|
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 |
On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Show nested quote +Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings.
His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election.
You seriously dont think that post is concerning?
|
On October 26 2024 19:27 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings. His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election. You seriously dont think that post is concerning?
Yes, I seriously don't. Election fraud does not become more or less bad depending on your reason for opposing it.
O'Keefe has also stated he has people watching and reporting undercover.
|
On October 26 2024 10:21 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 07:11 BlackJack wrote:On October 25 2024 23:18 ChristianS wrote:On October 25 2024 18:40 BlackJack wrote:On October 25 2024 17:20 ChristianS wrote:On October 25 2024 14:07 BlackJack wrote:On October 25 2024 13:04 ChristianS wrote:On October 25 2024 01:41 BlackJack wrote:On October 25 2024 00:23 ChristianS wrote:On October 24 2024 01:25 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
Biologically it's gametes. We have either sperm or eggs, there is no third type (it's "binary"). In many animals chromosomes can determine the sex but they don't define it. Famously, in alligators incubation temperature determines sex.
Edit: so chromosomes are a useful shorthand but edge cases don't make the whole exercise arbitrary. This is close to true, perhaps good enough for government work, but it’s not quite right. Fundamentally, what someone’s “biological sex” is depends on what purpose you have for defining their biological sex – for sex-linked genetic traits, for instance, chromosomes *is* what you would care about, whether or not their gametes match. Stepping back a little, biology is a constant exercise of looking at enormously complex, heterogeneous systems, and trying to define rules and categories that will help understand how they work, even though every rule or category will have nontrivial exceptions you’ll then have to account for. Even something relatively robust like “species” has weird exceptions that make it a little hard to delineate exactly how many species of this type of bird there are in a certain population, or where the dividing line is between them. But if we define a prototypical case, and describe the characteristics that the vast majority of cases follow, we can talk about the cases that deviate from the rule and why, which is still a better understanding than we had before. The nitpicky problem with “sex is binary, you either produce one gamete or the other” is that a small number of people produce both, and a huge number of people produce neither. The more fundamental problem is that when people talk about sex, even specifically “biological sex,” their gametes may or may not be relevant. If I’m talking about a chimeric individual (someone whose body is made partly of cells with a different genetic set), and I say that one of their genetic sets is male and the other is female, I don’t think anyone would think I was talking about gametes. Or, to put it another way, if I say “a male liver cell” it would be idiotic to respond “liver cells don’t produce gametes so there’s no such thing as male or female liver cells.” All of which is to say that we could, perhaps, say “gametes are binary” in that any individual gamete is one or the other (I’m not aware of any exceptions to that, although there’s no theoretical theoretical reason there couldn’t be). But biological sex is a complex constellation of traits that usually correlate into two populations, but not always. If you’re gonna push your glasses up your nose and say in a nasally voice, “Well actually, biological sex *is* binary” I could maybe excuse the know-it-all technicality of it, if you weren’t also wrong on the technicality. The relevance of all this to US politics is slim, except that one faction has committed itself to the rhetorical position that sex and gender are binary, and anyone who disagrees is a leftist radical wholly detached from scientific reality. Those folks are incurious dullards, every bit as censorious and tyrannical as BlackJack’s woke scolds who insist biological sex doesn’t exist, but in my experience, substantially more numerous and vocal. I'd consider a coin flip as something that is a binary. Of course there's a small chance that the coin lands perfectly on its edge leading to a result that is neither heads nor tails. To me, the people pointing out this (literal) edge case are the ones pushing their glasses up their nose and saying in the nasally voice "well actually.." For some reason I've never encountered a person that wants to go 12 rounds on whether or not a coin flip is actually binary because coins can land on their edge. If I did I would really hope they were trying to make some broader point and not trying to scold me for being dumb enough to think a coinflip is binary. What are we even disagreeing over then? I mean, when shitty right-wingers (including randos on Twitter, but also, like, Ted Cruz and the like) say it’s binary, they mean “the exceptions don’t exist, those people are just deluded.” You’re acknowledging the nontrivial exceptions exist, that values besides 1 and 0 are possible (and, I’d wager, significantly likelier than a coin landing on its edge), but you still want to use the word binary because, what, you like the sound of it? The mouth feel? Define words however you want to, I guess, why should I care? Meanwhile I opened with an explicit endorsement of the idea that the categories are useful even if they have edge cases and exceptions (as all biological categories inevitably will) and yet both you and Intro keep coming back to “isn’t it easier to just use the categories even though there are a few exceptions they don’t account for?” Yes, I already said so! Newtonian physics is fine for most purposes, just don’t insist it’s all there is or “well actually” people who are talking about quantum mechanics. Meanwhile those shitty right-wingers are using this bullshit to ban healthcare for trans people and fearmonger that the Satanic democrats are trying to trans your kids. You’ve already pretty clearly said you don’t agree with that shit (I don’t know about Intro) but that’s virtually the only policy implication of this topic and this is a US politics thread so what are we even doing here? I don’t know how “sex is binary” or non-binary helps any argument of any issue related to trans issues. That’s why I said I was hoping there would be some broader point to be made because arguing over something so trivial seems pointless. I think there are some interesting things to discuss regarding transgenderism. Nature vs nurture, social contagion, but from past experience my earnest attempt to just ask questions has been met with “you’re just a transphobe who is trying to mask their transphobia under the guise of JAQ.” I can tell you have a lot of disdain for US Republicans like Ted Cruz for trying to ban healthcare for trans people. I would instead offer that a lot of European countries have also started to draw back on gender medicine and that can’t be blamed as easily on the Ted Cruz’s in the US legislature. The clown world I object to is not about men identifying as women or women identifying as men. It’s about 19-year-olds lecturing Richard Dawkins on Twitter because his decades of study in biology has caused him to conclude sex is pretty damn binary. I don’t follow what Europe’s doing, I’m sure they have their own shitty people to worry about. There’s really no good reason for these decisions to be made by legislatures. Difficult medical decisions have been made between patients and their doctors (and their legal guardians, where children are concerned) for ages, and medical communities are perfectly capable of producing and evaluating clinical evidence for and against any given therapy. There’d be an argument for regulatory agencies to be making decisions (since they’re supposed to approve treatments for safety and efficacy anyway) except as I understand it, pretty much all of the relevant drugs were approved ages ago for largely uncontroversial applications, and it’s pretty normal for doctors to have freedom to prescribe off-label as they see fit. I mean to be honest I don’t think you’re the transphobe people accuse you of being but you don’t do a great job explaining yourself. Like, people who are obviously coming from a “trans ideology is just a delusion caused by the woke mind virus and must be destroyed” place start posting about it and you tend to sound like you’re agreeing with them, and using a lot of the same “man pretending to be a woman” language they would, when apparently you’re only trying to make mundane points like “there are biological differences between cis and trans men” (something I’ve never heard a trans person deny) or “polarization on this culture war issue sometimes makes woke scolds take dumb positions.” I know you live in San Francisco, arguably the woke scold capital of the world, so maybe it’s understandable that you feel the urgency of combating their orthodoxy much more acutely than I do. But it’s hard for me to give that too much credence when you’re going on about some Bill Maher segment or college kids being mean to Richard Dawkins on Twitter (a man who, wherever his contributions to science, is obviously extremely bad at Twitter). I’m sure they’re saying dumb stuff sometimes, but idk, maybe just grow up? Like, if they’re doing significant harm then sure, go oppose them in the proper venue, but otherwise it’s okay to let other people be wrong, even obnoxiously wrong, without picking a fight with them or demanding that society condemn them. 1. Yes, I generally agree with you. The best people to make medical guidance would be medical professionals and their regulating bodies. But there may be room for exception. For example, pain management clinics that were essentially pill mills where well-intentioned and ill-intentioned doctors alike helped contribute to the opioid epidemic. There's several good documentaries on this. Perhaps a more uniquely American problem given our for-profit healthcare system. It is, nonetheless an example of why you can't automatically allow for medical professionals to be left to their own devices. 2. Here's an article that gives a brief summary of European countries restricting trans health care for minors. For example the Swedish government's most up to date guidance says “risks of puberty suppressing treatment … and gender-affirming hormonal treatment currently outweigh the possible benefits.” I have little doubt that if that happened someone in the United States you would be outraged over someone denying life-saving gender affirming care to transgender minors. The thing that really bothers me is that I suspect you have very little idea what causes gender dysphoria, whether it can be melded onto young impressionable minds, why there has been a 1500% increase in it over a short period of time. Even people that study this professionally don't have good answers. So I don't know why you feel so confident in labeling people transphobes if they don't agree with your beliefs on these topics. 3. You can look at any single grievance on wokeism and sort of dismiss it as a one-off and not something I should be in a stink over. But I've been posting about it for years now. Sure Richard Dawkins will survive if he gets a little flak or an award or two gets revoked because he refuses to fall in line with the group think. For every Richard Dawkins there might be 10 other biologists that will self-censor themselves because they don't want to do with that. There may people declining to publish their research results because it came to the opposite conclusion they were hoping for. In my opinion the harm is immeasurable by the people wishing to make it taboo to tell the truth if the truth is inconvenient to them. 1. So you can imagine a scenario where legislatures should intervene, are you gonna say whether you think this is one of those scenarios? If there a reason you’re keeping us in suspense? Personally I don’t think puberty blockers are all that similar to pain pills but given you’re the one that brought it up, do you? Or is it just kind of an irrelevant aside about how doctors are bad sometimes? 2. Yeah like I said I don’t really follow what Europe’s been up to, because I don’t care. I’m not sure why “Sweden has decided…” should change my mind any more than “Alabama hahas decided…” or “Florida has decided…” would. Nothing against Europeans, y’know, but I never bought the idea that Europe is automatically more progressive or enlightened. They’ve got their own weird culture wars, I don’t need any more of those. Given that trans issues have been a constant culture war conversation for several years now, it’s not implausible to me that more young people are associating their personal difficulties to gender presentation than would have in the past. Maybe 50 years ago a 14 year old who didn’t quite fit in would just be angsty, now they’re more likely to consider whether it’s that dysphoria thing everybody’s been talking about constantly. I dunno. This has been turned into a moral panic about kids trans-ing each other or transitioning to be cool, which I just don’t buy – it’s a huge hassle at a minimum that would put a huge target for harassment on your back, even in a younger generation that’s more accepting about it. A confused kid could misattribute their problems, but I don’t think a meaningful percentage are doing it to get to eat at the cool table. But if more kids are self-reporting dysphoria than did in the past, and trying out social transition to see if that helps them (followed by medical interventions if it does), I don’t immediately see why that’s a crisis. If it’s not helping them they’re gonna have to figure that out for themselves. I guess you’d worry there’s some risk of their woke parents and peers will be so eager to support them that they’ll feel like they can’t change their mind? But I’ve always known people to be pretty ready to accept whatever they think is right for them. I mean, the whole point of the “start with social transition, then stay on puberty blockers for a while” thing is to give them time to think about it and change their mind if they want. At the end of the day increased prevalence is pretty weak evidence that they’re “wrong” somehow. If they’re as malleable as you’re worried they are, maybe they’re never going to change their mind because this is who they are now; is that so bad? Or maybe prevalence really has increased for some reason (idk, some PFAS side effect or something); so what? Kids and their parents and their doctors are making difficult medical decisions, all we can do is try to give them the best information possible. 3. Believe me, I know you’ve been posting about it for years. Whenever I have trouble figuring out what you’re on about, I try to figure out if there’s an angle that would incorporate the concept “self-censorship,” and if there is, I figure that’s probably where you’re coming from. And I mean, catch me on the right day and I worry about it too. There’s a lot of political conversations on both the left and the right where it feels to me like everybody is reading the room and trying to figure out the right thing to say in this crowd, and nobody is actually thinking sincerely about the underlying questions. I start thinking about the French Revolution sometimes, the way the orthodox position can change so fast and everybody re-orients so easily to it; the few that actually believe in something and stick to it are liable to get isolated, flanked from all sides, and destroyed, leaving nothing but a population of cynical survivalists who will say anything because they believe in nothing. But that’s when I’m feeling particularly melodramatic. Most days I think people might have to choose their battles a bit regarding what they say on politically charged topics when their career could be affected, but we get a pretty distorted view of this from stuff like Twitter. For most people in every day life, they mostly have about as much freedom to think and say whatever they want as they ever had. If there was a HUAC responsible for it that we could dismantle I’d say let’s dismantle it, but when it’s just a fuzzy-headed orthodoxy agreed on by Twitter mobs, I don’t think there’s much to be done. Don’t give it too much oxygen, don’t give it any more power than it already has, but otherwise, God knows we have a lot of worse problems to worry about. Personally I think the onus is on the people recommending a particular treatment to prove that the benefits outweigh the risks. If health experts in Europe see it another way you seem more likely to conclude that there must be a lot of transphobes in Europe as well, as opposed to maybe the evidence for your beliefs isn't as strong as you thought. The reason I bring up Europe is to make you confront your opinion that we should just leave it up the medical professionals. We have a situation where different medical professionals in different countries might believe different things. So...? What now...? Do you think we should go along with both even if they are saying contradictory things? Should whether or not a child gets gender-affirming care just be left up to the random geographical circumstances of where they were born? Kids in the UK and Sweden will just have to go without because you can't be bothered to care about what Europe is doing? It seems like you don't even really care about the evidence as you have a sort of laissez-faire approach of let's just let kids socially transition and "see if that helps them" and then "if it's not helping them they're going to have to figure that out for themselves." Like when has that ever been a way to practice medicine? Let's just let children figure it out for themselves what's the best treatment and it's not the end of the world if they mess it up? Also I'm sure you probably suspect that I lean more libertarian on most things. So naturally, no, I wouldn't typically conclude that lawmakers should be the ones deciding trans issues. But I'm also not willing to conclude that nothing should be decided by lawmakers. But it's not like Republican lawmakers are the ones exclusively trying to butt in. In California they passed a bill instructing courts to consider whether a parent affirms a child's gender when making custody decisions. Think about that... European health commissions have concluded there is not great evidence for gender affirming care but in California if you don't do it you might lose custody of your child in a custody dispute. I wouldn’t exactly say I “don’t care about the evidence.” I’m a chemist who works in the pharma pipeline, I certainly think the data we generate helps prove (or disprove) safety and efficacy in a way that ultimately improves treatment outcomes. My wife is also chronically ill, and wrt the bolded, that’s exactly how medicine works a lot of the time: you talk to your doctor about different treatment options, you try to make an informed decision, and then you reevaluate periodically whether the current regimen is getting the job done or needs to be adjusted. Psych stuff especially tends to be a lot of trying to find words to describe your emotional experiences, trying different treatments or medications with ambiguous evidence as to their efficacy, and periodically revisiting the subject to decide if things have improved. I’m not a medical professional, but the normal way for this to work is for medical professionals to try their best to assess the existing evidence and help patients make informed decisions, meanwhile doing clinical trials and case studies and meta-analyses to try to generate more conclusive evidence and eventually settle on a consensus standard of care. I’m not saying that system is perfect, but is there any particular reason to think it needs to be bypassed here? Pain meds were a systemic problem to do with addictive substances and financial incentives that perhaps demanded an external correction of some kind, but I’m not seeing any obvious reason that would be necessary here. Like, if some doctors in Sweden think the benefit of puberty blockers isn’t worth the detrimental effects on bone density or whatever, okay. I’m not gonna read their evidence because medical journals are boring and I’m not a doctor, but hopefully other medical professionals will, and either provide convincing arguments why they’re wrong or generate further supporting evidence why they’re right. Either way, why get legislatures involved?
I don't really disagree with anything you've said here
|
On October 26 2024 12:13 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 12:01 Sadist wrote:Oblade and other conservatives How do you feel about Trumps bullshit post here today: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113369255491639591CEASE & DESIST: I, together with many Attorneys and Legal Scholars, am watching the Sanctity of the 2024 Presidential Election very closely because I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election. It was a Disgrace to our Nation! Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again. We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON’T! Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country. How are you ok with this? He keeps on about the stolen election nonsense and is now trying to intimidate people with threats of jail time. Is this really the type of country you want to live in? Do you think you are immune and wont eventually get caught in the crossfire? This is the exact reason we shouldve never let his lies go unchecked. How did you let it get to this point? Easy answer. He said nothing wrong. If election officials are corrupt they should be jailed. To back up this point, I'm willing to have a 5 page discussion about the exact meaning of the word corrupt, and if you're lucky I'll somehow manage to get a few pages in there about woke nonsense.
"I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election. It was a Disgrace to our Nation!"
This is what's wrong. THE Democrats means the Democrat party, not some Democrat voters, otherwise he would've used a different wording. Trump is directly accusing the Democrat party of cheating to win the 2020 election. He has never presented any evidence for this, which tells us he has concluded the Democrat party is guilty without trial. Without evidence, any and all prosecution could only lead to an attempt at kangaroo trials.
If you don't see the problem, you are the problem.
|
On October 26 2024 14:02 Taelshin wrote:
@Nettles yeah im aobut 2 hrs in I expected Rogan to go a bit harder. Tbh this is going well for trump though this format suits his long rambly ways they even joked about it. If Kamala was capable of this kind of a discussion she really should have, I doubt she is.
I told ya'll Joe Rogan is center right. Why would he go harder on a far-right president?
|
On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:
I'm not a conservative
How would you identify yourself, politically?
|
Are we seriously talking about 2020 election fraud again?
It didn't exist. how many lawsuits were there for team Trump and not once did they come forward with evidence.
|
On October 26 2024 20:07 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 14:02 Taelshin wrote:
@Nettles yeah im aobut 2 hrs in I expected Rogan to go a bit harder. Tbh this is going well for trump though this format suits his long rambly ways they even joked about it. If Kamala was capable of this kind of a discussion she really should have, I doubt she is. I told ya'll Joe Rogan is center right. Why would he go harder on a far-right president?
Couldn't say for sure unless Kamala also went on and you could compare the treatment between them, but likely he would also treat Kamala with respect.He did go after Trump a bit harder on the debt/deficit issue and the answer Trump gave was pretty lousy, didn't make much sense.
Anyway seems to me the electorate is moving right, what other explanation for Kamala deciding now to build a border wall if she is re-elected.Such a dramatic shift there no? It's good to learn from mistakes i guess.
|
On October 26 2024 19:59 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 19:27 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings. His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election. You seriously dont think that post is concerning? Yes, I seriously don't. Election fraud does not become more or less bad depending on your reason for opposing it. O'Keefe has also stated he has people watching and reporting undercover.
You guys are terrible. Seriously. If you want to live in a fascist state get the fuck out of the US.
If theres any election fraud going on its being done by lunatic republicans who have been wound into a frenzy by the repeated lies.
Im sure O'Keefe wont doctor anything as hes been on the up and up from the beginning.
I hope at some point you can have a come to jesus moment in the future before its too late
|
On October 26 2024 19:59 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 19:27 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings. His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election. You seriously dont think that post is concerning? Yes, I seriously don't. Election fraud does not become more or less bad depending on your reason for opposing it. O'Keefe has also stated he has people watching and reporting undercover. O'Keefe?
As in Project 'verified to constantly lie and selective edit footage to tell said lies' Veritas O'Keefe?
Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.
|
On October 26 2024 20:30 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 19:59 oBlade wrote:On October 26 2024 19:27 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings. His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election. You seriously dont think that post is concerning? Yes, I seriously don't. Election fraud does not become more or less bad depending on your reason for opposing it. O'Keefe has also stated he has people watching and reporting undercover. You guys are terrible. Seriously. If you want to live in a fascist state get the fuck out of the US. If theres any election fraud going on its being done by lunatic republicans who have been wound into a frenzy by the repeated lies.
Are you talking about the case in PA I already linked? Do you have any evidence of who was behind it? It would help the authorities.
Mesa County, CO had a dozen ballots reported intercepted and filled out by others. 3 were counted already, and once counted cannot be reversed.
Presumably you would be opposed to election fraud as well so there's no reason to stoop to calling for deportation of American citizens.
|
Its like credibility means nothing to these people. Its like groundhog day over and over. Normally for someone to come back in the public eye or have some type of trust in them there would have to be some admission of guilt and acknowledgement that they were wrong. That literally never happens in conservative circles in media. Its just double down after double down.
You spout your bullshit about the govt only giving $750 to hurricame victims on facebook, you get fact checked and it shows you are wrong? No self reflection, no acknowledgement, no thinking hey i got fooled here maybe i should think twice before spouting stuff again. Nope, just post the same insane thing again next time. Its a fucking mental illness. Its how, still, after all these years you have oblade posting about O'Keefe watching polls like he has a fucking shred of credibility.
These people need fucking medicine and therapy.
|
On October 26 2024 20:52 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 20:30 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 19:59 oBlade wrote:On October 26 2024 19:27 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings. His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election. You seriously dont think that post is concerning? Yes, I seriously don't. Election fraud does not become more or less bad depending on your reason for opposing it. O'Keefe has also stated he has people watching and reporting undercover. You guys are terrible. Seriously. If you want to live in a fascist state get the fuck out of the US. If theres any election fraud going on its being done by lunatic republicans who have been wound into a frenzy by the repeated lies. Are you talking about the case in PA I already linked? Do you have any evidence of who was behind it? It would help the authorities. Mesa County, CO had a dozen ballots reported intercepted and filled out by others. 3 were counted already, and once counted cannot be reversed. Presumably you would be opposed to election fraud as well so there's no reason to stoop to calling for deportation of American citizens.
Acknowledge what Trump posted was horrible and immoral. Do it.
You can say you would still vote for him fine, but acknowledge his comments about the 2020 election and the "Democrats" are wrong.
|
On October 26 2024 20:52 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 20:30 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 19:59 oBlade wrote:On October 26 2024 19:27 Sadist wrote:On October 26 2024 13:07 oBlade wrote:I'm not a conservative so I have a vested interest in a free and fair and secure election which is the cornerstone of democracy, and don't find that controversial.
Pennsylvania uncovered a fraudulent registration scheme of at least 2,500 fake registrations.Colorado which we will all remember has universal no excuse mail-in voting is now dealing with people intercepting and returning other people's ballots that they filled out. In other news the 5th Circuit ruled Mississippi can't take ballots after Election Day (previously 5 days after) Congress statutorily designated a singular "day for the election" of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this "day for the election" is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississipppi's statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court's contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings. His entire post is built on a false premise about the 2020 election. You seriously dont think that post is concerning? Yes, I seriously don't. Election fraud does not become more or less bad depending on your reason for opposing it. O'Keefe has also stated he has people watching and reporting undercover. You guys are terrible. Seriously. If you want to live in a fascist state get the fuck out of the US. If theres any election fraud going on its being done by lunatic republicans who have been wound into a frenzy by the repeated lies. Are you talking about the case in PA I already linked? Do you have any evidence of who was behind it? It would help the authorities. Mesa County, CO had a dozen ballots reported intercepted and filled out by others. 3 were counted already, and once counted cannot be reversed. Presumably you would be opposed to election fraud as well so there's no reason to stoop to calling for deportation of American citizens.
While 0 is the ideal number of fraudulent ballots cast, let's keep in mind that we're comparing 3 potentially-fraudulent votes in Colorado to the over-600,000 votes in Colorado cast so far (as of a few days ago): https://www.coloradopolitics.com/elections/colorado-ballots-turned/article_16e69370-917c-11ef-a97b-b7ffb897ff24.html
In 2020, Colorado saw over 3 million votes cast, and Biden won by over 440,000 votes. 3 (or 30 or 300) will not matter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Colorado
|
|
|
3 fraudulent votes uncovered thus far in one case. 300 by the way is close to mattering if we have the sense to remember Florida.
The point of fraud is that you have to be vigilant to find that it exists, otherwise you can't know the magnitude of errors. Going "most secure ever" is at best a hope, or at worst a dogma. The government is nowhere close to infallible. For this election and 2028 we are still dealing with the fact that they couldn't even get the census right, and had 3-5% errors in states leading to a loss of 3 House seats - and therefore electoral votes - in Florida and Texas, overcounting blue states and undercounting red states in all but one case of seats that were wrongly awarded. This is important because it highlights the system's tendency to stick fingers in its ears and go "Look there's no problem," and then after a problem comes to light, go "too late, can't go back." There is no choice but to be unforgivingly vigilant before and during the process.
On October 26 2024 20:53 Sadist wrote:
You spout your bullshit about the govt only giving $750 to hurricame victims on facebook, you get fact checked and it shows you are wrong? No self reflection, no acknowledgement, no thinking hey i got fooled here maybe i should think twice before spouting stuff again. Nope, just post the same insane thing again next time. Its a fucking mental illness. Its how, still, after all these years you have oblade posting about O'Keefe watching polls like he has a fucking shred of credibility.
These people need fucking medicine and therapy.
I don't use Facebook and don't recall posting that but you should want as many skeptical eyes scrutinizing the process as possible. Have you considered complaining to your friends on Facebook rather than trying to blow off steam at me.
Ouch, you got me, I mean just look at this which isn't a strawman you're having an emotional episode with yourself about that I never said:
On Nevertember 0 2024 17:76 oBlade wrote:
durr only Democrats commit voter fraud and only Republicans should be allowed to
|
Hey dipshit admit Trump lied about the 2020 election and Democrats in his truth social post.
|
On October 26 2024 20:21 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2024 20:07 Magic Powers wrote:On October 26 2024 14:02 Taelshin wrote:
@Nettles yeah im aobut 2 hrs in I expected Rogan to go a bit harder. Tbh this is going well for trump though this format suits his long rambly ways they even joked about it. If Kamala was capable of this kind of a discussion she really should have, I doubt she is. I told ya'll Joe Rogan is center right. Why would he go harder on a far-right president? Couldn't say for sure unless Kamala also went on and you could compare the treatment between them, but likely he would also treat Kamala with respect.He did go after Trump a bit harder on the debt/deficit issue and the answer Trump gave was pretty lousy, didn't make much sense. Anyway seems to me the electorate is moving right, what other explanation for Kamala deciding now to build a border wall if she is re-elected.Such a dramatic shift there no? It's good to learn from mistakes i guess.
When Trump, before and during his presidency, made the border situation out to be a crisis, there was no crisis. He lied. Feel free to look it up, illegal border crossings were at a low point in and before 2020. The situation got worse only after Biden became president, which means it's not the result of Biden's policies. Migration can't spike so rapidly from US border policies, it spiked due to problems in the origin countries. More likely it was because of the economic fallout from the pandemic.
And also, Harris wasn't even in charge of border policy to begin with. Republicans framed it that way because they always do this. They always attribute blame to the wrong person as long as it hurts Democrats. Truth goes out the window.
Now that there is actually a large spike of illegal border crossings (which is entirely unrelated to US policy), Kamala obviously supports strengthening the border - not because she flip-flopped, but because now there's actually a problem to talk about. A real problem, not a fake problem made up by lying Trump and his supporters. Now it's actually fair to talk of a sort of border crisis.
In truth, before and after Trump became president, illegal border crossings to the US were at a low point. Democrats were completely right and Trump was lying his ass off.
I found an article explaining this. Feel free to fact check the claims made in it. The outlet has a strong left-wing bias, but they generally adhere to high factuality.
https://www.vox.com/politics/361635/kamala-harris-border-czar-immigration-mexico-guatemala-rnc
|
On October 26 2024 21:15 Sadist wrote:
Hey dipshit admit Trump lied about the 2020 election and Democrats in his truth social post.
He's entitled to his opinion. Mine is I think universal mail-in ballots and early voting are anathema to a secure election and the democratic process, which the Founders specified as election day, not election season. I mean just look at how many TENS of millions of votes have already been cast. This is why complaints about the lack of debates are laughable. In a normal year we'd be doing debates still at this point. That's kind of pointless if half the country has already rubber stamped their guy through the mail anyway.
He thinks Democrats are cheaters, you think Republicans are insane/maniac cheaters, ironically in both accusing the other sides should emerge the perfect balance of security.
|
How he entitled to his opinion when we know its a lie? Its not an opinion!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
