|
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 |
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Now, the other option (thankfully you present one) misses a few key things. First, republicans can "win the election in any way" by holding the Senate. There are only a few Senate seats that are up for vote in every election. In this election, the map leans favorable to Republicans.
On top of that, the Democrats ran a candidate credibly accused of sexual assault and rape and sporting a Nazi tattoo in Maine. After the accusations worsened, they swapped in another candidate that has little time to establish himself as an alternative. The Democratic candidate in Michigan is busy trying to distance himself from a letter he signed supporting the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president to "purge the media and the police" and his family's social media posts describing long-time Muslim Brotherhood support that El-Sayed denies. Talarico (Texas dem candidate) has his odd "God is nonbinary," Mary's example supports abortion for Christians, and "Radicalized white men are the greatest domestic terrorist threat in our country." Not exactly a good message in very white and pretty religious Texas. If Republicans hang on to the Senate, it will be in part due to candidate quality as well as a favorable map.
No need to count America out if this election goes poorly.
|
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress?
|
On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds".
In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost).
That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be.
|
On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress?
I appreciate your dislike for dyhb, but you really need to go to some Democrat organizational meetings if you don't know dyhb is representative not just of a large faction, but probably representative of the people running the meeting depending on where someone is.
|
On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Now, the other option (thankfully you present one) misses a few key things. First, republicans can "win the election in any way" by holding the Senate. There are only a few Senate seats that are up for vote in every election. In this election, the map leans favorable to Republicans.
On top of that, the Democrats ran a candidate credibly accused of sexual assault and rape and sporting a Nazi tattoo in Maine. After the accusations worsened, they swapped in another candidate that has little time to establish himself as an alternative. The Democratic candidate in Michigan is busy trying to distance himself from a letter he signed supporting the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president to "purge the media and the police" and his family's social media posts describing long-time Muslim Brotherhood support that El-Sayed denies. Talarico (Texas dem candidate) has his odd "God is nonbinary," Mary's example supports abortion for Christians, and "Radicalized white men are the greatest domestic terrorist threat in our country." Not exactly a good message in very white and pretty religious Texas. If Republicans hang on to the Senate, it will be in part due to candidate quality as well as a favorable map.
No need to count America out if this election goes poorly.
Did you miss how i posted an article about Trump trying to get CISA to hack voting machines, not tell the manufacturer, and only tell the white house? On the last page?
It stops being a conspiracy theory once they actually do it. Trump tried an insurrection the last time he lost. Do you really think he wouldn't rig the election if he thought he could do it?
The only reason the election might not get rigged is Trumps incompetence.
And yeah, you will always find some attack angle on everyone. That is what the republican shitthrowing machine does.
|
Trump trying to cheat in the election is not a conspiracy theory. Trump himself has openly called for his supporters to 'cheat like hell'.
|
On October 22 2026 04:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? I appreciate your dislike for dyhb, but you really need to go to some Democrat organizational meetings if you don't know dyhb is representative not just of a large faction, but probably representative of the people running the meeting depending on where someone is.
He’s danglars.
|
On October 22 2026 04:41 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? I appreciate your dislike for dyhb, but you really need to go to some Democrat organizational meetings if you don't know dyhb is representative not just of a large faction, but probably representative of the people running the meeting depending on where someone is. He’s danglars.
Is he?
The thick plotens.
|
On October 22 2026 04:35 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump trying to cheat in the election is not a conspiracy theory. Trump himself has openly called for his supporters to 'cheat like hell'.
He was just trolling
|
On October 22 2026 05:02 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:41 Billyboy wrote:On October 22 2026 04:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? I appreciate your dislike for dyhb, but you really need to go to some Democrat organizational meetings if you don't know dyhb is representative not just of a large faction, but probably representative of the people running the meeting depending on where someone is. He’s danglars. Is he? The thick plotens.
Funnily enough, it would only strengthen my points if dyhb was danglars.
|
On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress?
As insightful as saying a window is nonbinary. Talarico was just trying to be special, he even admitted that.
If I were voting in Texas and were concerned about senators being tough on crime, I would want the composition of the Senate to be people who don't rubber stamp federal judges and US AGs and DAs whose ideology is fundamentally based on empathy for criminals and a revolving door criminal justice system. (So I would not vote to help make a soft-on-crime Senate just because an AG once offered a plea deal instead of retrying a case after a hung jury without the victim's testimony that he would have no chance of winning.)
On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat. Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds".
You can't tamper with voting machines, America's elections are the most secure in history. Except I guess it's developing that in long-term Democrat-ruled California, after DOJ arrests for illegal registrations and voting, and information sent by the DOJ to California to sequester certain votes based on voter rolls having likely illegal voters, California are telling a court that they shouldn't have to follow an order to verify the citizenship of voters.
It may sound suspicious at first, but when you dig into it, they have an ironclad excuse. Their excuse, submitted to the court, for why they shouldn't have to follow the order to verify the citizenship of voters, is that they are simply incapable of it and have no way to verify it to begin with. And they had no idea an election was coming up so they didn't have time to prepare.
+ Show Spoiler +
On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost).
Your example of them trying to rig multiple elections, is one election?
Let's see if you believe this or just said it randomly without checking how many claims you had in the barrel. You have like 6 cycles to choose from. Which ones (multiple) did Trump cheat and how many votes were involved?
On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be.
If only there were a political movement pushing to make it impossible for people who aren't eligible to vote, to register to vote, or cast ballots. And to get the different aspects of government to work together to ensure that. That would be a great way to save the integrity of elections.
|
On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas?
On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat. Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds". In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost). That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be. You go mull over the consequences of saying Republicans are trying to rig the election after Trump just got done saying Democrats are trying to rig the election.
You'll have to expand on the alleged actual successful election cheating that happened in the 2020 election from the left's point of view.
On October 22 2026 04:34 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Now, the other option (thankfully you present one) misses a few key things. First, republicans can "win the election in any way" by holding the Senate. There are only a few Senate seats that are up for vote in every election. In this election, the map leans favorable to Republicans.
On top of that, the Democrats ran a candidate credibly accused of sexual assault and rape and sporting a Nazi tattoo in Maine. After the accusations worsened, they swapped in another candidate that has little time to establish himself as an alternative. The Democratic candidate in Michigan is busy trying to distance himself from a letter he signed supporting the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president to "purge the media and the police" and his family's social media posts describing long-time Muslim Brotherhood support that El-Sayed denies. Talarico (Texas dem candidate) has his odd "God is nonbinary," Mary's example supports abortion for Christians, and "Radicalized white men are the greatest domestic terrorist threat in our country." Not exactly a good message in very white and pretty religious Texas. If Republicans hang on to the Senate, it will be in part due to candidate quality as well as a favorable map.
No need to count America out if this election goes poorly. Did you miss how i posted an article about Trump trying to get CISA to hack voting machines, not tell the manufacturer, and only tell the white house? On the last page? It stops being a conspiracy theory once they actually do it. Trump tried an insurrection the last time he lost. Do you really think he wouldn't rig the election if he thought he could do it? The only reason the election might not get rigged is Trumps incompetence. And yeah, you will always find some attack angle on everyone. That is what the republican shitthrowing machine does. Did you miss my post on anonymously sourced articles and how much trust should be placed in them? Pro Publica is a big Democrat-funded operation that has had a string of obvious hit pieces, but see my previous post on that.
oBlade also remarked on the obvious point on penetration testing and validation. You didn't respond, but you should if you're serious about the point.
It should go without saying that each side pointing to the other about having the *REAL* example of a stolen election if they lose is a terrible message to voters. I think this is self-explanatory, but please let me know if it isn't for you.
|
On October 22 2026 03:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 01:26 Introvert wrote:
Response rates are even more garbage thsn before. For the sake of people's sanity they should be fully prepared for a 52-53 seat GOP senate. This goes for both sides. If there is a 52/53 advantage either way the other side is going to go apeshit.
Well Republicans have been expecting to lose for months now and there are always stories about consultants and campaign operatives wetting themselves. So I meant vs expectations. I mean we're already seeing it here. There is a plausible world where Republicans hold the senate. It's way more likely than some might think, and it will be ok. That's what I'm saying. We probably won't have 2018 where the GOP lost the House but gained in the Senate, but it could be split control again.
|
On October 22 2026 05:16 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas? Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat. Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds". In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost). That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be. You go mull over the consequences of saying Republicans are trying to rig the election after Trump just got done saying Democrats are trying to rig the election. You'll have to expand on the alleged actual successful election cheating that happened in the 2020 election from the left's point of view. Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:34 Simberto wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Now, the other option (thankfully you present one) misses a few key things. First, republicans can "win the election in any way" by holding the Senate. There are only a few Senate seats that are up for vote in every election. In this election, the map leans favorable to Republicans.
On top of that, the Democrats ran a candidate credibly accused of sexual assault and rape and sporting a Nazi tattoo in Maine. After the accusations worsened, they swapped in another candidate that has little time to establish himself as an alternative. The Democratic candidate in Michigan is busy trying to distance himself from a letter he signed supporting the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president to "purge the media and the police" and his family's social media posts describing long-time Muslim Brotherhood support that El-Sayed denies. Talarico (Texas dem candidate) has his odd "God is nonbinary," Mary's example supports abortion for Christians, and "Radicalized white men are the greatest domestic terrorist threat in our country." Not exactly a good message in very white and pretty religious Texas. If Republicans hang on to the Senate, it will be in part due to candidate quality as well as a favorable map.
No need to count America out if this election goes poorly. Did you miss how i posted an article about Trump trying to get CISA to hack voting machines, not tell the manufacturer, and only tell the white house? On the last page? It stops being a conspiracy theory once they actually do it. Trump tried an insurrection the last time he lost. Do you really think he wouldn't rig the election if he thought he could do it? The only reason the election might not get rigged is Trumps incompetence. And yeah, you will always find some attack angle on everyone. That is what the republican shitthrowing machine does. Did you miss my post on anonymously sourced articles and how much trust should be placed in them? Pro Publica is a big Democrat-funded operation that has had a string of obvious hit pieces, but see my previous post on that. oBlade also remarked on the obvious point on penetration testing and validation. You didn't respond, but you should if you're serious about the point. It should go without saying that each side pointing to the other about having the *REAL* example of a stolen election if they lose is a terrible message to voters. I think this is self-explanatory, but please let me know if it isn't for you.
I have muted oBlade thanks to the wonderful uBlock Origin code someone posted a while back. I can greatly recommend doing that.
As such, i do not see their posts, and even if i did, i would have zero interest in talking to them. They are the very worst debatelord i have ever seen, and talking to them is both exhausting and pointless, because they have absolutely no convinctions or beliefs, they just want to win the discussion. Do not expect me to ever reply to anything the post.
And yeah, it is really bad if you cannot trust your elections. But that is all on Trump and his republican enablers. He constantly cries about election fraud, and at the same time tries to cheat in elections in any way he can. He also tried to coup the government when he lost.
If you want people to trust their elections, maybe you should do something about the guy who constantly cheats at them and accuses other people of cheating?
Or make the process so transparent that it is very obvious no one is cheating. Like, for example, paper ballots with good procedures instead of utterly intransparent voting machines that no one can really trust, ever. Or at least allow in some international observers. But someone banned them for this election. I wonder who?
|
On October 22 2026 05:12 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 05:02 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 22 2026 04:41 Billyboy wrote:On October 22 2026 04:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? I appreciate your dislike for dyhb, but you really need to go to some Democrat organizational meetings if you don't know dyhb is representative not just of a large faction, but probably representative of the people running the meeting depending on where someone is. He’s danglars. Is he? The thick plotens. Funnily enough, it would only strengthen my points if dyhb was danglars.
You do believe the people running the dnc are literary villains, but then again you also believe the Chinese governments official position on the Uyghurs in China.
|
On October 22 2026 05:16 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas?
I'm obviously not an expert in everything, so sometimes I read posts in this forum that talk about things I'm not super informed about like specific tactics and equipment used in modern warfare, and I can't really agree with or dispute those points.
In this case you decided to opine about an issue I am very well informed on, and it couldn't be more obvious you aren't. If you'd like me to talk in great detail about how not only do the First and Third Persons of the Holy Trinity not have a biological sex (they aren't even made of matter and therefore cannot have genitalia or chromosomes), but also that God is described in explicitly female terms several times throughout the Bible in ways that are often missed if you don't know biblical Hebrew and/or Greek, I can do that.
Anyone who has a strong negative opinion about "God is nonbinary" is both grossly uninformed about basic orthodox theology, and was probably never going to vote for a Democrat anyway because they're likely carrying around a thousand other theological misconceptions fomented by Christian nationalism and fundamentalism.
|
On October 22 2026 05:24 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 05:16 dyhb wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas? On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat. Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds". In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost). That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be. You go mull over the consequences of saying Republicans are trying to rig the election after Trump just got done saying Democrats are trying to rig the election. You'll have to expand on the alleged actual successful election cheating that happened in the 2020 election from the left's point of view. On October 22 2026 04:34 Simberto wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Now, the other option (thankfully you present one) misses a few key things. First, republicans can "win the election in any way" by holding the Senate. There are only a few Senate seats that are up for vote in every election. In this election, the map leans favorable to Republicans.
On top of that, the Democrats ran a candidate credibly accused of sexual assault and rape and sporting a Nazi tattoo in Maine. After the accusations worsened, they swapped in another candidate that has little time to establish himself as an alternative. The Democratic candidate in Michigan is busy trying to distance himself from a letter he signed supporting the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president to "purge the media and the police" and his family's social media posts describing long-time Muslim Brotherhood support that El-Sayed denies. Talarico (Texas dem candidate) has his odd "God is nonbinary," Mary's example supports abortion for Christians, and "Radicalized white men are the greatest domestic terrorist threat in our country." Not exactly a good message in very white and pretty religious Texas. If Republicans hang on to the Senate, it will be in part due to candidate quality as well as a favorable map.
No need to count America out if this election goes poorly. Did you miss how i posted an article about Trump trying to get CISA to hack voting machines, not tell the manufacturer, and only tell the white house? On the last page? It stops being a conspiracy theory once they actually do it. Trump tried an insurrection the last time he lost. Do you really think he wouldn't rig the election if he thought he could do it? The only reason the election might not get rigged is Trumps incompetence. And yeah, you will always find some attack angle on everyone. That is what the republican shitthrowing machine does. Did you miss my post on anonymously sourced articles and how much trust should be placed in them? Pro Publica is a big Democrat-funded operation that has had a string of obvious hit pieces, but see my previous post on that. oBlade also remarked on the obvious point on penetration testing and validation. You didn't respond, but you should if you're serious about the point. It should go without saying that each side pointing to the other about having the *REAL* example of a stolen election if they lose is a terrible message to voters. I think this is self-explanatory, but please let me know if it isn't for you. I have muted oBlade thanks to the wonderful uBlock Origin code someone posted a while back. I can greatly recommend doing that. As such, i do not see their posts, and even if i did, i would have zero interest in talking to them. They are the very worst debatelord i have ever seen, and talking to them is both exhausting and pointless, because they have absolutely no convinctions or beliefs, they just want to win the discussion. Do not expect me to ever reply to anything the post. I believe in a truth separate from the person or persons talking about it. Even the most hardcore pro-tariff 2020-election-conspiracy-believer Trump supporter sometimes brings up a good point every once in a while. But that's your business on who you read and why. I limit it to the extreme trolls that don't actually believe a word they say and prove it again and again and are additionally bad-mannered.
And yeah, it is really bad if you cannot trust your elections. But that is all on Trump and his republican enablers. He constantly cries about election fraud, and at the same time tries to cheat in elections in any way he can. He also tried to coup the government when he lost.
If you want people to trust their elections, maybe you should do something about the guy who constantly cheats at them and accuses other people of cheating?
Or make the process so transparent that it is very obvious no one is cheating. Like, for example, paper ballots with good procedures instead of utterly intransparent voting machines that no one can really trust, ever. Or at least allow in some international observers. But someone banned them for this election. I wonder who? Well I'm not getting through to you on the obvious problem just pointing at each other and saying they're the true election denier/if we lose, it's because the other guy cheated.
It's like constantly going back to restating that the problem in America is Trump supporters, and every time somebody proposes ways to manage it or fix it or move past while accounting for it, you lash out and restate that the problem is Trump supporters. Ok, cool, but maybe slow your roll next time you parrot Trump on the "if we lose, it's because the other guy cheated?" I can agree with you that it doesn't feel fair in the information ecosystem and politics to have a reason not to repeat the claims in reverse.
On October 22 2026 05:32 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 05:16 dyhb wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas? I'm obviously not an expert in anything, so sometimes I read posts in this forum that talk about things I'm not super informed about like specific tactics and equipment used in modern warfare, and I can't really agree with or dispute those points. In this case you decided to opine about an issue I am very well informed on, and it couldn't be more obvious you aren't. If you'd like me to talk in great detail about how not only do the First and Third Persons of the Holy Trinity not have a biological sex (they aren't even made of matter and therefore cannot have genitalia or chromosomes), but also that God is described in explicitly female terms several times throughout the Bible in ways that are often missed if you don't know biblical Hebrew and/or Greek. Anyone who has a strong negative opinion about "God is nonbinary" is both grossly uninformed about basic orthodox theology, and was probably never going to vote for a Democrat anyway because they're likely carrying around a thousand other theological misconceptions fomented by Christian nationalism and fundamentalism. I noticed that you used "not have a biological sex" and transitioned, without comment, to "God is nonbinary." Any particular reason why you'd lead with the one? Or let me put it another way. Is there a cultural Christianity and theological difference between the statements that God does not have a biology to have biological sex and humans have crafted a socially constructed sexual identity that simply says not man or woman?
|
On October 22 2026 05:12 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 05:02 Biff The Understudy wrote:On October 22 2026 04:41 Billyboy wrote:On October 22 2026 04:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? I appreciate your dislike for dyhb, but you really need to go to some Democrat organizational meetings if you don't know dyhb is representative not just of a large faction, but probably representative of the people running the meeting depending on where someone is. He’s danglars. Is he? The thick plotens. Funnily enough, it would only strengthen my points if dyhb was danglars.
I think Danglar would have preferred to get hit in the face witha baseball bat than vote for a democrat, and I’m pretty certain almost no democrat wouldn’t find his ideas repellant.
|
On October 22 2026 05:38 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 05:24 Simberto wrote:On October 22 2026 05:16 dyhb wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas? On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat. Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds". In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost). That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be. You go mull over the consequences of saying Republicans are trying to rig the election after Trump just got done saying Democrats are trying to rig the election. You'll have to expand on the alleged actual successful election cheating that happened in the 2020 election from the left's point of view. On October 22 2026 04:34 Simberto wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat.
Now, the other option (thankfully you present one) misses a few key things. First, republicans can "win the election in any way" by holding the Senate. There are only a few Senate seats that are up for vote in every election. In this election, the map leans favorable to Republicans.
On top of that, the Democrats ran a candidate credibly accused of sexual assault and rape and sporting a Nazi tattoo in Maine. After the accusations worsened, they swapped in another candidate that has little time to establish himself as an alternative. The Democratic candidate in Michigan is busy trying to distance himself from a letter he signed supporting the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president to "purge the media and the police" and his family's social media posts describing long-time Muslim Brotherhood support that El-Sayed denies. Talarico (Texas dem candidate) has his odd "God is nonbinary," Mary's example supports abortion for Christians, and "Radicalized white men are the greatest domestic terrorist threat in our country." Not exactly a good message in very white and pretty religious Texas. If Republicans hang on to the Senate, it will be in part due to candidate quality as well as a favorable map.
No need to count America out if this election goes poorly. Did you miss how i posted an article about Trump trying to get CISA to hack voting machines, not tell the manufacturer, and only tell the white house? On the last page? It stops being a conspiracy theory once they actually do it. Trump tried an insurrection the last time he lost. Do you really think he wouldn't rig the election if he thought he could do it? The only reason the election might not get rigged is Trumps incompetence. And yeah, you will always find some attack angle on everyone. That is what the republican shitthrowing machine does. Did you miss my post on anonymously sourced articles and how much trust should be placed in them? Pro Publica is a big Democrat-funded operation that has had a string of obvious hit pieces, but see my previous post on that. oBlade also remarked on the obvious point on penetration testing and validation. You didn't respond, but you should if you're serious about the point. It should go without saying that each side pointing to the other about having the *REAL* example of a stolen election if they lose is a terrible message to voters. I think this is self-explanatory, but please let me know if it isn't for you. I have muted oBlade thanks to the wonderful uBlock Origin code someone posted a while back. I can greatly recommend doing that. As such, i do not see their posts, and even if i did, i would have zero interest in talking to them. They are the very worst debatelord i have ever seen, and talking to them is both exhausting and pointless, because they have absolutely no convinctions or beliefs, they just want to win the discussion. Do not expect me to ever reply to anything the post. I believe in a truth separate from the person or persons talking about it. Even the most hardcore pro-tariff 2020-election-conspiracy-believer Trump supporter sometimes brings up a good point every once in a while. But that's your business on who you read and why. I limit it to the extreme trolls that don't actually believe a word they say and prove it again and again and are additionally bad-mannered. Show nested quote +And yeah, it is really bad if you cannot trust your elections. But that is all on Trump and his republican enablers. He constantly cries about election fraud, and at the same time tries to cheat in elections in any way he can. He also tried to coup the government when he lost.
If you want people to trust their elections, maybe you should do something about the guy who constantly cheats at them and accuses other people of cheating?
Or make the process so transparent that it is very obvious no one is cheating. Like, for example, paper ballots with good procedures instead of utterly intransparent voting machines that no one can really trust, ever. Or at least allow in some international observers. But someone banned them for this election. I wonder who? Well I'm not getting through to you on the obvious problem just pointing at each other and saying they're the true election denier/if we lose, it's because the other guy cheated. It's like constantly going back to restating that the problem in America is Trump supporters, and every time somebody proposes ways to manage it or fix it or move past while accounting for it, you lash out and restate that the problem is Trump supporters. Ok, cool, but maybe slow your roll next time you parrot Trump on the "if we lose, it's because the other guy cheated?" I can agree with you that it doesn't feel fair in the information ecosystem and politics to have a reason not to repeat the claims in reverse. Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 05:32 LightSpectra wrote:On October 22 2026 05:16 dyhb wrote:On October 22 2026 04:15 LightSpectra wrote:
Ah, if it isn't our favorite self-described "Democrat" uncritically repeating Republican talking points yet again.
Not sure what's supposed to be odd about "God is nonbinary," do you think Christians generally believe the Holy Spirit has male genitalia? And do you think that sentence was somehow a worse crime than Paxton giving sweetheart deals to child molesters and campaigning on "Christian values" while openly taking vacations with his mistress? Do you have any idea of mainstream Christian beliefs, let alone Texas? I'm obviously not an expert in anything, so sometimes I read posts in this forum that talk about things I'm not super informed about like specific tactics and equipment used in modern warfare, and I can't really agree with or dispute those points. In this case you decided to opine about an issue I am very well informed on, and it couldn't be more obvious you aren't. If you'd like me to talk in great detail about how not only do the First and Third Persons of the Holy Trinity not have a biological sex (they aren't even made of matter and therefore cannot have genitalia or chromosomes), but also that God is described in explicitly female terms several times throughout the Bible in ways that are often missed if you don't know biblical Hebrew and/or Greek. Anyone who has a strong negative opinion about "God is nonbinary" is both grossly uninformed about basic orthodox theology, and was probably never going to vote for a Democrat anyway because they're likely carrying around a thousand other theological misconceptions fomented by Christian nationalism and fundamentalism. I noticed that you used "not have a biological sex" and transitioned, without comment, to "God is nonbinary." Any particular reason why you'd lead with the one? Or let me put it another way. Is there a cultural Christianity and theological difference between the statements that God does not have a biology to have biological sex and humans have crafted a socially constructed sexual identity that simply says not man or woman?
What do you think non-binary means?
|
On October 22 2026 05:13 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 22 2026 04:02 dyhb wrote:
It's dangerous to be pre-clearing the same kinds of conspiracy theories that Trump engages with in his rhetoric. He's said repeatedly that if he loses the election, then it's because the eleciton was rigged or because Democrats cheat. Trump and his buddies trying to rig another election, after we already know they've tried rigging multiple elections in the past and after we know they're currently trying to secretly tamper with voting machines, is a much more concerning and realistic situation than Trump's multitude of disproven conspiracy theories about how his 2020 election loss was due to cheating. They are not "the same kinds". You can't tamper with voting machines, America's elections are the most secure in history.
I hope they continue to stay that way, despite Trump repeatedly trying to cheat, and despite his appointees currently trying to tamper with voting machines.
Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In the 2020 election, for example, Trump accused Democrats of cheating, which they didn't, and Democrats accused Trump of cheating, which he did (and still lost). Your example of them trying to rig multiple elections, is one election?
"For example" means I'm giving one example. It doesn't mean that there is only one example to give.
Let's see if you believe this or just said it randomly without checking how many claims you had in the barrel. You have like 6 cycles to choose from. Which ones (multiple) did Trump cheat and how many votes were involved?
In 2016, Trump committed 34 felonies to cover up information that he thought would have hurt him during the election. And he publicly asked Russia to interfere in the 2016 election. And the Mueller Report listed 10 different ways that Trump obstructed justice during the 2016 election. Trump cheated multiple times here.
In 2020, Trump and his allies sued dozens of times to try and overturn election results, without a shred of evidence. And Trump specifically called Georgia's secretary of state to try and pressure him into giving Trump a win in Georgia. And Trump and his buddies created slates of fake electors across multiple swing states, in the hopes that they would give lost states to Trump. And he orchestrated a violent insurrection to try and stop the results from being certified. Trump cheated multiple times here.
In 2024, Trump and his fellow Republican leaders continued to try and cheat so completely that there is a 359-citation Wiki on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_efforts_to_disrupt_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election
Show nested quote +On October 22 2026 04:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
That being said, hopefully any future cheating is caught and stopped and the cheaters are held accountable, regardless of who the cheaters may be. If only there were a political movement pushing to make it impossible for people who aren't eligible to vote, to register to vote, or cast ballots. And to get the different aspects of government to work together to ensure that. That would be a great way to save the integrity of elections.
This brings back the statement you made earlier, that I replied to. You didn't respond to me. Here it is again, in bold:
On October 20 2026 23:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2026 22:43 oBlade wrote:On October 20 2026 21:54 LightSpectra wrote:
We could easily have nation-wide 100% mail-in voting like Oregon has done since 2000. Republicans would never agree to it though since they know people with physical disabilities and people that have to work long shifts on election day are overwhelmingly left-leaning. We could also easily have nice nationwide Georgia-style voter ID.You do not need universal mail-in voting to accommodate people with disabilities or people who work (who are not overwhelmingly left-leaning lol). LS didn't just say people who work; LS said people who work long shifts. Feel free to ask LS for a citation if you want. If every person eligible to vote were to receive a free voter ID (in the mail or via email, whichever the person prefers) without needing to do anything on their part, I'd be fine with that. Would you? Perhaps it's something that you and I could agree on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HVGpYtHakAAdSGN.jpg)
