Replies to Msg. #1275858
.
 Msg. #  Subject Posted by    Board    Date   
17268 Re: Virginia Redeistricting Referendum
   Virginia has a new state slogan. Virginia is for CHEATERS. o...
micro   GRITZ   23 Apr 2026
3:12 PM
17267 Re: Virginia Redeistricting Referendum
   Early in person voting was about even but leaned a little YES. Ear...
CTJ   GRITZ   23 Apr 2026
6:43 AM

The above list shows replies to the following message:

Virginia Redeistricting Referendum

By: Zimbler0 in GRITZ
Thu, 23 Apr 26 2:18 AM
Msg. 17265 of 17867
Jump to msg. #  

Zim: It seems Virginia held a 'special election' to enable the lying thieving election stealing demo-rats to 'redistrict' Virginia such that instead of the 6 to 5 advantage that the lying thieving dem-rats currently enjoy - could be changed to a 10 to 1 advantage.

I strongly suspect that 'mail in ballots' were used to STEAL this election.

And, now there is this headline :

>>>

Virginia Judge Blocks Dems’ Redistricting Referendum, Rules Plaintiffs Have ‘Extraordinarily High Likelihood of Success’

http://amgreatness.com/2026/04/22/virginia-judge-blocks-dems-redistricting-referendum-rules-plaintiffs-have-extraordinarily-high-likelihood-of-success/

A Virginia Circuit Court judge on Wednesday granted an emergency injunction blocking the April 21 redistricting referendum while the case is heard in court.

Tazewell County Judge Jack Hurley Jr. ruled that the referendum was likely unconstitutional as it violated procedural requirements in the Virginia Constitution, including the timing of the vote and the failure to publish the amendment three months before the prior general election.

The Tazewell Circuit Court also ruled the ballot language was misleading, specifically the phrase “restore fairness,” which Hurley determined could improperly influence voters by implying opposition is unfair.

The constitutional amendment was framed on the ballot as a vote “to restore fairness in the upcoming elections.” It narrowly passed Tuesday night by a margin of 51.5 percent to 48.5 percent.

In his written ruling, Hurley said the plaintiffs had an “extraordinarily high likelihood of success on the merits.”

>>>

(Article does continue. Zim.)




Avatar

Mad Poet Strikes Again.