Printable View
[QUOTE=Bblob69;2547785]Right on the money Canada! And to add to your point: I think the Democrats are probably also behind the recent uptick in anti-Asian violence. [/QUOTE]The violence is largely perpetrated by inner city blacks, 90% of whom support the democrats, so for once you are correct.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547321]A misleading statement. Some democracies permit mail-in voting *IN EXTREMELY RARE CIRCUMSTANCES*, for example for citizens living abroad, or for people who are so sick they cannot physically leave their homes.[/QUOTE]Or those registered voters who ask for it.
Mail-in ballots is a normal procedure that's done in nearly all democracies.
And to set it up quickly as a pandemic is hitting the world, with a minimum of hoops to jump through, seems normal and reasonable.
The State of Qregon has been doing the mass-mailing of ballots for over 20 years.
If there were ever cases of political operatives performing serial raiding of mailboxes it would be easily noticed in today's social media.
ChrisPee:
How hard do you think it would be to uncover 6 or 8 million fake ballots in the presidential election where less than 160 million total votes were cast. Remember, each vote it tied to a specific registered voter in the United States, which has less than 220 million of them.
If one person could randomly call 220 registered voters in a single day, wouldn't he or she be talking to 7 identifiable voter fraud victims?
The reason they were hard to find was because they didn't exist!
[QUOTE=PVMonger;2547735]FYI, I claimed that you were out of touch re: what you said about minorities. Get a clue. Republican racist morons won't ever change.
Ahhh, parsing words again, I see. The courts refused to look at Donnie's lawsuits because the lawyers offered not one shred of evidence. [/QUOTE]One side claims that blacks are incapable of carrying out basic functions like obtaining an ID, and that they are too lazy to wait in line to vote. The other side says that blacks are just as capable as other groups and should be treated equally. Which side is racist?
You don't understand very much about how courts work, do you? The courts didn't look at the evidence at all. That is because they refused to take the case, on the spurious ground of "lack of standing". As if 20 states of the Union (half the country) didn't have "standing" in a dispute over the unconstitutionality of the presidential election. If they don't have standing, who does? The answer, of course, is nobody except the media and deep state. Classic banana republic politicised "justice". Will not end well.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547846]The violence is largely perpetrated by inner city blacks, 90% of whom support the democrats, so for once you are correct.[/QUOTE]Hey Chris!
Always a great honor to be speaking to the resident genius of this board.
Let's assume your assertion is true: that the violence is largely perpetrated by inner city blacks, most of whom support the Democrats, and therefore the Democrats are to blame for the anti-Asian violence.
Let's also assume that Miller Genuine Draft and such is largely consumed by uneducated white men, most of whom support the Republicans. Per your logic, the Republicans are then to blame for the shitty beer in this country.
I would have never thought of this myself Chris. So glad to have made your acquaintance.
Yours truly.
Bblob69.
20 red states (of 50) do not constitute "half the country" especially if one is counting the overall population. The numerous lawsuits were laughed out of the courts. One succeeded on a technical issue, not changing the outcome in that state.
[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2547861]20 red states (of 50) do not constitute "half the country" especially if one is counting the overall population. The numerous lawsuits were laughed out of the courts. One succeeded on a technical issue, not changing the outcome in that state.[/QUOTE]Another ignoramus who does not understand how courts work. The lawsuit could not be "laughed *out* of court" because it was never *in* court, The Court refused to look at it on the grounds of "standing". This was not some random guy trying to get his case before the Supreme Court; this was 20 states of the Union, who wanted the case to be judged. If the Supreme Court had taken it and made their written judgements, that would be something. But they did not.
The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures. I will repeat for those who are slow on the uptake: The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures.
The Constitution was therefore violated in the five swing states with republican legislatures. These legislatures rejected the democrat attempts to change the election method to mass mail-in voting. So the democrats forced the change through via executive order or leftwing activist judge decree. Both of these methods are unconstitutional.
The election method was altered in an unconstitutional manner. The executive and judicial branch of government do not have the right to do what they did. Even if you believe there was no fraud (LOL) the unconstitutional changes rendered the election invalid.
Had this argument been made before the Supreme Court, as the 20 states wanted to do, the Court would have had no option but to agree that the election was unconstitutional and invalid. So it refused to hear the argument. Denial of justice is the opposite of justice. Biden is a fraudulent, invalid president. (Invalid in more ways than one).
"I look at it this way," Birx, a renowned HIV researcher and diplomat, told CNN, "The first time we have an excuse. There were about 100,000 deaths that came from that original (coronavirus) surge. All of the rest of them, in my mind, could have been mitigated or decreased substantially. "
They are essentially a solution in search of a problem. Here's a good read.
[URL]https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet[/URL]
Voter ID advocates tend to hype fear that individuals will vote on behalf of dead persons or exploit duplicity on state rolls that sometimes result when a person moves. This is illogical though as the risks of large fines and prison time are hardly worth adding an extra vote for one's preferred candidate. The scale of this fraud has been greatly exaggerated by Republicans, as was recently demonstrated in the dozens of failed court cases in the attempt to overturn a presidential election. Some here may recall the recent social media and fake news media lies of 1000's upon 1000's of dead people voting in Michigan, all very easily debunked.
[URL]https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54874120[/URL]
Add these false claims alleging illegal votes from out of state and the BS gets deeper.
[URL]https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/nov/06/nevada-republican-party/fact-checking-republican-claim-illegal-votes-nevad/[/URL]
Also claims that non-citizens effected recent national elections have been shown as unfounded. Like in other cases the incentive is small as they face deportation and other severe penalties for voting illegally.
[URL]https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clinton-800000-votes-non-citizens/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/19/fact-check-claim-voting-noncitizens-2020-election-unverified/6237115002/[/URL]
[URL]https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2019-08/Report_Truth-About-Voter-Fraud.pdf[/URL]
Bottom line is that angry white bigots and their Evangelical accomplices aren't the majority anymore. You'll control plenty of local and some state governments, but will lose national elections if there's high turnout. Thus you try to suppress the vote, race bait, and those at the very bottom of this food chain also scapegoat Jews. These should be watched, but essentially ignored until they break the law. But yea, in an age of fewer responsible editors, social media hacks, and "news as entertainment," misinformation will abound. And there's plenty of $ to be made appealing to the bigot market as there's still a lot around.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547851]One side claims that blacks are incapable of carrying out basic functions like obtaining an ID, and that they are too lazy to wait in line to vote. The other side says that blacks are just as capable as other groups and should be treated equally. Which side is.[/QUOTE]What's the big deal with an IDee? Isn't this something everyone has? Why are Democrats insisting there's no need to show identification to vote? I don't get it.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]Another ignoramus who does not understand how courts work. The lawsuit could not be "laughed *out* of court" because it was never *in* court, The Court refused to look at it on the grounds of "standing". This was not some random guy trying to get his case before the Supreme Court; this was 20 states of the Union, who wanted the case to be judged. If the Supreme Court had taken it and made their written judgements, that would be something. But they did not.
The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures. I will repeat for those who are slow on the uptake: The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures.
The Constitution was therefore violated in the five swing states with republican legislatures. These legislatures rejected the democrat attempts to change the election method to mass mail-in voting. So the democrats forced the change through via executive order or leftwing activist judge decree. Both of these methods are unconstitutional.[/QUOTE]Judicial decrees are within the constitution.
Another ignoramus.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]The election method was altered in an unconstitutional manner.[/QUOTE]It was done via judicial decree, in a constitutional manner.
The election methods were altered, due to the pandemic, and prudently so.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]Biden is a fraudulent, invalid president.[/QUOTE]He's looking for you now.
The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is unconstitutional and laughed all the the way to the nearest K Street bar. The Deep State is in control. If the Republicans can take over the house and senate in 2022, maybe the all the pedophiles will end up at Gitmo. Until then the trolls here will be blowing a gasket. It's a one party system pretending to be a democracy, brought to You courtesy of billionaires pulling the strings.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]Another ignoramus who does not understand how courts work. The lawsuit could not be "laughed *out* of court" because it was never *in* court, The Court refused to look at it on the grounds of "standing". This was not some random guy trying to get his case before the Supreme Court; this was 20 states of the Union, who wanted the case to be judged. If the Supreme Court had taken it and made their written judgements, that would be something. But they did not.
The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures. I will repeat for those who are slow on the uptake: The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures.
The Constitution was therefore violated in the five swing states with republican legislatures. These legislatures rejected the democrat attempts to change the election method to mass mail-in voting. So the democrats forced the change through via executive order or leftwing activist judge decree. Both of these methods are unconstitutional.
The election method was altered in an unconstitutional manner. The executive and judicial branch of government do not have the right to do what they did. Even if you believe there was no fraud (LOL) the unconstitutional changes rendered the election invalid..[/QUOTE]These 20 states had no standing as election procedures are controlled by the states and other states have no say in how a different state carries out its elections. So the proper venue for determining any dispute is via the courts in those states. All the state courts rejected the plaintiffs in these cases. The basis of the rejections were two fold, 1. Millions of voters would be disenfranchised by retroactively changing the rules and 2. Many of the rules were in place for well over a year being used in primaries and no one brought up a challenge. One of the reasons is that prior to Trumpturd whining these laws were liked by the Republicans. Trumpturd basically shot himself in the foot, but you can't help stupid.
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]Another ignoramus who does not understand how courts work. The lawsuit could not be "laughed *out* of court" because it was never *in* court, The Court refused to look at it on the grounds of "standing". This was not some random guy trying to get his case before the Supreme Court; this was 20 states of the Union, who wanted the case to be judged. If the Supreme Court had taken it and made their written judgements, that would be something. But they did not. [/QUOTE]Yes, many of these complaints were presented to the courts and were quickly rejected. That's laughed out of the courts, even if you want to mince words. Also many were presented at the state level based on alleged irregularities, mistreatment of poll watchers, etc and were likewise rejected. They were rejected again and again, then in some cases wound up in federal appeals. In this case the PA federal judge looked at it long and hard and here's his 21 page rebuke. He's also a life long Republican. You make a lot of proud assertions but don't do your homework.
[URL]https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf[/URL]
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures. I will repeat for those who are slow on the uptake: The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures..[/QUOTE]Non-sequtur as your conclusions are based on false assumptions.
The Repub legislature in PA expanded mail in voting in Oct 2019 in exchange for some goodies on their wish list. Then after they lose the presidential election want to back track and whine? Uh no, and those arguments were rejected at both state and federal levels.
[URL]https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2021/01/09/fact-checking-josh-hawleys-claim-about-pennsylvanias-election-law-politfact/[/URL]
In any case disgruntled Repubs had their chance to make their case on these points, and with endless resources have only failed. The Trump stacked conservative Supreme Court refused to offer any relief on Constitutional grounds. State courts in red and blue states repeatedly upheld actions to better facilitate voter access during the pandemic. States certified the popular votes in spite of all the legal Hail Marys. You want to throw out all mail ballots of people who voted in good faith according to established procedures, and without ever proving any substantial fraud for which to offer relief. And this only in the midwestern states, AZ, and GA that fell out of Trump's column from 2016. Thankfully such a douche move repeatedly failed the legal tests. And these weren't "swing states" BTW. In the Midwest the Dems just came back for what was there's after Trump's abysmal handing of the pandemic. The same also fueled upsets in GA and AZ.
So who are the fools here? The Trump stacked Supreme Court? All these state and federal judges, and even ones in red states like AZ, MT, TX and GA that sent Trump packing? Or is the fool an Anti-Semitic disgruntled wingnut posturing in monger forum? I say the latter. But ultimately what matters is what the courts believe, not you. We voted your guy out. Chalk one up for democracy. Chalk up a zero for an authoritarian and his cult followers who tried to steal an election. Done deal. America wins.
[URL]https://www.npr.org/2020/12/08/944230517/supreme-court-rejects-gop-bid-to-reverse-pennsylvania-election-results[/URL]
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547864]The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures. I will repeat for those who are slow on the uptake: The Constitution is clear that the method of election must be decided by the state legislatures. The Constitution was therefore violated in the five swing states with republican legislatures..[/QUOTE]The SCOTUS thus far hasn't interpreted the term "legislature" in Article 1 Section 4 of the Constitution so narrowly as to mean simply the state's representative assembly, but broadly as all legislative authority conferred by a state's Constitution. This is partly based on dictionary definitions of the word "legislature" from the time of the framers. It thus should come as no surprise that the SCOTUS refused to intervene on that ground, or any other ground and throw out all mail in ballots in key states. The same can be said for state courts across the political spectrum. In a word, you can feign superiority and "repeat" claims until the cows come home, but your arguments have failed over and over and over, and in much higher realms than a monger forum. And it's not just leftists that are picking on you. Damn. Oh well.
[URL]https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S4-C1-1-1-1-1/ALDE_00001036/[/URL]
[URL]https://casetext.com/case/arizona-state-legislature-v-arizona-independent-redistricting-commn[/URL]
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547691]Aaaand most of the people in the photo are white. Stuck your foot up your arse there, didn't you? It turns out that there's no white privilege card that lets white people skip the line! Incredible news to a brainwashed leftist bullshit-spewing muppet, but reality all the same.[/QUOTE]What does the color of their skin have to do with anything?
First you squeaked:
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2547555][b]Nobody in a single election in America[/b] has ever lined up for more than 10 hours to vote, you buffoon. Stop spewing bullshit.[/QUOTE]To that I clearly demonstrated that you're full of it.
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2547679]Oh?
12-hour voting lines give me hope, even as America looks like a banana republic: [URL]https://www.inquirer.com/columnists/attytood/early-voting-long-lines-georgia-texas-turnout-voter-suppression-20201015.html[/URL].
More than 10-hour wait and long lines as early voting starts in Georgia: [URL]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/13/more-than-10-hour-wait-and-long-lines-as-early-voting-starts-in-georgia[/URL].
Stop spewing bullshit.[/QUOTE]Another lie gets debunked, and then "white privilege" comes into play.
Not easy to be you, huh?