Do any of you still believe that

Djarum300

Addicted Member
I have no idea.

And sadly many americans feel that way.

The constitution nhas relegated running elections at the state level. I'm starting to think we need an amendment that at minimum defines how an election for president should be ran. That is the only office the whole country votes for.

If a state wants to run cracker jack elections for its own officials, that's fine.
 

Greg T.

The Jizz Slinger
I have no idea.

And sadly many americans feel that way.

The constitution nhas relegated running elections at the state level. I'm starting to think we need an amendment that at minimum defines how an election for president should be ran. That is the only office the whole country votes for.

If a state wants to run cracker jack elections for its own officials, that's fine.
"In person" voter I.D. proof to receive ballot. Absentee ballots only with application and sinature check. Must vote at designated precinct and name must appear on register.
 

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
I don't know. Quite frankly, I'm disappointed in the high courts for refusing to even look at the accusations and render a verdict as to the status of the claims. IMO it would have gone a long way if the claims and been argued and disproven in court. On the flip side, it also would have provided an opportunity for a court ordered recount if the evidence was compelling enough to warrant it.
 

WAMO

Spanking His Monkey
SPOT ON DJ! :Thumbsup:

9!!!! WHY DO YOU TRY AND USE LOGIC AND MAKE SINCE? CIVIL WAR IS A MUST, FOR ONE SIDE ANYWAY.

AFTER ALL, WE ALL HAVE MUCH TO LEARN.
 

Djarum300

Addicted Member
I don't know. Quite frankly, I'm disappointed in the high courts for refusing to even look at the accusations and render a verdict as to the status of the claims. IMO it would have gone a long way if the claims and been argued and disproven in court. On the flip side, it also would have provided an opportunity for a court ordered recount if the evidence was compelling enough to warrant it.
I listened to ted cruz about some of this early on and the fundamental problem is that thousands of votes aren't going to get tossed out. The only real solution for PA is to reverse the ACT 77 and have another election. That ain't happening either.


Even with Trump gone people running these elections and denying observers should be penalized.
 

Greg T.

The Jizz Slinger
I listened to ted cruz about some of this early on and the fundamental problem is that thousands of votes aren't going to get tossed out. The only real solution for PA is to reverse the ACT 77 and have another election. That ain't happening either.


Even with Trump gone people running these elections and denying observers should be penalized.
This isnt even about Trump now. You may as well forget about legit future elections. Guess we can just wait and see who they appoint.
 

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
I listened to ted cruz about some of this early on and the fundamental problem is that thousands of votes aren't going to get tossed out. The only real solution for PA is to reverse the ACT 77 and have another election. That ain't happening either.


Even with Trump gone people running these elections and denying observers should be penalized.
Well, fuck it then. If there's no integrity in the process, and potential fraud will not even be investigated much less corrected or punished, then there's no point in anyone ever bothering to show up and vote again!
 

WAMO

Spanking His Monkey
ON A SERIOUS NOTE (FOR ONCE). IF TRUMP HAD HANDLED THIS WHOLE THING DIFFERENTLY, MIGHT HE HAVE GOTTEN WHAT HE WANTED. JUST MEANING IF HE HADNT BEEN SO AGRESSIVE IN HIS RHETORIC, MAYBE THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A CHANCE THAT THE COURTS WOULD HAVE LOOKED INTO IT. "HEY GUYS, I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON HERE THAT AINT RIGHT. CAN YA'LL PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT IT?" INSTEAD OF ATTACKING THE DIFFERENT STATES AND CALLING NAMES. WHETHER IT SHOULD MATER OR NOT, SOMETIMES PLAYING NICE GETS BETTER RESULTS. THEN!... IF IT WAS PROVEN TRUMP WAS RIGHT, THEN HE CAN BLOW UP AND BE HIS USUALL DICKHEAD SELF.
 

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
ON A SERIOUS NOTE (FOR ONCE). IF TRUMP HAD HANDLED THIS WHOLE THING DIFFERENTLY, MIGHT HE HAVE GOTTEN WHAT HE WANTED. JUST MEANING IF HE HADNT BEEN SO AGRESSIVE IN HIS RHETORIC, MAYBE THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A CHANCE THAT THE COURTS WOULD HAVE LOOKED INTO IT. "HEY GUYS, I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON HERE THAT AINT RIGHT. CAN YA'LL PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT IT?" INSTEAD OF ATTACKING THE DIFFERENT STATES AND CALLING NAMES. WHETHER IT SHOULD MATER OR NOT, SOMETIMES PLAYING NICE GETS BETTER RESULTS. THEN!... IF IT WAS PROVEN TRUMP WAS RIGHT, THEN HE CAN BLOW UP AND BE HIS USUALL DICKHEAD SELF.
I think if he'd cut the drama back by 50% or more he'd have easily won. I mean, it's not like the Democrats demonstrated any self control nor acted like the adult in the room the last 4 years. Trump was batshit crazy in 2016 and won. The Democrats noted his success and doubled down with lunacy. For whatever reason (probably not to be outdone at his own game) Trump pounded a few shots and said "Sit back and watch this shit!" ...and he went over the edge. Simply took it too far. People reacted with "Duuuude... no." And we're left with Joe Fucking Biden.

And none of this would have happened (Obama, Trump, Biden) if it weren't for that damn G.W. Bush!! It really IS all his fault! :Roflmao: :Confused:
 

Greg T.

The Jizz Slinger
I think if he'd cut the drama back by 50% or more he'd have easily won. I mean, it's not like the Democrats demonstrated any self control nor acted like the adult in the room the last 4 years. Trump was batshit crazy in 2016 and won. The Democrats noted his success and doubled down with lunacy. For whatever reason (probably not to be outdone at his own game) Trump pounded a few shots and said "Sit back and watch this shit!" ...and he went over the edge. Simply took it too far. People reacted with "Duuuude... no." And we're left with Joe Fucking Biden.

And none of this would have happened (Obama, Trump, Biden) if it weren't for that damn G.W. Bush!! It really IS all his fault! :Roflmao: :Confused:
I kinda disagree. I don't think he ever had a chance of "winning". Yes, I believe he kicked royal ass legitimately. But there's no way he can beat the manufactured and cyber votes.
 

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
I kinda disagree. I don't think he ever had a chance of "winning". Yes, I believe he kicked royal ass legitimately. But there's no way he can beat the manufactured and cyber votes.
Perhaps, but if public opinion of him was better it would have been harder to pull off. As it stands, it's fairly easy to believe he is not particularly liked by the majority of people (even if they do approve of his policy).

It's like Hillary. If she wasn't such an easy person to dislike, Trump would never have beat her. I mean, she had every reason to win. Years of political experience, people seemed to love Bill, the DNC was finally behind her, but she is such a... kinda the same with The Donald. His actions/personality made it so difficult for many people to feel comfortable "siding" with him... they couldn't defend his non-policy actions, and eventually those behaviors became so toxic they couldn't defend him at all. Not everyone, but enough.

Policy alone just doesn't cut it. You have to be likable too. Although that argument doesn't explain Pelosi...
 

AlwaysWrite

Addicted Member
This isnt even about Trump now. You may as well forget about legit future elections. Guess we can just wait and see who they appoint.
Dear Greg T:

With the Democrats in control of both houses of Congress, there's no reasonable chance that election reform legislation will ever pass because ...


Why would the Democrats change something (election fraud) that worked so well for them?
 
Top