion of Baker.

Did you see coverage of the MA GOP convention? They hate Baker, especially the chair. It's hard to imagine Baker winning an endorsement over Diehl. And sure, maybe enough unenrolled voters would have chosen a GOP ballot in the September primary, but what if the Dem race was tight? Would he be able to pull enough people who just wanted to block Diehl? That's a big risk. Primaries are low turn out and the MAGAs are the group who are highly motivated to turn out for such contests.

Perhaps a summer of campaigning would GOTV for Baker to block Diehl, but that seems like a bigger gamble than some acknowledge and would be a huge embarrassment for Mr. World's Most Populor Gov.

Baker was smart to nope right out of 2022.

up
Voting closed 0

I would have loved to bet 5000 bucks (to use Romney's words) on Diehl's chances vs Baker.

We've already seen what that race looked like when DR. EMAIL lost big in his Senate Primary. Diehl is playing the same role in this play.

I put even money on Diehl even loosing to Doughty in primary.

up
Voting closed 0

*although I am not $5k confident. It would be for considerably lower stakes.

I don't believe it would be impossible for Baker to win a MAGA primary and then win the general. I do think chances are he would have lost the primary, but I think my biggest quibble is that people think that Baker would have cruised to victory. I think in order to win, it would have been a slog for Charlie, if not an outright blood bath. A Baker primary and then a general victory would be contingent on too many variables. And my guess is that the campaign made the same assessment.

The other thing, I wonder, is are we discounting Baker's desire (or lack of) to continue as governor? Why would Baker want to do this job for another four years? The man can retire and not deal with COVID, BPS, the T, and a federal government that may swing back to an unfriendly ultra-right, punitive legislature and executive. He can go be a bigwig at a nonprofit of his choice for the same (or better) salary as governor for relatively 0 stress.

up
Voting closed 0

I’m not necessarily for or against mail in voting, but what befuddles me when there is opposition in trying to secure voting against fraud, which does happen on both sides of the aisle and if you think it doesn’t your a fool. Implement block chain technology for voting. Secure the vote and have honest elections. Stop Gerrymandering too while we are at it. Y’all heard it here first. Blockchain technology.

up
Voting closed 0

... actually means something concrete or useful. Try explaining your proposed solution again without using that word.

up
Voting closed 0

Block chains 4 sale. Get you’re blockchains. Did you see what I did there mister your hater.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

False.

Even the right wing Heritage Foundation blows up the “both sides” myth.

The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank, maintains a public database of ballot-fraud cases. A review of the database reveals an astonishing fact: In every listed indictment and conviction for voter fraud or other malfeasance in connection with the 2020 presidential general election [1,173 cases] when the culprit’s political affiliation is known he or she turns out to be a Republican or “unabashed conservative.”

https://www.thebulwark.com/the-pattern-of-gop-voter-fraud/
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

up
Voting closed 0

No, there isn't voter fraud by any political party. Not by mail and not by other means. The verified (real) cases of someone voting twice or when they should not have are extremely rare and are not throwing elections.

If you want to say otherwise, show some proof by a reputable, impartial source.

The real voter fraud is people who legitimately should have the right to vote but where denied do to clerical slip-up or just because they were sick or had to work on the day of the election.

up
Voting closed 0

This is a classic "prove a negative" line of bullshit. Saying or suggesting that "fraud...does happen on both sides of the aisle" is a lie and it is propaganda.

if you think it doesn’t your a fool

If you think it does, you're a sheep. A propagandized sheep.

If you know it doesn't, but you pretend that it is, you're a liar and a propagandist.

up
Voting closed 0

Drives me nuts.

up
Voting closed 0

Yes u r

up
Voting closed 0

Blockchain for voting? I first saw that discussed on XKCD about four years ago: https://xkcd.com/2030/

up
Voting closed 0

will solve voter fraud problems merely reveals how little you understand the technology. It's a spectacularly dumb idea. Short version, courtesy of Matt Blaze, a cryptography expert with a deep understanding of election security:

- It doesn't solve any of the problems that civil elections actually have
- It's basically incompatible with "software independence", considered an essential property
- Most important, it makes ballot secrecy difficult or impossible.

Another perspective here, from the Journal of Cybersecurity. From the abstract: "While current election systems are far from perfect, Internet- and blockchain-based voting would greatly increase the risk of undetectable, nation-scale election failures. "

(Likewise, there's pretty much nothing that blockchain does better than existing technological or non-tech alternatives, and meanwhile it's an ecological disaster. I hope if you're one of those cryptocurrency true believers, you got in on the bottom floor of the pyramid scheme.)

Shorter version: if you want secure elections, shun electronic systems in favor of voter-verifiable paper ballots paired with routine risk-limiting audits.

up
Voting closed 0

I haven't seen such a well executed troll here in quite some time.

up
Voting closed 0

And Your or you are or yur very very welcome! Nyuk nyuk nyuk. I’m probably the only babe alive that loves the three stooges.

up
Voting closed 0

n/t

up
Voting closed 0

my copy of that NoMagoo Chrome extension.

(Is he still around? No, I don't miss him, just a little curious)

up
Voting closed 0

you be out playing in traffic?

up
Voting closed 0

Yet more evidence they don’t want more people voting.

up
Voting closed 0

Anyone want some tacos? I’m buying.

up
Voting closed 0