Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 15:36:57 GMT
"Develop a foolproof method"
Let me translate that: "never have another election."
|
|
|
|
Post by Greg55_99 on Jul 30, 2020 15:37:20 GMT
That is a false statement. The Dems have never said there is NO fraud. That is a LIE.
Greg
I see where you are going and it won't work. You will comeback with they said it's Republicans who commit fraud. See I'm still 3 steps ahead of you. To that end both sides have at times claimed fraud. It still doesn't change the potential for it on a larger scale with an untested system let alone testing it on a presidential election. Develop a fool proof method and deploy it first before we use it to elect a person to the highest office in the land. In addition to slapping it together in a few months.
This is what you said:
"Let's not forget that the Democrats have been screaming for decades that there is no fraud when we vote so why not pick up on that and stick with what works."
That's a lie. Thank you.
Greg
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Jul 30, 2020 15:42:59 GMT
Trump votes by mail. Pence votes by mail. Most military members vote by mail. Everybody in Washington state and Oregon votes by mail. Problem? The problem would be that states that don't already do universal vote by mail are going to have issues putting together the infrastructure to do that in a matter of months. E.g., many counties do not have enough machines to count mail ballots? Where's the funding for those going to come from? Can they be purchased quickly enough? Etc. You're expecting counties and states that don't have the resources to do in 4 months what Oregon has been doing for decades. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 15:45:22 GMT
I didn't say it mattered when we get the result. Perhaps I misunderstood. If if you did not say it mattered when we get the result, what did you mean by the following (emphasis mine)? The issue is how will all those mail in ballots be verified and will they all be counted by the end of election day. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 15:45:40 GMT
No, we have legit reasons to be worried about gathering indoors. See the thread about Herman Cain. I gave you a response to that. Granted they are my few ideas and I'll leave it to the eperts. Keep everyone outside. Bring in a few at a time. Have more in person voting and earlier. You are glossing over the fact that it can be done relatively safely by expecting me to provide all the answers as to how. How about mail in ballots being touched or sneezed on? Think about it. You would say they can wear golves. See the point isn't the sneezing or handling but that precautions can be devised. Like I said we all go to the grocery stores and they are methods. Like the experts figure out how to deploy those methods on a larger scale. I think I made my position on this clear as have you. Nothing more to be gained by backand forth. We simply don't agree. The problem with your solution is that it could slow the process down, which equates to voter disenfranchisement. I definitely agree there is nothing to be gained in this back and forth. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 16:00:02 GMT
Perhaps I misunderstood. If if you did not say it mattered when we get the result, what did you mean by the following (emphasis mine)? Fair enough. I should not have spoken about the time frame in a generalized knowing here that we have some who take the least important aspect of a comment and turn it into the most important aspect of what the person is trying to say. The point was verification more than the time frame. I should have left ou t" by the end of election day" as if that changes the point of verification.  (emphasis mine) Abe, asking you a question about what you said is hardly taking "the least important aspect of a comment and turn it into the most important aspect of what the person is trying to say." It was asking a question about what you said. That's all. You literally said "The issue is...and..." That would seem to be the most important sentence in your six-sentence post. You are literally saying what the issue is that you are concerned about. And somehow I'm unreasonable for asking a question about the second half of the sentence. Ok... |
|
|
|
Post by phillip on Jul 30, 2020 16:08:56 GMT
Trump will need more than a bunker to try to survive if he formally attempts to delay the election he is about to get demolished in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 16:15:36 GMT
So if Bunker Boy delays the election (he can't and knows it) what about the 20th Amendment which boots his fat ass out of office at noon on January 20th? The only constitutionally elected federal officials will be the senators not up for reelection.
|
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Jul 30, 2020 16:18:07 GMT
So if Bunker Boy delays the election (he can't and knows it) what about the 20th Amendment which boots his fat ass out of office at noon on January 20th? The only constitutionally elected federal officials will be the senators not up for reelection.
Republicans use the constitution as toilet paper.
|
|
|
|
Post by atreyu on Jul 30, 2020 16:18:35 GMT
Have someone wipe down the machines. Machines? As in electronic voting? Isn't that the most vulnerable method? At least with mail-in votes we get a paper ballot that can be analyzed and verified later.
THIS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 16:20:54 GMT
(emphasis mine) Abe, asking you a question about what you said is hardly taking "the least important aspect of a comment and turn it into the most important aspect of what the person is trying to say." It was asking a question about what you said. That's all. You literally said "The issue is...and..." That would seem to be the most important sentence in your six-sentence post. You are literally saying what the issue is that you are complaining about. And somehow I'm unreasonable for asking a question about the second half of the sentence. Ok... I explained myself. Is there anything else? To you it might be the most important part. I wrote it and said that I should have been clearer. Yet here we are still haggling about it. At least you are. Since you want the last word, have it. Abe, This isn't haggling. I'm not arguing a point. I'm not trying to win a debate. I come here to explain my POV on political issues and learn from the POV of others. I don't assume those I disagree with are fools or idiots. I assume I can learn from them. You said something. I asked you about it. You claimed you didn't say it, so I pointed out exactly what I was talking about, leaving open the possibility that the misunderstanding was my fault. Your reaction is to blame me for attaching undue importance to your words. So yeah, I'm going to reject that assessment and reject your blame. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 30, 2020 16:24:25 GMT
According to Trump, voting in person was also a big problem. It almost sounds like voting itself is the problem. I tend to smile at all this talk about voter fraud. In my view, this is all about turnout. If people have to go into public to vote and there is a pandemic raging, turnout is likely to be muted. But if they can vote by mail then turn out will be fine. And the GOP tends to do better when fewer people vote. A high turn out election makes it more difficult for Republicans to get elected. That is the *real* reason our right-wing friends are talking about mail-in voting. We have very similar issues here in UK. Turnout is problematic for Conservatives here, largely because of the age profile (retirees are more likely to vote, and more likely to vote Conservative). Evidence, diligently searched for by police and the Electoral Commission, of fraud or inaccuracies that even approach an effect on even one constituency, isn't found. This is dogwhistle politics. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Jul 30, 2020 16:25:55 GMT
Have someone wipe down the machines. Machines? As in electronic voting? Isn't that the most vulnerable method? At least with mail-in votes we get a paper ballot that can be analyzed and verified later. Our system is indelible pencil on paper voting slip, counted by a mix of officials from local authority and Party reps overseeing each other. I can't see machinez being a good idea at all. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,211
|
Post by demos on Jul 30, 2020 16:29:29 GMT
Some of the machines now print out a paper ballot which is scanned in (that's been the process when I voted in the primary and run-off elections in Travis County this year), so there is some kind of paper trail.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 16:31:16 GMT
According to Trump, voting in person was also a big problem. It almost sounds like voting itself is the problem. I tend to smile at all this talk about voter fraud. In my view, this is all about turnout. If people have to go into public to vote and there is a pandemic raging, turnout is likely to be muted. But if they can vote by mail then turn out will be fine. And the GOP tends to do better when fewer people vote. A high turn out election makes it more difficult for Republicans to get elected. That is the *real* reason our right-wing friends are talking about mail-in voting. We have very similar issues here in UK. Turnout is problematic for Conservatives here, largely because of the age profile (retirees are more likely to vote, and more likely to vote Conservative). Evidence, diligently searched for by police and the Electoral Commission, of fraud or inaccuracies that even approach an effect on even one constituency, isn't found. This is dogwhistle politics. Ha, remember Cheetohead's election fraud task force? Quietly disbanded. www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/report-trump-commission-did-not-find-widespread-voter-fraud |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 16:37:47 GMT
]That's funny. I don't beleive that I said I didn't say it. Dude, it was like an hour ago. I didn't say it mattered when we get the result. So, yeah... Yes. You said more than one post. 1. First you said you said A mattered. 2. I asked why A should matter. 3. You said you never said A mattered. 4. I quoted you, asking for a clarification, and allowed that I might be misunderstanding you. 5. You admitted you said A mattered, said you shouldn't have said it, and then blamed me for asking about it in the first place. Gee, thanks awfully. We've derailed this thread enough. I'll see you on another thread. Perhaps in the future you can highlight in red those portions of your posts you would prefer others not ask about. It would make communicating with you easier, if not less bizarre. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 16:50:07 GMT
Dude, it was like an hour ago. So, yeah... Yes. You said more than one post. 1. First you said you said A mattered. 2. I asked why A should matter. 3. You said you never said A mattered. 4. I quoted you, asking for a clarification, and allowed that I might be misunderstanding you. 5. You admitted you said A mattered, said you shouldn't have said it, and then blamed me for asking about it in the first place. Gee, thanks awfully. We've derailed this thread enough. I'll see you on another thread. Perhaps in the future you can highlight in red those portions of your posts you would prefer others not ask about. It would make communicating with you easier, if no less bizarre. If you need red, you'll get it. In fact maybe since I too parse, I'll do that as well. I said what I did. I clarified it and here you are still bitching. No YOU derailed the thread while I was having a discussion mostly with TL. But the moment you felt you had a gotcha over something I admitted that I said unclearly and made sound inconsistent...as well as clarified...well here you are still harping how many post later? Here's a better idea. Don't communicate with me. I'll live. Abe, There is no gotcha. I don't do that because I'm not trying to prove your POV wrong. Had you said "Fair enough. I should not have spoken about the time frame. The point was verification more than the time frame. I should have left out " by the end of election day" as if that changes the point of verification," you know what my response would have been? I'd have said, "Ok, cool" and moved on. But you didn't say just that. You added the snide comment that I was to blame for asking you about what you said. Which is unreasonable on your part. But as I said, we've derailed this thread enough and yes, it is we since you claimed I could have the last word and yet you keep responding to me with further blame and attacks and such. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,115
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 30, 2020 17:29:11 GMT
The amount and the inability to verify on a much larger scale for one. There is no civilian mail in ballot. It's called an absentee ballot and it has a specific purpose and it HAS TO BE requested, not mass mailed. It is verified when returned. But you were in the military so you tell us the difference.
Sure, I'll tell you the difference.
None..
Greg
You can explain it all until you're blue (or whatever) in the face.
Abehole still won't get it.
Sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Greg55_99 on Jul 30, 2020 18:13:47 GMT
Military get the same mail in ballots civilians get. Ask me how I know.
Greg
|
|
|
|
Post by Greg55_99 on Jul 30, 2020 18:22:43 GMT
Military get the same mail in ballots civilians get. Ask me how I know.
Greg
Nice pivot. We are talking about absentee ballots being the same as mass mailed ballots that aren't requested... at least I am. What you are trying to divert to is something else. The link is there. Prove it wrong.
Did you even read the link YOU posted? One ballot allows people to request a mail in ballot if they have various reasons for doing so. The reasons are listed. The other is just a ballot a voter can request if he just doesn't want to show up at the polls on election day. The type of ballot you get is governed by state law. Military get the same ballot as civilians no matter what state they vote in. So, WTF are you talking about now?
Greg
|
|
