Jump to content
cmh6476

2022 Midterm Elections

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Whether you believe elections were fair/stolen in the past, there's no reason we can't make elections secure to the point that no one can deny they're fair and secure moving forward.  Simply things like requiring voter ID seem common sense but the Libs resist them at every turn.  The Georgia law proved that you can have secure elections AND a strong voter turnout, despite the whining from the left.  How stupid does MLB look now for moving their all star game?

Agree. I love it whenever some entity capitulates and later are shown for their stupidity. I wonder to what extent this little game they played here hurt the Dems in terms of votes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, dogcows said:

If they don’t count fast enough, it’s fraud? 

If the election deniers get their way and switch everything to hand-counting ballots, it could take months to get results. Did you see the recent story out of a rural county in Nevada that tried that? Not only did it take them 3 hours to count 50 ballots, but they were reading ballots out loud, including name of the voter, which was against the law protecting voters’ privacy. It was a complete 💩-show and the state told them to quit f-ing around.

It’s still amazing that, despite the 2020 election having the most audits and challenges of probably any election ever, and nothing dastardly being found, that we still have right-wingers banging the “MUH FRAUD” drum. Brainwashed by the biggest sore loser in history: Donald J Trump.

I saw that too...5 people, 3 hours, and they had to do it multiple times because they couldn't agree on the count.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait until Sunday so I can watch football without getting blasted with campaign ads EVERY FOCKING COMMERCIAL BREAK. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

The PA mail voting law was passed in 2019 with bipartisan support in PA. And in August the Supreme Court of PA upheld the law despite the challenges to it.  But either way I was more speaking to the idea of mail in balloting and counting always being done at a state level as the way it was always done. Again- there is no national across the board platform on this. 

Do you have links to all these cases of election fraud that were so prevalent in PA in 2020? How many were found valid?

Again- mail in voting has always existed. States have their own rules as to how they count it and when they start counting it and all that. Until you make an across-the-board policy, it is what it is. 

Philadelphia is where election observers were bullied, intimidated and weren't allowed in. The ones that were were kept 40-50 yards behind a fence where they couldn't see anything. It was a farce. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, dogcows said:

And yet the GOP keeps banging on the fraud drum. It doesn’t seem to make sense at first, but it’s part of the game they play right now, which is: We must support Trump so we don’t lose Trump voters. So they have to keep yapping about fraud.

The worry about having election deniers in positions of power over elections is that somebody would get more actual votes, but they’d refuse to certify because they don’t like the candidate. I’m hoping they are mostly bluster and when it comes time to do their job, they decide to do it honestly. But their rhetoric is worrisome.

So if the democrats lose its because of the people that were never going to vote for them in the first place? Makes sense. You think independents and democrats that vote Republican are being swayed because of election fraud claims? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

 

Philadelphia is where election observers were bullied, intimidated and weren't allowed in. The ones that were were kept 40-50 yards behind a fence where they couldn't see anything. It was a farce. 

The PA Supreme Court rejected this claim 2 years ago. 

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/11/17/trump-campaign-loses-case-on-philadelphia-vote-count-observers.html

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MDC said:

One hand washes the other in Pennsylvania Democratic circles. They were kept 50 yards away, you can't see anything from there. You do recognize that even your article implies the validity of that? It was a sham observation and entirely unethical lacking any true oversight which is why nobody believes them.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

One hand washes the other in Pennsylvania Democratic circles. They were kept 50 yards away, you can't see anything from there. You do recognize that even your article implies the validity of that? It was a sham observation and entirely unethical lacking any true oversight which is why nobody believes them.

So if I'm following this properly the discussion is:

"The Democrats bullied and intimidated observers and wouldn't let them in."

(Supreme Court investigates and finds it to lack merit)

"Well it's fixed."

Perhaps it is that the stuff didn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

One hand washes the other in Pennsylvania Democratic circles. They were kept 50 yards away, you can't see anything from there. You do recognize that even your article implies the validity of that? It was a sham observation and entirely unethical lacking any true oversight which is why nobody believes them.

The state Supreme Court was in on it too? :o Damn. Trump is the unluckiest silver spoon millionaire fraudster ever. :( 

This reminds me of a joke I think you’ll appreciate. ;) 

Two MAGAtards die and go to heaven. God meets them at the pearly gates and says “Welcome! All knowledge is available to you now. Ask me anything you’d like to know!”

The one MAGAtard asks, “Tell me God: How did Biden manage to steal the 2020 election?”

God says, “The election wasn’t stolen my child. Biden won fair and square.”

So the one MAGAtard leans over to the other and whispers …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

”This goes even further up than we thought!” :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Perhaps it is that the stuff didn't exist.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/KhoO5LABlbqj/

The Dems in Philly gave themselves the opportunity to rig the results unobserved. Then it all got covered up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I agree with most of this. I think the polls have shown us what the voters care about right now, seems like the economy and crime dominate.

I think it is likely true that Biden did win that election, likely not by the amount we observed, but I think he likely did win it. But I would suggest the key factor in that outcome was the media onslaught that people just grew weary of.  I think for many of us the hope was "fine, put a Democrat in there, but for god sakes stop crying".

We let the toddlers have control and they ruined things, not surprisingly. 

I think Biden clearly won in 2020. The GOP picked up House seats, they stopped the Senate from becoming too far gone leaving them the ability to flip it now in 2022, only Trump lost. And I think that was largely because people were tired of the circus around him.

It is obvious now that inflation is up, prices are up on things- I'm not sure how much of that is Biden's policies solely versus some mix of runoff from a global pandemic and Trump's policies but either way- perception is reality to voters so they will vote out Democrats because of those issues. And the GOP does a better job of getting out their messaging (regardless of how truthful it is) so that helps them. I appreciate the hustle.. 

46 minutes ago, Strike said:

Whether you believe elections were fair/stolen in the past, there's no reason we can't make elections secure to the point that no one can deny they're fair and secure moving forward.  Simply things like requiring voter ID seem common sense but the Libs resist them at every turn.  The Georgia law proved that you can have secure elections AND a strong voter turnout, despite the whining from the left.  How stupid does MLB look now for moving their all star game?

I don't think anyone fights against secure elections. But I think the sticking point is there is no real evidence that people are voting without voter IDs or any of those things. So in some respects it gets painted as/comes across as sour grapes. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MDC said:

The state Supreme Court was in on it too? :o Damn. Trump is the unluckiest silver spoon millionaire fraudster ever. :( 

This reminds me of a joke I think you’ll appreciate. ;) 

Two MAGAtards die and go to heaven. God meets them at the pearly gates and says “Welcome! All knowledge is available to you now. Ask me anything you’d like to know!”

The one MAGAtard asks, “Tell me God: How did Biden manage to steal the 2020 election?”

God says, “The election wasn’t stolen my child. Biden won fair and square.”

So the one MAGAtard leans over to the other and whispers …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

”This goes even further up than we thought!” :D 

I have a better joke that's real about libtards like yourself. It's goes even farther than you thought. I always knew libtards were idiots. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/KhoO5LABlbqj/

The Dems in Philly gave themselves the opportunity to rig the results unobserved. Then it all got covered up

Look- I'm fine with you guys deciding that the media is biased and all that so you want to discount it....but to then give a video from the "Vatican Catholic" and portray that as real news is not uber compelling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Look- I'm fine with you guys deciding that the media is biased and all that so you want to discount it....but to then give a video from the "Vatican Catholic" and portray that as real news is not uber compelling. 

OMG. So glad to know you are fine with it. Phew! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I don't think anyone fights against secure elections. But I think the sticking point is there is no real evidence that people are voting without voter IDs or any of those things. So in some respects it gets painted as/comes across as sour grapes. 

 

Yes, people do fight against secure elections.  They say requiring ID is racist against black people because supposedly black people are too stupid or can't afford to get an ID.  Here you go with the talking points again.  If you're not against it just say you're not against it and let's get it codified.   Don't say "I'm not against it but we shouldn't do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Look- I'm fine with you guys deciding that the media is biased and all that so you want to discount it....but to then give a video from the "Vatican Catholic" and portray that as real news is not uber compelling. 

Go ahead and re-read MDC's link closely, you'll see the PA Supreme Court ruling was that the "observers" were allowed in the room, which technically met the definition of observing and that 100 feet away doesn't violates policy. Like I said, it was one hand washing the other in Philly Democrat circles. They deliberately prevented observation, it was entriely crooked. It was even worse in Detroit where they covered the windows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Look- I'm fine with you guys deciding that the media is biased and all that so you want to discount it....but to then give a video from the "Vatican Catholic" and portray that as real news is not uber compelling. 

That was timely on the ground footage taken as the ballot counting process was ongoing. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yes, people do fight against secure elections.  They say requiring ID is racist against black people because supposedly black people are too stupid or can't afford to get an ID.  Here you go with the talking points again.  If you're not against it just say you're not against it and let's get it codified.   Don't say "I'm not against it but we shouldn't do it."

The ID thing is one aspect of that law:

"Governor Brian Kemp just signed into law a bill that adds many obstacles to voting, including reducing the number of ballot boxes, shrinking the window for early voting, adding additional photo ID requirements, and allowing state officials to circumvent the work of county election officials if they don’t like the outcomes they are seeing. The Georgia bill even goes so far as to make it illegal for outside groups to give water or food to voters stuck in long lines."

I'm not going with talking points. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Voltaire said:

That was timely on the ground footage taken as the ballot counting process was ongoing. .

That is also biased in what they are recording and presenting. C'mon man. You know this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Go ahead and re-read MDC's link closely, you'll see the PA Supreme Court ruling was that the "observers" were allowed in the room, which technically met the definition of observing and that 100 feet away doesn't violates policy. Like I said, it was one hand washing the other in Philly Democrat circles. They deliberately prevented observation, it was entriely crooked. It was even worse in Detroit where they covered the windows. 

Observers were allowed in the room has apparently become "they were bullied and intimidated and not allowed to observe."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

The ID thing is one aspect of that law:

"Governor Brian Kemp just signed into law a bill that adds many obstacles to voting, including reducing the number of ballot boxes, shrinking the window for early voting, adding additional photo ID requirements, and allowing state officials to circumvent the work of county election officials if they don’t like the outcomes they are seeing. The Georgia bill even goes so far as to make it illegal for outside groups to give water or food to voters stuck in long lines."

I'm not going with talking points. 

You have a problem with any part of that quote? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

The ID thing is one aspect of that law:

"Governor Brian Kemp just signed into law a bill that adds many obstacles to voting, including reducing the number of ballot boxes, shrinking the window for early voting, adding additional photo ID requirements, and allowing state officials to circumvent the work of county election officials if they don’t like the outcomes they are seeing. The Georgia bill even goes so far as to make it illegal for outside groups to give water or food to voters stuck in long lines."

I'm not going with talking points. 

The Georgia law was just one example.  Why can't you just agree that secure elections, including voter ID, is reasonable?  Thanks for proving my point.  FFS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

You have a problem with any part of that quote? 

I'm not sure why you need to reduce the number of ballot boxes. I would also be curious as to where those ballot boxes are being removed- I would imagine they are being moved from strategically picked areas. Also, think state officials should not be able to circumvent the work of county election officials.....do you agree that those things are okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Strike said:

The Georgia law was just one example.  Why can't you just agree that secure elections, including voter ID, is reasonable?  FFS.

It's the one you attacked specifically. Why can't you understand that my version of "secure election" might not be the same as yours? FFS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Observers were allowed in the room has apparently become "they were bullied and intimidated and not allowed to observe."

You're being deliberately obtuse. Since you got the results you wanted in 2020, the fact that it was under a dark cloud of election shenanigans where observers were barred from the process doesn't bother you and you don't care. There's plenty of other such footage of first hand accounts from people there on the ground around the country, but you refuse to take it credibly because you got the result you want and disagree with their politics.

The process should be observed and verified and everything done in the open with good faith participation which is not what happened but we are expected to ignore it.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

The ID thing is one aspect of that law:

"Governor Brian Kemp just signed into law a bill that adds many obstacles to voting, including reducing the number of ballot boxes, shrinking the window for early voting, adding additional photo ID requirements, and allowing state officials to circumvent the work of county election officials if they don’t like the outcomes they are seeing. The Georgia bill even goes so far as to make it illegal for outside groups to give water or food to voters stuck in long lines."

I'm not going with talking points

So you're claiming you're not going with talking points by quoting talking points? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I'm not sure why you need to reduce the number of ballot boxes. I would also be curious as to where those ballot boxes are being removed- I would imagine they are being moved from strategically picked areas. Also, think state officials should not be able to circumvent the work of county election officials.....do you agree that those things are okay?

Yes I think there should be one ballot box and only one. With a surveillance camera on it 24/7 at city hall with a livestream link on each cities website. In the event the city doesn’t have a town hall then sheriff or police station should suffice.  If non of those work a ballot box should be provided on Election Day at polling spots (which they are). It’s called Election Day not election month. I also think Election Day every year should be an observed holiday and part of the extended weekend of veterans day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Voltaire said:

You're being deliberately obtuse. Since you got the results you wanted in 2020, the fact that it was under a dark cloud of election shenanigans where observers were barred from the process doesn't bother you and you don't care. There's plenty of other such footage of first hand accounts from people there on the ground around the country, but you refuse to take it credibly because you got the result you want and disagree with their politics.

The process should be observed and verified and everything done in the open with good faith participation which is not what happened but we are expected to ignore it.

You guys- you always fall back on this creating sides dynamic. Maybe the 100th time will sink in on you- I don't have "results I wanted." If Trump would've won, he won- who cares? He won in 2016 and my life continued on. Biden won in 2020 and my life has continued on.

There was no dark cloud of shenanigans. It was a secure election by every measure. all the cases that were brought up were basically told either "This is untrue" or "There is no evidence you have to support this." And all you can fall back on is "Well Chocolate Starfish#1 on YouTube recorded some things and he is legitimate."

People were observed. In the case you specifically mentioned they found they were observed. So you are upset because "They need to let them observe." When they did now it is "Well, they need to be in their pocket to do it." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DonS said:

So you're claiming you're not going with talking points by quoting talking points? 

No. I quoted an article on the bill. They weren't my words. It was just a way of pointing out there is potentially more to the bill than the ID portion. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Yes I think there should be one ballot box and only one. With a surveillance camera on it 24/7 at city hall with a livestream link on each cities website. In the event the city doesn’t have a town hall then sheriff or police station should suffice.  If non of those work a ballot box should be provided on Election Day at polling spots (which they are). It’s called Election Day not election month. I also think Election Day every year should be an observed holiday and part of the extended weekend of veterans day

So you want it to be harder for all people to vote? Votes have always been allowed for a period of time before and after the actual day. Again- states individually decide this, if you want to change it there needs to be a universal policy but then that pulls away from "state's rights."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

It's the one you attacked specifically. Why can't you understand that my version of "secure election" might not be the same as yours? FFS

I didn't attack the Georgia law.  Are you retarded?   And your last sentence proves what I'm saying.  If we can't agree that showing ID to prove who you are is reasonable, we're never going to agree on what's secure and by extension you're always going to have people suggesting elections are stolen.  Thanks for playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The liberal PA state Supreme Court has ruled that undated mail in ballots are ineligible.  It clearly states on the ballot there must be a date on the submitted ballot. Of course the left is fighting it. It was allowed in 2020. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strike said:

I didn't attack the Georgia law.  Are you retarded?   And your last sentence proves what I'm saying.  If we can't agree that showing ID to prove who you are is reasonable, we're never going to agree on what's secure and by extension you're always going to have people suggesting elections are stolen.  Thanks for playing.

Where did I ever say "showing ID" was unreasonable? I'm saying going beyond that is unreasonable and many of the laws go beyond just that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

You guys- you always fall back on this creating sides dynamic. Maybe the 100th time will sink in on you- I don't have "results I wanted." If Trump would've won, he won- who cares? He won in 2016 and my life continued on. Biden won in 2020 and my life has continued on.

There was no dark cloud of shenanigans. It was a secure election by every measure. all the cases that were brought up were basically told either "This is untrue" or "There is no evidence you have to support this." And all you can fall back on is "Well Chocolate Starfish#1 on YouTube recorded some things and he is legitimate."

People were observed. In the case you specifically mentioned they found they were observed. So you are upset because "They need to let them observe." When they did now it is "Well, they need to be in their pocket to do it." 

You're the one who knows election observers in your state couldn't observe anything in 2020 because they were kept 100 feet from the tables and think that behavior on the part of the election officials is either perfectly acceptable or you just don't care. What other conclusion can be drawn? 

Well some people do care. That's why they go to some lengths to make things more transparent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Gladiators said:

Even centrists will agree with this.

Stephen Miller is a nut. Yes Fetterman is a sh1tty candidate, even without the stroke, and I’ve said that many times myself. But then Miller the nazi white supremacist goes on some crazy rant about fetterman having fantasies about setting killers free?? Miller is a dangerous freak 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, IGotWorms said:

Stephen Miller is a nut. Yes Fetterman is a sh1tty candidate, even without the stroke, and I’ve said that many times myself. But then Miller the nazi white supremacist goes on some crazy rant about fetterman having fantasies about setting killers free?? Miller is a dangerous freak 

But Fetterman has set killers free. And wants to set more free. How is that a fantasy? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Where did I ever say "showing ID" was unreasonable? I'm saying going beyond that is unreasonable and many of the laws go beyond just that. 

Every once in a while I try to engage you thinking you might be worthy of an actual intelligent discussion. And every time I'm quickly reminded that you're just a partisan hack.  Shame on me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Horseman said:

Mooney proving he's the dumbest person in the room, again?

Well, Worms is just getting started but yeah so far he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

But Fetterman has set killers free. And wants to set more free. How is that a fantasy? 

Go back and read what Miller tweeted :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×