More from Confederacy of Drones.
As Adam Schiff opened the final day of impeachment testimony, he thanked the minority party, the day's witnesses and a country that wants politicians to take care of all basic needs. He expressed confidence that the trail to impeachment would crush President Trump, ending his chance for a second term.
Nancy Pelosi commented that:

“This removes the voter from the election process. And even proves that we can eliminate the act of voting as a basic need. Unless it does the opposite.”

Schiff expressed sureness that voters will come to several unanimous conclusions by the end of the day. Namely that the majority members provided solid proof that Trump says mean things and is orange. Schiff noted another obvious conclusion.

“The committee has relieved an already overburdened citizenry of its voting obligation.”

His confidence was now peaking as evident by the dramatic reduction in his blink rate and eye bulging.

Schiff continued with:

“The country should not place the strain of voting on working-class people, living or dead. We want to free all citizens from their November 2020 election day drudgery for new pursuits”.

To fill the resulting abundance of free time, Schiff suggested memorizing Mao Zedong poetry, identifying crimes against the establishment, or improving on Venezuelan recipes that have road-kill, tree bark, and used socks as the only ingredients.

The committee managed the final testimonies as during the previous days. Each minority committee member was required to bang their head on the dais three times prior to each five-minute session, precede each question with “by the power given through the committee chair”, and replenish the majority's stock of peeled grapes during intermissions.

Following the final witness' testimony, Schiff concluded the House open hearings.

“I'd like to thank everyone who participated during these House Committee on Circus Act Strategy hearings. We all recognize that our citizenry remains too dumb, destitute, dependent and/or deplorable to live without the government as a surrogate parent. Therefore, we next take on John and Jane Q. Public's burden of food chewing.”

Schiff blinked that last statement in Morse code.

Da, Comrade. We can replace elections with computers, which will predict the election results. That will save everyone the time and expense of going to the polls, and the expense of counting ballots when we already know the outcome of the election.

I would like to offer my Global Warming computer models to this effort. They have already been proven 100% accurate at producing the desired result predicting the Earth's temperature for hundreds of years in advance!

While brilliant in Party policy, will this not marginalize and or disenfranchise a butt-load of necro-voters buried under strongholds like Chicago and Detroit?

Ivan the Stakhanovets wrote:While brilliant in Party policy, will this not marginalize and or disenfranchise a butt-load of necro-voters buried under strongholds like Chicago and Detroit?

Komrade, I'm under the impression that the Cosa Nostradamus™ program running on the Demokrat mainframes already accounted for that.

Voters no longer applicable. Yes. But what about the billions to be raised for campaignslushfunds?

jackalopelipsky wrote:... what about the billions to be raised for campaignslushfunds?

They pay off the (cough) "student loans" for those (wink, wink...) attending the Electoral College.

Ivan the Stakhanovets wrote:While brilliant in Party policy, will this not marginalize and or disenfranchise a butt-load of necro-voters buried under strongholds like Chicago and Detroit?

Nyet, Comrade. We already have those voters included in our Computer Models. Which are never wrong, of course.

If voting really mattered they wouldn't let us do it.

Papa Kalashnikook wrote:If voting really mattered they wouldn't let us do it.

[OFF]

From No Treason by Lysander Spooner, Libertarian and Anarchist titan. Emphases are mine:

"A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible. The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily implying the other. Neither can exist without the other. If, therefore, Congress have that absolute and irresponsible lawmaking power, which the Constitution — according to their interpretation of it — gives them, it can only be because they own us as property. If they own us as property, they are our masters, and their will is our law. If they do not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us.

But these men who claim and exercise this absolute and irresponsible dominion over us, dare not be consistent, and claim either to be our masters, or to own us as property. They say they are only our servants, agents, attorneys, and representatives. But this declaration involves an absurdity, a contradiction. No man can be my servant, agent, attorney, or representative, and be, at the same time, uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me for his acts. It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible one? or a limited and responsible one?""

Myself, even though I pretend to care about the presidential race, I really don't. I look at the presidential elections from the point of view of a casting director. I take a look at the candidates and ask myself who would be the most entertaining star character in the soap opera our federal government has become.

The rest of the races? To quote Grand Hotel (1932) starring Greta Garbo and John Barrymore: "People come, people go, nothing ever happens."

Just to dot the remaining i and cross the last t, here a concluding rule:
(of course, as a complete and consistent set of nice and clean axioms)

A1) Congress and only Congress determines the compo of Congress.
A2) Once in Congress, always in Congress. (yes, for life)
A3) Shifty Schiff, Nervous Nancy, Low-IQ Maxine, Evita Cortez, plus Crazy Bernie and Pocahontas ..._ are in Congress.