EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4198
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21946 Posts
On May 15 2024 07:06 BlackJack wrote: well only one of the two has tried to overthrow the result of a legitimate election so not quite 'both sides'.As is often the case - nobody actually objects fundamentally to the idea that ballots should be received by election day. The disagreement is simply that when the D's do something it's good/moral and when the R's do the exact same thing it's fascism/tyranny. It's just another flavor of the same argument we always have. The minutiae of election law details is immaterial. The only thing missing is GH dropping in to tell us both sides are fascist. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 07:06 BlackJack wrote: As is often the case - nobody actually objects fundamentally to the idea that ballots should be received by election day. The disagreement is simply that when the D's do something it's good/moral and when the R's do the exact same thing it's fascism/tyranny. It's just another flavor of the same argument we always have. The minutiae of election law details is immaterial. The only thing missing is GH dropping in to tell us both sides are fascist. Obviously, we're going to call you out on your claim that there's a double standard here, unless you provide evidence. Republicans are trying to throw out legal, valid votes, to rig elections, and have been since at least the 2020 presidential election. Please provide a source supporting your assertions that 1. Democrats are trying to do "the exact same thing", and 2. We think that Democrats rigging elections is "good/moral". Thank you in advance. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On May 15 2024 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Obviously, we're going to call you out on your claim that there's a double standard here, unless you provide evidence. Republicans are trying to throw out legal, valid votes, to rig elections, and have been since at least the 2020 presidential election. Please provide a source supporting your assertions that 1. Democrats are trying to do "the exact same thing", and 2. We think that Democrats rigging elections is "good/moral". Thank you in advance. It's been thrice said that the majority of states require ballots to be received by election day to be counted. That majority includes many blue states. You don't seem to be taking any issue with these blue state officials that have decided to not count ballots received after election day. It's only the Republicans in Nevada you take umbrage with for not allowing votes received after election day to be counted. So do you want to call out those blue states now...? Or is it only bad when the Republicans do it? | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 08:00 BlackJack wrote: It's been thrice said that the majority of states require ballots to be received by election day to be counted. That majority includes many blue states. You don't seem to be taking any issue with these blue state officials that have decided to not count ballots received after election day. It's only the Republicans in Nevada you take umbrage with for not allowing votes received after election day to be counted. So do you want to call out those blue states now...? Or is it only bad when the Republicans do it? I've never said - and I don't think anyone else here has said - that blue states shouldn't count all their legal ballots. Everyone here has been saying things like "votes correctly sent in by the deadline should be counted", not "this only applies to some states" or "I only care about the votes that help Democrats". You've fabricated a double-standard that no one is holding; if Democrats were the ones trying to rig the elections, then we would be pissed off too. All legal California votes should be counted, even though we know that a Democrat will win California. Same goes for New York and New Jersey and any other obviously-blue state. Same goes for the deep red states, and all the rest of the states. Republicans know it's easier to rig Nevada and Pennsylvania than California though, hence their focus on undermining swing states. I'm also noting that you provided no sources for your claims that 1. Democrats are trying to do "the exact same thing", and 2. We think that Democrats rigging elections is "good/moral". | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/politics/mail-in-voting/ Many blue states don't count ballots received after election day. Tell me what's different between New Hampshire or Colorado (blue states) not counting the ballots they received after election day vs Republicans not wanting Nevada to count they ballots they received after election day? How is that not the exact same? | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On May 15 2024 07:22 Gorsameth wrote: well only one of the two has tried to overthrow the result of a legitimate election so not quite 'both sides'. Right, that's the point. We can skip all the "what are good rules to have" and just settle on "we should do whatever the oppositeGOP position is" like oBlade said earlier. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7290 Posts
On May 15 2024 08:32 BlackJack wrote: Right, that's the point. We can skip all the "what are good rules to have" and just settle on "we should do whatever the oppositeGOP position is" like oBlade said earlier. This is such nonsense. Only one party is crying about election fraud, bitching about stopping the count oh wait no keep counting! Having conspiracy theories about voting bags in the night etc. This is such bad faith from you, seriously. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 08:31 BlackJack wrote: I'm not sure how I can be any more clear. Here's a link showing which states do and don't accept ballots after election day. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/politics/mail-in-voting/ Many blue states don't count ballots received after election day. Tell me what's different between New Hampshire or Colorado (blue states) not counting the ballots they received after election day vs Republicans not wanting Nevada to count they ballots they received after election day? How is that not the exact same? They are the same. You seem to be the only one asserting that there's a difference. If New Hampshire doesn't count all the ballots, then I disagree with what NH is doing too. The statements I've been making apply to all the states, not just the ones that Republicans are actively trying to rig. Looks like the double standard was all in your head. On May 15 2024 08:32 BlackJack wrote: Right, that's the point. We can skip all the "what are good rules to have" and just settle on "we should do whatever the oppositeGOP position is" like oBlade said earlier. No one is forcing you to write bad-faith posts like this  | ||
KwarK
United States43203 Posts
On May 15 2024 06:49 Mohdoo wrote: My 2 cents on fixing election logistical nonsense: It is plain and simply under funded and under staffed. Our goal should be for each ballot to be manually counted and then verified by a randomized second person within 24 hours of polls closing. Election integrity and election clarity are too important to allow to be resource constrained. I don't think it is outlandish or unreasonable to basically make the budget infinite. If it means hiring 100,000 people, hire 100,000 people. Pay each of them $500 for an 8 hour shift counting ballots. Our country should be capable of organizing a monstrous effort like this. I think all of the efforts to minimize, distribute, or digitize are both misguided and ridiculous. The mission statement of an election is too critical to be finding ways to cut corners. Manual counting with some kind of verification system with an insane number of people is all we need. The focus should be advocating for funding rather than redesigning a way to work within budget constraints. That’s not how they’re counted. You fill out your paper ballot and put it in the box. The box reads it and updates its internal tally. The total votes cast counter on the box goes up by one so you can see that your vote was counted (but it doesn’t show everyone how you voted). Your pink voter registration slip goes into a box next to the ballot box. Through the day these are routinely reconciled to the total votes on the tally (this prevents airdropping votes because the pinks are voter specific, only the white ballots are anonymous). Voters also have the option of requesting manual counting by putting their ballot in a different box. At the end of the day the box prints out 3 slips with election results. These are signed by a representative of each party working as an election judge. One of these is posted on the outer door of the voting station, one sent to the Secretary of State, and one goes to the main election office with the ballot box, punks, any spoiled or provisional ballots, and any voided postal votes. At the election office the outliers are resolved and a random recount audit of the electronic count is performed on a sample of ballot boxes. The ballot boxes are offline and their software is audited too. I know this because I served as an election judge last election. I’ll likely serve again this election too. As a registered Republican it’s important for me to be ready to authenticate the election and vouch for its integrity. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14046 Posts
On May 12 2024 08:19 BlackJack wrote: So basically you get to dismiss wide swathes of people that you've never interacted with as nazis, racists, bigots, and misogynists because they oppose vaccine mandates, but in turn everyone should ask you in good faith what your opinions are and accept them at face value. Rules for thee but not for me. I don't dismiss people based on one point of data. I paint my opinion of them based on those data points but the greater painting I have of them is based on much more than that. you would be able to learn that if you treated people with good faith and actualy engaged with them. On May 12 2024 14:46 BlackJack wrote: The reason we went 20 rounds on this is because I answered the question 20 times and for whatever reason it never sank in for you. Here is a postwhere I’m even explaining how many times I answered that question and even quoted some of my other posts where I’ve answered it. I’ve explained like 20 times that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis and the reason we should vaccinate for say Measles and not Covid is because the MMR can actually stop measles from spreading and the covid vaccine can’t stop Covid from spreading. I’m not sure why this won’t stick for you. Probably because you are still under the illusion that we can reach herd immunity and eradicate COVID from schools if we just throw enough vaccines at children as you stated in this post. Funny that the entire world is in agreement with my position - we should judge vaccine mandates on a case by case, we can’t eradicate covid from schools with vaccine mandates, and we should require covid vaccines for children to attend schools. The entire world disagrees with your position. Maybe you should really reflect on that and ask yourself why you think I’m the one with the extreme positions. we went 20 rounds because you refused to give a simple answer to a simple question despite me reframing it every single time for you. You don't answer it in any of those posts you quote, you just vaguely state that you make decisions in them. I asked you over and over again because I wanted your reasoning on covid specifically and you refused every time on why specifically you had a problem with covid vaccines but not others. When you answer "Measles and not Covid is because the MMR can actually stop measles from spreading and the covid vaccine can’t stop Covid from spreading", this would have been an answer you could have quoted from the start. You know you didn't do this because its embarrassing not understanding the value of vaccines and how they saved lives from building resistance. If you were that confident on that sentence you would have been able to easily supply it at any time and save me and everyone else a lot of time and effort trying to get it out of you. Having a position that you make decisions isn't a position, again I also judge vaccine mandates on a case by case basis. You don't see people who disagree with you of having a valid reason for disagreeing with you so you can't comprehend how they come to those decisions, or just don't care. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On May 15 2024 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Please provide a source supporting your assertions that 1. Democrats are trying to do "the exact same thing", . On May 15 2024 08:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I'm also noting that you provided no sources for your claims that 1. Democrats are trying to do "the exact same thing" On May 15 2024 09:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: They are the same. You seem to be the only one asserting that there's a difference. This is such odd behavior. You ask me to provide evidence that blue states have applied the same "election rigging" rules to invalidate ballots that Republicans are asking for in Nevada and as soon as I provide that evidence your response is to... ...acknowledge that it is the same and then insist I was the one saying there's a difference? Do you really think you can gaslight me into believing I'm the one saying there's a difference after you repeatedly directly quote me calling it "the exact same thing"? | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 20:12 BlackJack wrote: This is such odd behavior. You ask me to provide evidence that blue states have applied the same "election rigging" rules to invalidate ballots that Republicans are asking for in Nevada and as soon as I provide that evidence your response is to... ...acknowledge that it is the same and then insist I was the one saying there's a difference? Do you really think you can gaslight me into believing I'm the one saying there's a difference after you repeatedly directly quote me calling it "the exact same thing"? Quote-mining someone doesn't work when the audience can just scroll up and read the entire post, in context. You asserted that the rest of us were applying a double-standard, and you claimed that we think there's an acceptable difference between Democrats trying to rig an election (which isn't happening, and we wouldn't accept even if it was happening) and Republicans trying to rig an election (which is happening and has happened in the past, and we still aren't accepting of it). You fabricated a double-standard that doesn't exist, and then challenged us to explain why that double-standard is acceptable to us. There is no double-standard going on here when we say that all legal votes should be counted *regardless of the state*, no matter how much you project onto us the idea that there must be a difference between states for us to take this position, and that we need to defend said difference. You're inventing these issues out of thin air, just to be contrarian, which is why so many people have such little patience left with you. You're not making valid points, and it comes off as insincere and attention-seeking. If you have follow-up questions, then ask them, but don't tell us what our positions are when all you're doing is strawmanning and contradicting what we've already said. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5764 Posts
On May 15 2024 09:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: They are the same. You seem to be the only one asserting that there's a difference. If New Hampshire doesn't count all the ballots, then I disagree with what NH is doing too. The statements I've been making apply to all the states, not just the ones that Republicans are actively trying to rig. Looks like the double standard was all in your head. We understand that you think the GOP wants to rig everything they can, including the Nevada elections. We find this proposition hard to reconcile with its implications: for example, that the machiavellian GOP has somehow convinced Colorado Democrats to rig their own elections against themselves at the same time the feeble-minded Pennsylvania GOP was apparently tricked into doing the same thing, and why the 117th Congress and Biden didn't deliver the justice of unrigging Election Day federally when they had the chance, after one of the most contentious elections in recent history, to nationwide acclaim and an obvious political victory. Unless you can provide another step of analysis to fill these gaps and explain what's going on, you ought to expect further head scratching. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 21:00 oBlade wrote: We understand that you think the GOP wants to rig everything they can, including the Nevada elections. We find this proposition hard to reconcile with its implications: for example, that the machiavellian GOP has somehow convinced Colorado Democrats to rig their own elections against themselves at the same time the feeble-minded Pennsylvania GOP was apparently tricked into doing the same thing, and why the 117th Congress and Biden didn't deliver the justice of unrigging Election Day federally when they had the chance, after one of the most contentious elections in recent history, to nationwide acclaim and an obvious political victory. Unless you can provide another step of analysis to fill these gaps and explain what's going on, you ought to expect further head scratching. Did you just... make up a whole list of assertions here? I certainly didn't make these claims, so the onus isn't on me to "provide another step of analysis to fill these gaps". They're not my gaps. If you think these things happened, then please explain why. If you think these things happened and you're okay with them happening, then please explain why. The attempted rigging of the 2020 election by the Republican party is well-documented, from Trump calling Georgia's Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, to invent enough non-existent Republican votes to flip Georgia; to trying to eliminate legal mail-in ballots to flip Pennsylvania; to the dozens of failed lawsuits all over the country; to the general spreading of misinformation regarding the security of both in-person and mail-in ballots (which led to the violent insurrection and the fact that half of Republicans still incorrectly think that the election was stolen). At the beginning of our conversation, I had made a list of examples where Republicans were actively trying to make it harder for Democrats to vote, including for this upcoming 2024 presidential election: https://tl.net/forum/general/532255-us-politics-mega-thread?page=4196#83905 | ||
|
oBlade
United States5764 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On May 15 2024 21:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Did you just... make up a whole list of assertions here? I certainly didn't make these claims, so the onus isn't on me to "provide another step of analysis to fill these gaps". They're not my gaps. If you think these things happened, then please explain why. If you think these things happened and you're okay with them happening, then please explain why. The attempted rigging of the 2020 election by the Republican party is well-documented, from Trump calling Georgia's Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, to invent enough non-existent Republican votes to flip Georgia; to trying to eliminate legal mail-in ballots to flip Pennsylvania; to the dozens of failed lawsuits all over the country; to the general spreading of misinformation regarding the security of both in-person and mail-in ballots (which led to the violent insurrection and the fact that half of Republicans still incorrectly think that the election was stolen). At the beginning of our conversation, I had made a list of examples where Republicans were actively trying to make it harder for Democrats to vote, including for this upcoming 2024 presidential election: https://tl.net/forum/general/532255-us-politics-mega-thread?page=4196#83905 His point was, if the Nevada Republicans plot to require ballots be received by Election Day is an attempt to rig the election against the Democrats, then why would other blue states, like Colorado, also make it a law to require ballots be received by Election Day. Are they trying to rig it against themselves? That makes no sense. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 21:42 oBlade wrote: You opened this can of worms with election conspiracies that the GOP is trying to "rig" Nevada by suing to only count ballots received by a deadline of election day (which is otherwise the law as regards every other form of casting a ballot - early voting, drop boxes which have to be emptied on time, and election day voting which has rules on when polls close). Why have Democrats in Colorado made it harder for Democrats to vote, Republicans in Pennsylvania made it easier for Democrats to vote, and Democrats in D.C. not made it easier for everyone to vote? If you think these things happened, then provide your own evidence and your own explanations. I'm not entertaining these projections where you and BlackJack claim other people need to defend positions that they don't necessarily hold. If you and BlackJack want to focus on Colorado, then that's your prerogative, but we don't need to buy in to your assertions if they remain unjustified. If you wanted to ask a good-faith question about why Republicans focus on rigging certain states and not others, then the answer probably has something to do with which states will have the closest races (like Nevada this time, and Pennsylvania and Georgia last time). Swing states are easier to overturn or interfere with than deep blue/red states, because fewer votes would need to be prevented (like in 2020 PA) or invented (like in 2020 GA). There's another good-faith follow-up to ask, after acknowledging that we really do want all states to accept all legal votes: Different states currently have different rules surrounding this, so are there certain states where it's even more important to make sure all legal votes are counted? And to that, I think someone could reasonably point out that, while it's important for all states to count all legal votes, only a few of those states might affect the outcome of the presidential election. For example, having an accurate California count or Texas count is important for the popular vote, but the popular vote doesn't decide the election and we know that CA will break blue and TX will break red. Therefore, I could see someone making an argument that we should be prioritizing the swing/purple states if we had to choose the top five or top ten states to make sure they all count their votes accurately, as those electoral votes could swing the election. Just some food for thought and other rabbit holes to consider exploring, since I'm not engaging with the need to defend positions that I don't actually hold. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45006 Posts
On May 15 2024 21:43 BlackJack wrote: His point was, if the Nevada Republicans plot to require ballots be received by Election Day is an attempt to rig the election against the Democrats, then why would other blue states, like Colorado, also make it a law to require ballots be received by Election Day. Are they trying to rig it against themselves? That makes no sense. Different states have different populations, voting percentages, rates of counting votes, mail-in dates, delivery efficiencies, percents of mail-in votes vs. in-person votes, and other variables to consider. You'd have to look at what things are actually the same and what things are actually different to try and figure out why each state has the rules that they do. Colorado may have a system that works for that state, or it may not. Feel free to look into it and let me know. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5764 Posts
On May 15 2024 21:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: If you think these things happened, then provide your own evidence and your own explanations. I'm not entertaining these projections where you and BlackJack claim other people need to defend positions that they don't necessarily hold. If you and BlackJack want to focus on Colorado, then that's your prerogative, but we don't need to buy in to your assertions if they remain unjustified. Here's my evidence since you still don't seem up to date: The 117th Congress and Biden didn't make Election Day a federal holiday. Pennsylvania GOP greatly expanded mail-in voting in the lead-up to the 2020 election, in which their candidate for president lost the state critically, and badly. Blue Colorado has the exact same mail-in voting rules the Nevada GOP is now suing for in Nevada. I am actively asking you why these objective realities have occurred. You seem reluctant to acknowledge the rhetorical trap you've built around yourself. Why don't YOU explain what is functionally different between Colorado and Nevada such that you can support the claim of "rigging" in Nevada's case which is about the exact same thing? Please explain to me like I'm five years old why the GOP is trying to rig the election in Nevada, WITHOUT mentioning that a polling station in Georgia closed. You're the only one who sees it. It's 100% clear you're not arguing or even discussing an idea, just assuming and then listing. Sure it's possible different states can have different systems that work for them. This is what I told you when you first brought up a weird quote mine from a "report" that said a Georgia polling station closed. You seem to acknowledge mail-in voting in some way leans Democrat. Yet a Georgia polling station closes, and your conclusion is NOT a) Obviously it's totally plausible that they wouldn't need as many polling stations, since so many more people are voting by mail. I'll need to look at this further to make any claim of rigging... Nor b) Clearly the Georgia Democrats are trying to suppress the in-person Republican vote in a case of rigging... but rather, the Republicans are at it again with their rigging. This isn't reasoning. It's pure, primitive assumption. On May 15 2024 22:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Different states have different populations, voting percentages, rates of counting votes, mail-in dates, delivery efficiencies, percents of mail-in votes vs. in-person votes, and other variables to consider. Sir, the post office is federal. The mail is the same everywhere. On May 15 2024 22:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: You'd have to look at what things are actually the same and what things are actually different to try and figure out why each state has the rules that they do. Colorado may have a system that works for that state, or it may not. Feel free to look into it and let me know. Tell us first what things are actually different about Nevada, and then explain why Georgia doesn't deserve this same logical consideration when you list it offhand as part of some nationwide rigging conspiracy. | ||
| ||
