Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No evidence of conspiracy to commit fraud on any scale.

No evidence of fraud outside historical norms, which happens for both parties, AKA little that doesn't impact elections.  Oh, and it gets investigated and prosecuted.

Trumpists - "Nope, gotta burn it all down and make every state the same." 

Yet you guys still claiming individually you support the "Party of states rights, and the Constitution?" Did you think the TX lawsuit was a good idea too?

And...you're willing to trust a signature on a absentee/mail-in-ballot?  Holy dumb-shit rationalization Batman.  Like I said before, get involved locally if you want to change things.  Stay the fuck away from my State with your wasted ideas.  We have mail in voting...it worked fine.

Sounds like the same bullshit I heard about restricting Airmen because they COULD do something that makes the AF look bad.  You know, the shit we all bitch about?

The sand in your vag should be a pearl by now for you to wear to your next Q-anon dance party.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Complete and utter malarkey. ONE mainstream network went after Obama, Foxnews, some of it unwarranted Political tripe, some of it valid.  Meanwhile ALL of the remaining mainstream networks suppor

Want to slash American carbon?  Build nuclear power plants.  

When MSNBC announced Trump's win in Iowa, there was an audible grunt from Rachel Madow. By the sound of it, she apparently sat on her sack wrong. Happens to the best of us.

Posted Images

23 hours ago, M2 said:

Funny how all those alleging election tampering in 2016 suddenly claim it couldn't have happened in 2020!

You're conflating interference with fraud, most people accepted 2016 all votes as valid even if they claimed there was foreign interference that changed the outcome, or even if they went the cringey route of saying they would leave the country or #notmypresident. And most everyone who claimed interference happened in 2016 would certainly agree it could have happened this year. Key word being interference, not invalid fraudulent votes from a domestic conspiracy at a scale never seen before. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17D. You are really good at taking something and running in a lot of different directions and since your first point is right it must all be right. You argue like.....well someone who grasps at emotional straws when you really don’t like something or have a very very strong opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Guardian said:

17D. You are really good at taking something and running in a lot of different directions and since your first point is right it must all be right. You argue like.....well someone who grasps at emotional straws when you really don’t like something or have a very very strong opinion.

Oh, are you back on here?  Seems like you bounced when every avenue for appealing on "fraud, hacking...uh...something" to get the election turned out to fail.  I see you trotted out the, "everyone's emotional and lacks logic in argument" line again too.  Well played.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on here? Yeah. I have a life and more important things to do than constantly educate SNAPs (do you understand my implication?). And remember I never claimed anything. Just posted other articles etc and asked for opinions and shot holes in others arguments.

Yep. Facts still don’t have emotions but you and I do. And emotions don’t help when trying to present ideas. Still doesn’t deal with your logical straw man and jumping around to other topics to claim they are true or in an effort to make a certain group of people look silly. Just makes you look silly and immature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sim said:

Okay that's a sampling (n 916) of the 150M or so voters.  I understand how stats work a little and I don't know if you can just post a poll from NPR to put this to rest.

My personal opinion is that the alleged rampant fraud wasn't in every state but the ones that it was in was enough to overturn the will of the people in those states.  A lot of Americans feel the same way.  The coordinated radio silence and censorship on the MSM and social media platforms along with big tech (Google, big tech) should be cause for alarm for ALL Americans.  Regardless of ideology or background or politics.

Of course I think everyone is on the same page with the issue here not being about the candidates, but about a free and fair and open election.  Lots of people are arguing that that happened, and I truly think it did in a lot of states.  IF however there was enough fraud to overturn the will of the American citizen in some states then I can't understand why everyone wouldn't be on board with getting to the bottom of this.  IF that was the case and it was indeed enough to overturn the results of the election then I think that probably marks a point of no return for our republic.

Not a huge fan of politics and the only reason this is on my radar at all is because I have in-laws that migrated here from the USSR back in the 1980's who lived it.  Their perspective is a unique one that probably few people on this message board have - and only recently have I begun to pay more attention to what they are saying is going on in America.  I'm sure some of you guys have been to the museums in the old Soviet Bloc countries and to think that that would be impossible to happen here is pretty naive.  It doesn't happen overnight, but there certainly gets to be a point where it's too late to go back.  I really hope I am wrong about all of this.  I enjoying BSing about flying with all you nerds much more than talking politics.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, billy pilgrim said:

Okay that's a sampling (n 916) of the 150M or so voters.  I understand how stats work a little and I don't know if you can just post a poll from NPR to put this to rest.

Sim is on the extreme end of your side on this issue, I think you may have misinterpreted what he was trying to say. He posted that to say a majority of Republicans believing there was fraud is a rebuttal to the earlier claim that a majority of voters don't believe election was fraudulent. 

n=916 mathematically provides a margin of error of roughly 3% for a 95% confidence interval, so it's not something to put aside. Based on this poll it is a near certainty that a majority of Republicans believe the election was not accurate and that a majority of voters feel it was accurate. But I'm open to whatever stats you know since everything I've ever seen wrt sample sizes show roughly 1000 as standard statistical practice.  

10 minutes ago, billy pilgrim said:

My personal opinion is that the alleged rampant fraud wasn't in every state but the ones that it was in was enough to overturn the will of the people in those states.  A lot of Americans feel the same way.

Based on? A lot of Americans also feel the Earth is flat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, arg said:

If they are "already working two jobs" don't you think they already have an ID? I've had a few people here, in probably the poorest state in the US, that I hired do some work on my small farm that you would consider poverty level folks. They all drove here, so unless they were driving without a licence they had ID. Many states offer no cost IDs, of course NM is not one of them.

Maybe, maybe not, but just because you have an extremely narrow worldview because "I hired poor people" doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist and enacting laws like this won't make the problem worse.

 

10 hours ago, lloyd christmas said:

The soft bigotry of low expectations.   

Or perhaps its the hard bigotry of trying to enact laws to increasingly marginalize the poorest of our community?

Again you are all trying to solve a problem you can't even prove exists.  There should be few barriers to voting, particularly for those less fortunate.  Rich peoples' interests are already overrepresented by congress, and the poorest amongst us on either side of the aisle need their voices heard the most.

If you want to solve a problem, lets look into the rules of how states purge voter rolls making people ineligible to vote, or the intentional slowing the delivery of mail in ballots, or the disproportionately few polling stations in poor neighborhoods, or the last minute closing of polling locations, or the fake ballot drop boxes installed, or the robocalls telling voters not to vote, or people electioneering near polling places?  There is ample evidence of all these things happening every election yet you don't care about that...why is that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Man, you guys are ridiculous. “Because I’ve never personally seen X” is an incredibly stupid way to make a case. This thread (and elsewhere) is full of this bullshit notion; how about you guys acknowledge a shitload of things exist, occur, etc. in ways you haven’t personally experienced because such a thing would be impossible, as you haven’t lived in every square inch of the world, the U.S., etc.
Directly to your specific point on this subject, here’s a decent overview:
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx
My personal experience - I’ve voted in three states that don’t require a photo ID. In one of those states there is literally nothing done beyond verifying the name I stated is on the registered voter list (checked at the time by the volunteer sitting at the check in table). Yeah, it happened...in the last 3 elections I’ve voted in (local/state and federal).
Parting shot to emphasize the point - do you disbelieve one of your airman’s claims of rape because you’ve never experienced it or seen it happen first hand? Yeah, that’s exactly how stupid your above comment comes off. And even worse, you’re not the only one in this camp.
 

My point stands in spite of the wild rabbit hole you went down. At no point did I say everything is wrong because I haven’t seen it. I simply said I have to question the validity of what you said because it wasn’t representative of my experience. You are the one who passed your earlier comment off as if it were a fact. If you didn’t check that fact, why should I believe you check any of your facts?

And your rape claim comparison is beyond ridiculous.

Whole argument is stupid anymore. You guys keep claiming crap with little credible evidence. It’s been rejected by every court out there, regardless of their political leaning. The election didn’t go your way, so like a lot of idiot democrats 4 years ago, you’re all crying that you must have been cheated. Accept it already, and stop crying.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, drewpey said:

Maybe, maybe not, but just because you have an extremely narrow worldview because "I hired poor people" doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist and enacting laws like this won't make the problem worse.

 

Or perhaps its the hard bigotry of trying to enact laws to increasingly marginalize the poorest of our community?

Again you are all trying to solve a problem you can't even prove exists.  There should be few barriers to voting, particularly for those less fortunate.  Rich peoples' interests are already overrepresented by congress, and the poorest amongst us on either side of the aisle need their voices heard the most.

If you want to solve a problem, lets look into the rules of how states purge voter rolls making people ineligible to vote, or the intentional slowing the delivery of mail in ballots, or the disproportionately few polling stations in poor neighborhoods, or the last minute closing of polling locations, or the fake ballot drop boxes installed, or the robocalls telling voters not to vote, or people electioneering near polling places?  There is ample evidence of all these things happening every election yet you don't care about that...why is that?

I have "an extremely narrow worldview"? How would you know that? That's an actual quote from you versus the false quote from me you posted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, arg said:

I have "an extremely narrow worldview"? How would you know that? That's an actual quote from you versus the false quote from me you posted. 

Well you demonstrated in your previous comment that you haven't been or known legitimately poor people or their way of life.  Your only way to "relate" to the topic at hand was to tell us a story of how you hired some poor people once to work on your property, and they probably had licenses because they drove a car.  It's an amazingly tone-deaf story.

The fact of the matter is the republican party is dieing and the only way they can remain relevant is to gerrymander and raise barriers to voters to drive down participation.  If you actually cared about securing our elections you would have passed any of the bills sent to McConnell over the last several years to provide funding to secure our systems, or working to get rid of voting machines with no auditable paper trail, etc.  But you don't, you only care about chipping away at the voter base and trying to turn over legitimate votes by dubious lawsuits.

Edited by drewpey
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, brabus said:

Man, you guys are ridiculous. “Because I’ve never personally seen X” is an incredibly stupid way to make a case. This thread (and elsewhere) is full of this bullshit notion; how about you guys acknowledge a shitload of things exist, occur, etc. in ways you haven’t personally experienced because such a thing would be impossible, as you haven’t lived in every square inch of the world, the U.S., etc.

Directly to your specific point on this subject, here’s a decent overview:

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx

My personal experience - I’ve voted in three states that don’t require a photo ID. In one of those states there is literally nothing done beyond verifying the name I stated is on the registered voter list (checked at the time by the volunteer sitting at the check in table). Yeah, it happened...in the last 3 elections I’ve voted in (local/state and federal).

Parting shot to emphasize the point - do you disbelieve one of your airman’s claims of rape because you’ve never experienced it or seen it happen first hand? Yeah, that’s exactly how stupid your above comment comes off. And even worse, you’re not the only one in this camp.

 

Here let me translate:
 

“My argument is pretty weak and I’m really quibbing over finding a solution to a problem that only had a small amount of documented verified claims in the past 20 years. Here’s an emotionally charged comment that has nothing to do to support my argument.”

Oh, and before you ask, I went to Georgetown for grad school, since I guess you find that important.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that it is a weird, mainly unfounded, dem talking point to say that  requiring a voter ID is racist. There just really isn’t data to support that claim. Even Jimmy Carter headed a study back in 2005 that concluded that, while the actual tangible benefits of requiring IDs may be low, it would still be worth it from a “trust in the system” perspective, and it would not likely significantly affect voting turnout.


Just phase in the law over 4 years and be done with it. It would probably help improve society’s perception of election integrity at a minimal cost.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Negatory said:

I agree that it is a weird, mainly unfounded, dem talking point to say that  requiring a voter ID is racist. There just really isn’t data to support that claim. Even Jimmy Carter headed a study back in 2005 that concluded that, while the actual tangible benefits of requiring IDs may be low, it would still be worth it from a “trust in the system” perspective, and it would not likely significantly affect voting turnout.


Just phase in the law over 4 years and be done with it. It would probably help improve society’s perception of election integrity at a minimal cost.

So now it's not about actual security, we are going to create more barriers to voting to make fragile voters feel better?

If we want people to feel better about the security of their elections, we should do things that...get this...actually secure our elections.  We can't pander to every fragile voter because they are sad about the way an election went and refuse to accept the evidence laid before them.

Again there is a long list of things that will actually improve security, start with those otherwise people will just assume you are legislating in bad faith and trying to limit the voting pool.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It turns out that, due to the American court system, conspiracy theory propaganda has a limit. Newsmax and Fox News collapsed at the threat of a lawsuit and clarified that the voting machine conspiracy theories postulated on their programs have no basis in fact. Stop supporting those who would lie and mislead, regardless of political affiliation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/20/business/media/smartmatic-lawsuit-fox-news-newsmax-oan.html

 

 

Edited by Majestik Møøse
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

It turns out that, due to the American court system, conspiracy theory propaganda has a limit. Newsmax and Fox News collapsed at the threat of a lawsuit and clarified that the voting machine conspiracy theories postulated on their programs have no basis in fact. Stop supporting those who would lie and mislead, regardless of political affiliation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/20/business/media/smartmatic-lawsuit-fox-news-newsmax-oan.html

 

 

Hence why best to just not trust journalist, politicians, or corporate spokes people of any affiliation. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...