Republicans tried to reject votes for Joe Biden in Michigan

by Ben Reilly Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:47 am

Classic transference. Huffington Post reports:

The two Republicans on Michigan’s Wayne County Board of Canvassers initially refused on Tuesday to certify the county’s election results, which show former Vice President Joe Biden defeating President Donald Trump.

But they suddenly reversed their decision after hours of phone calls from the public lambasting them for trying to exclude predominantly Black Detroit from the certification.

The board first deadlocked at 2-2 with the Republicans voting against certifying the results and Democrats voting to certify. It would have been an unprecedented move by a local board to refuse to certify an election result as part of a scheme to overturn the outcome.

by Maddog Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:55 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:Classic transference. Huffington Post reports:

The two Republicans on Michigan’s Wayne County Board of Canvassers initially refused on Tuesday to certify the county’s election results, which show former Vice President Joe Biden defeating President Donald Trump.

But they suddenly reversed their decision after hours of phone calls from the public lambasting them for trying to exclude predominantly Black Detroit from the certification.

The board first deadlocked at 2-2 with the Republicans voting against certifying the results and Democrats voting to certify. It would have been an unprecedented move by a local board to refuse to certify an election result as part of a scheme to overturn the outcome.

Did they give a reason why they wouldn't certify the vote to begin with?

by Maddog Wed Nov 18, 2020 3:04 pm

I found this tid bit in the Detroit Free Press.

The board's votes came after absentee ballot poll books at 70% of Detroit's 134 absentee counting boards were found to be out of balance without explanation. The mismatches varied anywhere from one to more than four votes.

It appears there was a compromise after the brouhaha. The vote will be certified and audits will be done later to try to find and explain any irregularities.

by Maddog Wed Nov 18, 2020 3:05 pm

Just like in Texas, it's always about the absentee ballots.

by Original Quill Wed Nov 18, 2020 4:19 pm

To go from slight irregularities in voting, to saying that the City of Detroit did not vote whatsoever, is a bit extreme...not to mention comical. The remedy is to fix the irregularity, where it is found, and otherwise count all votes. Couldn't be simpler.

We all know what this is about. The City of Detroit is in Wayne County, Michigan. The Detroit Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA)3 accounts for 72 percent of the state's metropolitan black population, and, within the Detroit PMSA, Wayne County holds 85 percent of the PMSA total, with a black population of 864,627, representing 42 percent of its total population.

This is just another ruse to suppress the vote of a racial minority. It is a typical use of Jim Crow logic: white County Board imposes arbitrary authority to eliminate democracy in black areas. This tactic has been used in the State of Mississippi (which has majority black population) since the Civil War. It's not at all surprising that it is also used in neighboring Texas.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

by Maddog Wed Nov 18, 2020 7:20 pm

Original Quill wrote:To go from slight irregularities in voting, to saying that the City of Detroit did not vote whatsoever, is a bit extreme...not to mention comical. The remedy is to fix the irregularity, where it is found, and otherwise count all votes. Couldn't be simpler.

We all know what this is about. The City of Detroit is in Wayne County, Michigan. The Detroit Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA)3 accounts for 72 percent of the state's metropolitan black population, and, within the Detroit PMSA, Wayne County holds 85 percent of the PMSA total, with a black population of 864,627, representing 42 percent of its total population.

This is just another ruse to suppress the vote of a racial minority. It is a typical use of Jim Crow logic: white County Board imposes arbitrary authority to eliminate democracy in black areas. This tactic has been used in the State of Mississippi (which has majority black population) since the Civil War. It's not at all surprising that it is also used in neighboring Texas.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

No one said they didnt vote.

2 commissioners wanted an audit. Now they will get it.

Audits are good. Audits are necessary. That's how they catch fraud.

by Maddog Wed Nov 18, 2020 7:34 pm

A man who tried to run for mayor in Hawthorne is among two people charged in a voter fraud case in which thousands of fraudulent voter registration applications were allegedly submitted on behalf of homeless people, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office announced Tuesday.

Carlos Antonio De Bourbon Montenegro -- also known as Mark Anthony Gonsalves -- was set to be arraigned Tuesday in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom on 18 felony counts of voter fraud, 11 felony counts of procuring a false or forged instrument, two felony counts of perjury and one felony count of conspiracy to commit voter fraud, along with nine misdemeanor counts of interference with a prompt transfer of a completed affidavit, according to the District Attorney's Office.

Montenegro, 53, allegedly submitted more than 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications between July and October, as well as allegedly falsifying names, addresses and signatures on nomination papers under penalty of perjury to run for mayor in Hawthorne.

This is why audits are a good idea.

by Original Quill Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:19 pm

Much ado about nothing. really. Just an attempt at voter suppression of minorities, that got caught,

Gotta watch those Russo-Republicans. Wink

by Maddog Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:34 pm

Original Quill wrote:Much ado about nothing. really. Just an attempt at voter suppression of minorities, that got caught,

Gotta watch those Russo-Republicans.

Yeah, you're real concerned about voter fraud. Rolling Eyes

by Ben Reilly Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:28 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Much ado about nothing. really. Just an attempt at voter suppression of minorities, that got caught,

Gotta watch those Russo-Republicans.

Yeah, you're real concerned about voter fraud.

Don't know why anybody would be concerned about voter fraud in this election, really. Numerous state officials, along with the Department of Homeland Security, say it's one of the most secure elections in U.S. history, because so many people voted by mail that there's a clear paper trail for the majority of the ballots.

Trump has had his lawsuits laughed out of court by judges he appointed himself. Some judges have pointed out that the basis of the lawsuit seems to be confusion about matters that wouldn't have been confusing, had the Trump election observers bothered to attend the orientation class before the election was held.

The truth is, the vote was the honest reflection of the will of the American people, and they overwhelmingly chose Joe Biden to take over the job from Trump. But Trump is really good at making noise, distracting people from reality and attracting attention to himself.

by eddie Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:29 pm

Does anyone really believe that there were rigged votes? I mean, really???

by Ben Reilly Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:03 pm

eddie wrote:Does anyone really believe that there were rigged votes? I mean, really???

Maybe Trump does. Only those who really know him can have any insight into whether he really believes that, or if he's saying the vote was rigged as a way to protect his ego.

Now he's saying there's some secret government computer system that changed the votes. I wish I was joking -- and some of his supporters are going on TV saying the same thing.

If he had any evidence of a secret government computer system, or any other voter fraud, that'd be one thing. But nobody has been able to prove, or even show evidence to suggest, that anything happened in this election that could have dishonestly taken the victory away from him.

by eddie Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:08 pm

Oh let him ramble. He will soon wear himself out and be on to the next shiny thing.

by Original Quill Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:16 am

Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:Does anyone really believe that there were rigged votes? I mean, really???

Maybe Trump does. Only those who really know him can have any insight into whether he really believes that, or if he's saying the vote was rigged as a way to protect his ego.

His niece Mary, notes that Trump confuses value with fact. His father so emphasized that one cannot lose, that the value of 'not losing' motivates him to simply deny reality. The guy is borderline...

by Maddog Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:48 am

eddie wrote:Does anyone really believe that there were rigged votes? I mean, really???

There is voter fraud every election. It's not enough to swing a presidential election. But its enough to warrant prosecution.

by Maddog Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:50 am

eddie wrote:Does anyone really believe that there were rigged votes? I mean, really???

A man who tried to run for mayor in Hawthorne is among two people charged in a voter fraud case in which thousands of fraudulent voter registration applications were allegedly submitted on behalf of homeless people, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office announced Tuesday.

Carlos Antonio De Bourbon Montenegro -- also known as Mark Anthony Gonsalves -- was set to be arraigned Tuesday in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom on 18 felony counts of voter fraud, 11 felony counts of procuring a false or forged instrument, two felony counts of perjury and one felony count of conspiracy to commit voter fraud, along with nine misdemeanor counts of interference with a prompt transfer of a completed affidavit, according to the District Attorney's Office.

Montenegro, 53, allegedly submitted more than 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications between July and October, as well as allegedly falsifying names, addresses and signatures on nomination papers under penalty of perjury to run for mayor in Hawthorne.

by Maddog Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:51 am

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Yeah, you're real concerned about voter fraud.

Don't know why anybody would be concerned about voter fraud in this election, really. Numerous state officials, along with the Department of Homeland Security, say it's one of the most secure elections in U.S. history, because so many people voted by mail that there's a clear paper trail for the majority of the ballots.

Trump has had his lawsuits laughed out of court by judges he appointed himself. Some judges have pointed out that the basis of the lawsuit seems to be confusion about matters that wouldn't have been confusing, had the Trump election observers bothered to attend the orientation class before the election was held.

The truth is, the vote was the honest reflection of the will of the American people, and they overwhelmingly chose Joe Biden to take over the job from Trump. But Trump is really good at making noise, distracting people from reality and attracting attention to himself.

Because it happens and its illegal.

by Original Quill Sat Nov 21, 2020 4:11 pm

Maddog wrote:
eddie wrote:Does anyone really believe that there were rigged votes? I mean, really???

There is voter fraud every election.

I think that's doubtful. I've seen no evidence of voter fraud. Accusations, yes. The accusations go up as soon as the issue becomes a political football. But mostly, it's could've and might've...and no one hangs around long enough to see the results of the trial.

Since Donald Trump, the efforts at Republican voter suppression have taken the form of accusations of voter fraud in black and Hispanic neighborhoods, to try to suppress those votes by legal means. But when they get into court and the judge demands they put up or shut up, they slink away with tail tucked.

For the average Democrat, there's neither money nor advantage in voter fraud. Republicans, yes...those guys have to pay taxes on their inflated incomes, so they occasionally advance schemes to affect election outcomes. But fortunately, as one goes up the income ladder, there are fewer and fewer of them…hence, fewer and fewer election fraud cases.

The United States Department of Justice has determined that in studies of the 2002 and 2004 federal elections, cases of election fraud occurred in only 0.00000013 percent of ballots cast. See, Brennan Center, NYU School of Law, “Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth” (citation below). Indeed, A study published by a Columbia University political scientist tracked incidence rates for voter fraud for two years, and found that the rare fraud that was reported generally could be traced to “false claims by the loser of a close race, mischief and administrative or voter error.”

Coincidentally, the false claim of Donald Trump is what prompts the present concern in 2020. Turns out, it’s a naked form of voter suppression.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

by Maddog Sat Nov 21, 2020 5:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

There is voter fraud every election.

I think that's doubtful. I've seen no evidence of voter fraud. Accusations, yes. The accusations go up as soon as the issue becomes a political football. But mostly, it's could've and might've...and no one hangs around long enough to see the results of the trial.

Since Donald Trump, the efforts at Republican voter suppression have taken the form of accusations of voter fraud in black and Hispanic neighborhoods, to try to suppress those votes by legal means. But when they get into court and the judge demands they put up or shut up, they slink away with tail tucked.

For the average Democrat, there's neither money nor advantage in voter fraud. Republicans, yes...those guys have to pay taxes on their inflated incomes, so they occasionally advance schemes to affect election outcomes. But fortunately, as one goes up the income ladder, there are fewer and fewer of them…hence, fewer and fewer election fraud cases.

The United States Department of Justice has determined that in studies of the 2002 and 2004 federal elections, cases of election fraud occurred in only 0.00000013 percent of ballots cast. See, Brennan Center, NYU School of Law, “Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth” (citation below). Indeed, A study published by a Columbia University political scientist tracked incidence rates for voter fraud for two years, and found that the rare fraud that was reported generally could be traced to “false claims by the loser of a close race, mischief and administrative or voter error.”

Coincidentally, the false claim of Donald Trump is what prompts the present concern in 2020. Turns out, it’s a naked form of voter suppression.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

I've given enough examples.

You ignore them.

by Original Quill Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:37 pm

Rightly so. They are unproven examples, yet to go to trial...if that even happens.

And, our concern as a public is, will it change anything? The obvious answer is NO.

by Maddog Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:44 pm

Original Quill wrote:Rightly so. They are unproven examples, yet to go to trial...if that even happens.

And, our concern as a public is, will it change anything? The obvious answer is NO.

Nothing changes by ignoring it.

by Original Quill Mon Nov 30, 2020 7:24 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Rightly so. They are unproven examples, yet to go to trial...if that even happens.

And, our concern as a public is, will it change anything? The obvious answer is NO.

Nothing changes by ignoring it.

We properly ignore things that are irrelevant. Under Rule 401, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an item of proof is relevant only if "it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence". At issue is an election, not a single vote. Your evidence misplaced.

You make the same mistake that Trump makes. The facts you raise are probative of a single incident of alleged fraud, but not probative of the validity of an entire election. (And, since the charges have not yet gone to trial, they are not even proven facts...they are only allegations.) You have forgotten what is important…the plurality of the vote.

In order for the incidents you raise to be probative of an entire election, you would have to have the entire election tally, and amass enough proven fraudulent votes to determine the plurality. You can never generalize from specifics.

You do not have enough votes to create a generalization of any size or kind, let alone a plurality. A specific vote does not determine a whole election. This is the reason why courts have rejected over 50 of Trump's case filings...he lacks the right evidence.

by Maddog Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:48 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Nothing changes by ignoring it.

We properly ignore things that are irrelevant. Under Rule 401, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an item of proof is relevant only if "it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence". At issue is an election, not a single vote. Your evidence misplaced.

You make the same mistake that Trump makes. The facts you raise are probative of a single incident of alleged fraud, but not probative of the validity of an entire election. (And, since the charges have not yet gone to trial, they are not even proven facts...they are only allegations.) You have forgotten what is important…the plurality of the vote.

In order for the incidents you raise to be probative of an entire election, you would have to have the entire election tally, and amass enough proven fraudulent votes to determine the plurality. You can never generalize from specifics.

You do not have enough votes to create a generalization of any size or kind, let alone a plurality. A specific vote does not determine a whole election. This is the reason why courts have rejected over 50 of Trump's case filings...he lacks the right evidence.

I never said it changed the whole election.

I have said from the beginning that there is no where near enough fraud to alter the results of the presidential election.

I have said it happens on a small scale and needs to be addressed no matter how small the scale.

by Original Quill Tue Dec 01, 2020 3:36 am

Maddog wrote:I have said it happens on a small scale and needs to be addressed no matter how small the scale.

And I've said no one is interested in that question...even if you could prove it is a crime. The sujet du jour is the election and the fool Trump is making of himself over trying to overturn an election over allegations of a single act or incident.

by Maddog Tue Dec 01, 2020 4:14 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:I have said it happens on a small scale and needs to be addressed no matter how small the scale.

And I've said no one is interested in that question...even if you could prove it is a crime. The sujet du jour is the election and the fool Trump is making of himself over trying to overturn an election over allegations of a single act or incident.

I think a lot of people are concerned with fraud regardless of the scale.

I also believe that you're not concerned with fraud. It matches the character you display around here,

by Original Quill Tue Dec 01, 2020 5:54 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

And I've said no one is interested in that question...even if you could prove it is a crime. The sujet du jour is the election and the fool Trump is making of himself over trying to overturn an election over allegations of a single act or incident.

I think a lot of people are concerned with fraud regardless of the scale.

I also believe that you're not concerned with fraud. It matches the character you display around here,

Ehhhh...I don't think so. Not the majority of people, and certainly not the courts. Some 50 of Trump's law cases, based on the same faulty reasoning, have been tossed out to the sidewalk.

The logic of Trump is: oh, there's a jaywalker...look, there's another... From this he concludes that there is a traffic jam!!?

The court asks: where's the evidence of a traffic jam?

Trump's response: Look, look, at those two jaywalkers.

The court's response: First, there's no proof that they are jaywalkers; and second it's not proof of a traffic jam.

The election is over.

by Maddog Tue Dec 01, 2020 5:59 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

I think a lot of people are concerned with fraud regardless of the scale.

I also believe that you're not concerned with fraud. It matches the character you display around here,

Ehhhh...I don't think so. Not the majority of people, and certainly not the courts. Some 50 of Trump's cases, based on the same faulty reasoning, have been tossed out to the sidewalk.

The logic of Trump is: oh, there's a jaywalker...look, there's another... From this he concludes that there is a traffic jam???

The court asks: where's the evidence of a traffic jam?

Trump's response: Look, look, at those two jaywalkers.

The court's response: first, there's no proof that they are jaywalkers; and second it's not proof of a traffic jam.

The election is over.

I wasnt talking about Trumps cases. His are full of shit, much like you.

Are you orange too?

by Original Quill Fri Dec 04, 2020 8:36 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Ehhhh...I don't think so. Not the majority of people, and certainly not the courts. Some 50 of Trump's cases, based on the same faulty reasoning, have been tossed out to the sidewalk.

The logic of Trump is: oh, there's a jaywalker...look, there's another... From this he concludes that there is a traffic jam???

The court asks: where's the evidence of a traffic jam?

Trump's response: Look, look, at those two jaywalkers.

The court's response: first, there's no proof that they are jaywalkers; and second it's not proof of a traffic jam.

The election is over.

I wasnt talking about Trumps cases. His are full of shit, much like you.

Are you orange too?

Why are you so concerned about me? We were talking about voting fraud. I'm just the messenger.

The only reason why we are brought to this issue is that we've just gone through an election recently. An election deals with the quantitative view, not the single vote. So, only things that affect huge groups of voters, are of real public concern. The individual cases are left to the lawyers.

While individual cases are not the concern, separate the predicate crime from the remedy. Using the individual case as the predicate crime, which is singular, Trump wants to shape a remedy that excludes whole groups of voters...in particular, black voters. He raises the question only about Detroit, Milwaukee, or Philadelphia, where black voters live in concentration. Thus, the concern about a single crime, leads to a remedy that excludes whole populations--once again, the black man is victimized.

The only thing of concern to the voters of America is, once again, voter suppression. When you analyze what Trump is doing, separating the predicate from the remedy, he is using the courts as an instrument for suppression of black voters. It's good old Jim Crow, raising his ugly head once again.

by Ben Reilly Fri Dec 04, 2020 9:30 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Yeah, you're real concerned about voter fraud.

Don't know why anybody would be concerned about voter fraud in this election, really. Numerous state officials, along with the Department of Homeland Security, say it's one of the most secure elections in U.S. history, because so many people voted by mail that there's a clear paper trail for the majority of the ballots.

Trump has had his lawsuits laughed out of court by judges he appointed himself. Some judges have pointed out that the basis of the lawsuit seems to be confusion about matters that wouldn't have been confusing, had the Trump election observers bothered to attend the orientation class before the election was held.

The truth is, the vote was the honest reflection of the will of the American people, and they overwhelmingly chose Joe Biden to take over the job from Trump. But Trump is really good at making noise, distracting people from reality and attracting attention to himself.

Because it happens and its illegal.

Not the tightest logic, I'm afraid, because you just implied that you worry about people smoking weed in Texas. It does happen and it is illegal as well.

by Maddog Fri Dec 04, 2020 11:40 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Because it happens and its illegal.

Not the tightest logic, I'm afraid, because you just implied that you worry about people smoking weed in Texas. It does happen and it is illegal as well.

I don't care about people smoking weed. I do care about voter fraud.

It's that simple.

Do you care if people commit voter fraud or smoke weed?

by Maddog Fri Dec 04, 2020 11:44 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

I wasnt talking about Trumps cases. His are full of shit, much like you.

Are you orange too?

Why are you so concerned about me? We were talking about voting fraud. I'm just the messenger.

The only reason why we are brought to this issue is that we've just gone through an election recently. An election deals with the quantitative view, not the single vote. So, only things that affect huge groups of voters, are of real public concern. The individual cases are left to the lawyers.

While individual cases are not the concern, separate the predicate crime from the remedy. Using the individual case as the predicate crime, which is singular, Trump wants to shape a remedy that excludes whole groups of voters...in particular, black voters. He raises the question only about Detroit, Milwaukee, or Philadelphia, where black voters live in concentration. Thus, the concern about a single crime, leads to a remedy that excludes whole populations--once again, the black man is victimized.

The only thing of concern to the voters of America is, once again, voter suppression. When you analyze what Trump is doing, separating the predicate from the remedy, he is using the courts as an instrument for suppression of black voters. It's good old Jim Crow, raising his ugly head once again.

You are a refection of your posts.

Your posts are full of shit, therefore I've concluded that you are full of shit.

by Original Quill Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:02 am

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Why are you so concerned about me? We were talking about voting fraud. I'm just the messenger.

The only reason why we are brought to this issue is that we've just gone through an election recently. An election deals with the quantitative view, not the single vote. So, only things that affect huge groups of voters, are of real public concern. The individual cases are left to the lawyers.

While individual cases are not the concern, separate the predicate crime from the remedy. Using the individual case as the predicate crime, which is singular, Trump wants to shape a remedy that excludes whole groups of voters...in particular, black voters. He raises the question only about Detroit, Milwaukee, or Philadelphia, where black voters live in concentration. Thus, the concern about a single crime, leads to a remedy that excludes whole populations--once again, the black man is victimized.

The only thing of concern to the voters of America is, once again, voter suppression. When you analyze what Trump is doing, separating the predicate from the remedy, he is using the courts as an instrument for suppression of black voters. It's good old Jim Crow, raising his ugly head once again.

You are a refection of your posts.

Your posts are full of shit, therefore I've concluded that you are full of shit.

So, you have nothing further to say on the topic? I'm pleased that I won the point, but your acrimony seems gratuitous. Maybe anger management counselling...

Rolling Eyes

by Maddog Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:03 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

You are a refection of your posts.

Your posts are full of shit, therefore I've concluded that you are full of shit.

So, you have nothing further to say on the topic? I'm pleased that I won the point, but your acrimony seems gratuitous. Maybe anger management counselling...

I'll add that you are extremely full of shit.

by Original Quill Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:06 am

You're not being productive, pal. Nobody gives a shit about your personal tastes.

by Maddog Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:18 am

Original Quill wrote:You're not being productive, pal. Nobody gives a shit about your personal tastes.

You'd be surprised what people care about. Cool

by JulesV Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:36 am

Ben Reilly wrote:Classic transference. Huffington Post reports:

The two Republicans on Michigan’s Wayne County Board of Canvassers initially refused on Tuesday to certify the county’s election results, which show former Vice President Joe Biden defeating President Donald Trump.

But they suddenly reversed their decision after hours of phone calls from the public lambasting them for trying to exclude predominantly Black Detroit from the certification.

The board first deadlocked at 2-2 with the Republicans voting against certifying the results and Democrats voting to certify. It would have been an unprecedented move by a local board to refuse to certify an election result as part of a scheme to overturn the outcome.

The GOP need to do some earnest soul searching to see how they can move forward without the monstrous albatross that is Trump. 2024 will be here sooner than you think and if he is the best person they can find to lead them next time, it says a lot about them. They are all so petrified with fear that when in his presence, automatic obedience is all they can muster.

He did not drain the swamp, he swelled the volume and polluted it tenfold. Time to exit politics, Donald, return to your reality show. It's like you never left it anyway, you fired a record number of people in the white house.

by Original Quill Sat Dec 05, 2020 3:52 am

Republicans met in 2009 to determine what changes had to be made to attract voters. They decided no changes were needed; instead, they decided to tear down the democratic systems of America, and put an autocratic system in place instead.

Today, we see the Senate acting as a veto on all government action, an executive that denies the Constitution and its powers, while Republicans rely increasingly on a court system that they have put in place. Of the three American systems, the court system is the one decidedly non-democratic system. So, their plan is working, to the extent that the Court system makes all the decisions.

We need some drastic action to counteract this Republican plan. Otherwise, democracy will become a memory.

by Maddog Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:16 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:

Not the tightest logic, I'm afraid, because you just implied that you worry about people smoking weed in Texas. It does happen and it is illegal as well.

I don't care about people smoking weed. I do care about voter fraud.

It's that simple.

Do you care if people commit voter fraud or smoke weed?

Well?

by Ben Reilly Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:18 am

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Because it happens and its illegal.

Not the tightest logic, I'm afraid, because you just implied that you worry about people smoking weed in Texas. It does happen and it is illegal as well.

I don't care about people smoking weed. I do care about voter fraud.

It's that simple.

Do you care if people commit voter fraud or smoke weed?

Don't care a lot about either one, but I'm more concerned by voter fraud.

But I'm much more concerned when it seems a political party has come up with an elaborate scheme to rig a national election than I am when a few random individuals try to cast a vote they're not allowed to cast. The latter is going to happen, and it usually doesn't work. And if it does work, it's not going to change the result of an election.

In a nutshell, I'm concerned if millions of votes were fraudulent; not very concerned if it was a few hundred scattered across the country.

But you proved me right -- "it happens and it's illegal" isn't a real reason to worry about something.

by Maddog Sun Dec 06, 2020 5:21 am

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

I don't care about people smoking weed. I do care about voter fraud.

It's that simple.

Do you care if people commit voter fraud or smoke weed?

Don't care a lot about either one, but I'm more concerned by voter fraud.

But I'm much more concerned when it seems a political party has come up with an elaborate scheme to rig a national election than I am when a few random individuals try to cast a vote they're not allowed to cast. The latter is going to happen, and it usually doesn't work. And if it does work, it's not going to change the result of an election.

In a nutshell, I'm concerned if millions of votes were fraudulent; not very concerned if it was a few hundred scattered across the country.

But you proved me right -- "it happens and it's illegal" isn't a real reason to worry about something.

Why would you care about voter fraud at all?

Are you aware that some elections are decided by single digits?,

by Sponsored content