For those unaware, like the perp here, you can’t wear election related material in or around polling places. It’s called “Electioneering”.
https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/electioneering-prohibitions
Texas (where this happened):
100 ft. of an outside door through which a voter may enter a building in which a polling place is located
Campaign materials/signs/banners/literature
Projecting sounds Referring to candidates/issues
Loitering
Apparel/buttons/stickers/placards
Tex. Elec. Code § 61.003 and .004
Tex. Elec. Code § 61.010
When I went to vote (in San Antonio, TX) in the 2022 election, I was standing in line near someone wearing a rainbow mask. Some MAGA moron gets in line wearing a MAGA hat and a “Let’s Go Brandon” shirt. No one decides to say anything because if this idiot is crazy enough to wear this shit to vote, what else are they willing to do? At least they’re not actively threatening anyone, right?
Then the dumbass waves down a volunteer and says that the rainbow-mask man needs to remove his mask because rainbows are political. The volunteer brings the other guy a mask and asks him to put the rainbow one in his pocket. Then turns to the Trumpicana Orange Juice Guzzler and says, “I wasn’t going to say anything, but you’re gonna need to take off your hat and change your shirt.” The dude threw such a fit about not having a spare shirt and how he can’t believe that he’ll have to go home and this is undemocratic, etc., etc.
What many of us Texans are lacking in pride, we’re also lacking in intelligence.
…he could just turn his stupid shirt inside out…
That would require a level of reasoning that he probably isn’t capable of
You sound just like my boss who gave me a ride to the polls. I’ll tell you the same thing I told her. “Sure, but this is so beautiful. Just watch and appreciate this unbelievable creature in their natural habitat.”
I work in medicine. I get to see these people come in and rant and rave against vaccinations. It’s great.
- Rainbows are not political
- Even if they were, unless it’s directly related to something on the ballot its not electioneering. You can wear a I’m with her Clinton hat or whatever now
We make up for the lack of intelligence with an abundance of pride. It’s an inverse scale. The bigger the Gadsden Flag and the more Trump merch, the lower the intelligence.
We know.
Good for the volunteer.
Huh. I thought I knew about this, but I didn’t realize it applied to individual voters. I thought it was more geared towards volunteers, demonstrators, poll workers, etc. Thanks!
Geared toward, maybe, but vaguely written enough to apply to voters as well
BoTh SiDeS
Can’t wait to hear Trump say the guy is a hero and deserves a pardon.
But why would Kamala pardon him?
Not to rain on the joke parade, but the pardon would come from the Texas governor and Abbott has already shown he is willing to abuse the pardon power to score political points.
Well, that’s unsurprising. The default state for these MAGA chuds is “violent moron.”
Before I started using the mail-in ballots, I’d go to my local polling place, and it was always staffed with old retirees just happily supporting democracy. They’d work long hours, and not for pay, just for community. My mom worked polling places several elections after she retired. This article makes me sad.
Those pesky right-wingers with their over-active amygdala just can’t control themselves and act like adults.
Taking it one further: how shitty does your life have to be to respond with violence because someone asked you to follow the rules. This person is small and weak and pathetic.
All you really have to do is make the rule a tax on tea and they’ll start throwing shit into the sea.
I understand the use of ‘allegedly’ when it is about a crime that is still under investigation. But a punch? How is that ‘allegedly’? Was it in a dark alley away from prying eyes? If you see a guys fist and a victim’s face, what more do you need?
Innocent until proven guilty. Newspapers can’t say someone is guilty if there wasn’t a trial yet.
Newspapers certainly can, because of the First Amendment, but they are cowardly.
No they legally can’t. It’s defamation until a verdict is in. First Amendment isn’t freedom from consequences of your speech.
It isn’t defamation unless it is actually false, and the risks are a civil lawsuit.
You all are talking past each other because you’re talking about different things. They can’t say he’s guilty until he’s convicted, because he isn’t guilty until then. They also don’t have to say he ‘allegedly’ punched someone when multiple people reported witnessing it, the other guy’s face is bloody and and there is video of him hitting the guy. Saying he’s guilty of a crime and saying he punched someone are two different claims.
