USA Mid Term elections in November

[Spearman]

All issues are window dressing if democracy goes.

Doesn’t happen over night, it’s like the frog in the slowly boiling water, happen gradually and people will adapt and accept anything.

5 years ago people wouldn’t of stood for majority of a party being election deniers without any proof, yet here we are.

If you're the sort that studies history, you can see the parallels. The you remember of the few things you heard in G7 social studies class...those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

Early it the piece, I felt an old post-Tito Yugoslav vibe in the right's rhetoric. Turning once good friends and neighbors against each other. And then there's the echoes of authoritarian regimes getting their footholds on levers of power through winning relatively minor elections.

Some of the dumbest comments are prefaced with 'It could never happen here'. Look at how the host #1 cable show shamelessly propagandizes for one side with misinformation. If you've ever lived under monopolized media, you'd recognize how easily it is to sway a (self)captive audience.

 

[Spearman]

I got another phone call from DNC Headquarters in Washington DC over the weekend. (I didn't answer.)They know that I have't voted. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Hopefully the ten plus emails a day that I've been getting from various Democrats will end tomorrow. Well, at least until next week.

The DNC and DCCC are the biggest hindrances to the Dems having any electoral successes.

 

[Taylor]

This is the sort of thing I was talking about.
Question the integrity of the election prior to 2020, 2020 was totally fine and if you question it you're an election denier, things might not be so safe anymore in 2022.

 

[jim_shoes]

This is a good sign, people coming back to reality.

 

[beez]

This is a good sign, people coming back to reality.

What? Voting for a nominal Dem?

 

[EFL Boy]

This is a good sign, people coming back to reality.

I agree.

 

[GreyCrow]

This is a good sign, people coming back to reality.

Are you suggesting those who dont vote (R) are insane?

 

[GreyCrow]

This is the sort of thing I was talking about.

You just read the clickbait didnt you?

The 2020 presidential election was rife with allegations of voting machine hacks that were later debunked

The U.S. has many safeguards protecting voting equipment, so any actual hack would probably be localized, quickly detected and unlikely to affect final results.

Lies and conspiracy theories about the security of election systems

I mean LOL - in an article promoting lies and conspiracy theories

But hey dog whistles attract attention

 

[bourbons]

I thought he was just trying to avoid a long queue

If I lived over there I'd be mail or dropbox voting every time I could.

Nothing but respect for those who stand in line for hours to cast their votes in person, actively cultivated as a vote suppression technique in some areas and it'd certainly be enough to see me off

 

[bourbons]

This is the sort of thing I was talking about.
Question the integrity of the election prior to 2020, 2020 was totally fine and if you question it you're an election denier, things might not be so safe anymore in 2022.

And it would have been totally fine to do in 2022, had Trump not did what he did in 2020 (hint: it wasn't "questioning" lol)

Really, its not complicated.

 

[Satan]

One of many court cases ahead
This one got knocked on its head

A Michigan judge throws out a Republican lawsuit targeting Detroit’s absentee ballots.

A Wayne County judge issued a scathing, 24-page ruling that addressed each specific allegation in the suit, finding no credibility in any.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Taylor]

And it would have been totally fine to do in 2022, had Trump not did what he did in 2020 (hint: it wasn't "questioning" lol)

Really, its not complicated.

Democrats were suggesting the machines weren't secure between 2016 and prior to the 2020 election, then any discussion of the election not being entirely safe and secure wasn't tolerated (which makes people who saw the democrats saying it before the election asking why the power no longer wanted that looked into after they won) and now the democrats will begin questioning it again.

 

[Taylor]

You just read the clickbait didnt you?

The 2020 presidential election was rife with allegations of voting machine hacks that were later debunked

The U.S. has many safeguards protecting voting equipment, so any actual hack would probably be localized, quickly detected and unlikely to affect final results.

Lies and conspiracy theories about the security of election systems

I mean LOL - in an article promoting lies and conspiracy theories

But hey dog whistles attract attention

And yet now there are risks again with the election.

I look forward to you shutting down any discussion about election integrity when the democrats start it again post losing an election.

But I suspect what will happen is you will forget you had this position and instead pat yourself on the back for "defending democracy" by suggesting the security of the election needs to be looked into more because the election of 2022 might not have been all above board.

 

[bourbons]

Democrats were suggesting the machines weren't secure between 2016 and prior to the 2020 election, then any discussion of the election not being entirely safe and secure wasn't tolerated (which makes people who saw the democrats saying it before the election asking why the power no longer wanted that looked into after they won) and now the democrats will begin questioning it again.

Taylor, honest question - do you believe what Trump did in 2020 can be categorised as "discussion" or "questioning"?

 

[Bloods86]

Are you making the case for authoritarian federal government here?

What on earth are you talking about? I'm arguing for democracy. In the US, many states elections are barely democratic with the amount of gerrymandering and other restrictions that take place to suppress certain voting groups. Unfortunately once state elections are influenced, those states also have power of federal congressional maps, however, federal elections are at least somewhat more reflective of the will of the people. So I'm saying the federal government is more democratic than many states, and when states rights means restricting people's freedoms unnecessarily (like it did re: slavery), I'm fine with the federal government trying to intervene and override.

 

[Taylor]

Taylor, honest question - do you believe what Trump did in 2020 can be categorised as "discussion" or "questioning"?

No, it was an escalation - no doubt about it.

 

[Taylor]

What on earth are you talking about? I'm arguing for democracy. In the US, many states elections are barely democratic with the amount of gerrymandering and other restrictions that take place to suppress certain voting groups. Unfortunately once state elections are influenced, those states also have power of federal congressional maps, however, federal elections are at least somewhat more reflective of the will of the people. So I'm saying the federal government is more democratic than many states, and when states rights means restricting people's freedoms unnecessarily (like it did re: slavery), I'm fine with the federal government trying to intervene and override.

It looked like you were saying that the federal government should be able to enforce it's own law on the states even if those states locally vote the exact opposite way? Do you see that as a more democratic outcome?

 

[Satan]

Cruzing for a bruising

 

[bourbons]

No, it was an escalation - no doubt about it.

Right - an escalation which was so far and above beyond anything democrats had said up to that point that drawing any parallels whatsoever between them is absurd, as is some notion that Trump was only expanding on what came before.

Which leads to another question - what are you talking about when you say "discussion of the election not being entirely safe and secure wasn't tolerated"? Which examples weren't tolerated?

Coz I seem to remember many court cases, recounts, audits and commentary happening and being tolerated.

 

[Crankyhawk]

States should only get rights if the take in more tax to the federal treasury compared to their expense. Ie contribute or be dictated to by federals who pay your bills.

 

[Bloods86]

It looked like you were saying that the federal government should be able to enforce it's own law on the states even if those states locally vote the exact opposite way? Do you see that as a more democratic outcome?

If the states are less democratic themselves, not legislating in accordance with the will of the people (because elections are influenced by gerrymandering and voter suppression), and are restricting people's freedoms unnecessarily, then I think the federal government, also elected by the people of that state, has a duty to protect its citizens.

 

[Taylor]

If the states are less democratic themselves, not legislating in accordance with the will of the people (because elections are influenced by gerrymandering and voter suppression), and are restricting people's freedoms unnecessarily, then I think the federal government, also elected by the people of that state, has a duty to protect its citizens.

What if the representatives of that state disagree with the laws being imposed federally?

So the state representatives voted against it, the federal representatives voted against it.

Should the state still have the federal law imposed on it? Does that represent democracy?

Do elected representatives only have integrity in their election to office when they agree with an opinion or are from one side?

The views and way of life in California will be different to Texas or Florida. That is ok in my opinion. There doesn't need to a political homogeneous culture across an entire nation and enforcing one is the antithesis of democracy - it's authoritarian.

 

[Taylor]

But for something important to talk about

https://nypost.com/2020/11/11/great-****-could-be-wiped-out-by-climate-change-in-near-future/

 

[bourbons]

Actually still waiting for an answer to this one Taylor when you can;

What are you talking about when you say "discussion of the election not being entirely safe and secure wasn't tolerated"? Which examples weren't tolerated?

 

[GreyCrow]

And yet now there are risks again with the election.

I look forward to you shutting down any discussion about election integrity when the democrats start it again post losing an election.

But I suspect what will happen is you will forget you had this position and instead pat yourself on the back for "defending democracy" by suggesting the security of the election needs to be looked into more because the election of 2022 might not have been all above board.

I suspect what will happen is you will ignore anything said by me unless you can insert a paragraph free dissertation on why people are mean to the Republicans

What I will do is smirk at attempts by the Democrats to set a continuous agenda of voter fraud when they had ample opportunity to make change.