(12-06-2023 02:04 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 01:47 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Like we didn't already have enough idiots here, another one has risen from the dead.

Perhaps you should start your own website so you can only read opinions you agree with? Hell, I bet there's already a few you go can go to currently for your desired circle jerk!

This one works just fine. There are about half a dozen idiots here that I disagree with on a routine basis.

Posters like you just like to argue and troll. You will never convince not one poster here to agree with you. If not you'd go somewhere where YOU are in the majority.

(12-06-2023 02:07 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 02:04 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 01:47 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Like we didn't already have enough idiots here, another one has risen from the dead.

Perhaps you should start your own website so you can only read opinions you agree with? Hell, I bet there's already a few you go can go to currently for your desired circle jerk!

This one works just fine. There are about half a dozen idiots here that I disagree with on a routine basis.

Posters like you just like to argue and troll. You will never convince not one poster here to agree with you. If not you'd go somewhere where YOU are in the majority.

So someone you disagree with...is just an idiot? Nice world view there.

And why do you think that I have any desire or need to convince anyone to agree with me?

And I'm not shallow...I don't need to have everyone agree with me.

I post here because it's enjoyable for me to continually debunk the nonsense and lies of the trump cult with facts. With the exception of 1 or 2 posters, you all just make it way to easy. In all honestly, it makes me feel smarter and more grounded than you Kool-Aid drinkers.

As I frequently posit, I can only provide you with information and facts. I can't make you understand them.

Lastly, and with even rarer exception, a poster here will actually reply with facts and lucid arguments that are worthy of discussion. I usually get the drivel you post. With lame attacks and off handed dismissals of ignorance and the like.

I disagree with a LOT of posters here that I don't consider idiots. You conveniently twisted what I said.

Busy day with consequences for trying to steal the 2020 election all around the country! A Nevada grand jury has indicted 6 fake electors there on felony charges -

https://thehill.com/homenews/4345851-nev...-electors/

I look forward to either their repentance as in Wisconsin, or their conviction and imprisonment.

Busy day with Gamehole trolling

(12-06-2023 03:44 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Busy day with Gamehole trolling

Thank god for the Electoral College instead of the federal government being in full control of elections…right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(12-06-2023 03:51 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 03:44 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Busy day with Gamehole trolling

Thank god for the Electoral College instead of the federal government being in full control of elections…right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But did their football team get left out of the playoffs?

C'mon man, it is as important as the breathless news that GameTroll posted......

(12-06-2023 12:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 12:27 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 12:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 12:15 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 11:52 AM)Bronco14 Wrote:  lol

I admit the D's won too, a D is in office, no?

And admitting they won does not imply that they won fairly.

Cheating was involved.

Heck, we see cheating affecting the outcome of sporting events all the time.

Exactly.

Well cheating also involves elections, most recently a Democratic primary in Connecticut as well as a sheriff's election, forgot where that was.

You should look at all the Google results because claiming it just the Dems is a cop out.

Never said it was just Dems.

In fact, the case in Atlanta regarding Dominion voting machines being subject to hacking and incorrect counts was filed by Democrats a few years before even the 2016 election.

Regardless of who's at the root cause, cheating is wrong and should be punished. If cheating impacted the results of an election, they proper remedy should be pursued.

Yes and the Republican majority board in NC invalidated a Republican win in a congressional election because the winner did ballot harvesting.

(12-06-2023 03:44 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Busy day with Gamehole trolling

HUnter's attorney is really nervous. The next 7 days will be more of this sh*t from the #TaintBoyz.

Because we had fake electors giving Biden the election, we have political witchhunts trying to criminalize honest differences of opinion.

Don't let it be close enough to steal next time.

(12-06-2023 04:01 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 03:51 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 03:44 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Busy day with Gamehole trolling

Thank god for the Electoral College instead of the federal government being in full control of elections…right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But did their football team get left out of the playoffs?

C'mon man, it is as important as the breathless news that GameTroll posted......

I guess he feels like football season is over so he's striking out at everyone.

(12-06-2023 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  Because we had fake electors giving Biden the election, we have political witchhunts trying to criminalize honest differences of opinion.

Don't let it be close enough to steal next time.

Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state.

Please be specific which states' electors that were finally counted in full on Jan 7 were 'fake'.

Do you consider the electors that Trump tried to talk Pence into substituting by fiat as 'real' electors? Can you point to any state certification of those if that is the case?

Last I saw, it is each individual state that determines their own electors. That is by an official act. When did this change?

And for your education, the issue isnt a 'difference of opinion' that is criminalized. It is trying to substitute votes that might as well have been pulled out of a fing Cracker Jack box in place of those actually certified by a state. Or do you think that is just a fine dandy thing to do?

(12-06-2023 11:46 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 11:38 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The Wisconsin 2020 election used illegal ballot drop boxes, and allowed mail in voting for those not qualified under the law. Therefore their election was illegitimate.

Enjoy your message board victories, no doubt the vast majority here will agree with what you said or some slightly different version of it that ends in the same place. Meanwhile, we'll enjoy our victories in court where what is legal actually gets determined and get back to work making the country better. Are you tired of winning yet?

What happens in a court room is not always right. Anyone who does not understand that has yet to step foot in one.

(12-06-2023 06:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  Because we had fake electors giving Biden the election, we have political witchhunts trying to criminalize honest differences of opinion.

Don't let it be close enough to steal next time.

Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state.

Please be specific which states' electors that were finally counted in full on Jan 7 were 'fake'.

Do you consider the electors that Trump tried to talk Pence into substituting by fiat as 'real' electors? Can you point to any state certification of those if that is the case?

Last I saw, it is each individual state that determines their own electors. That is by an official act. When did this change?

And for your education, the issue isnt a 'difference of opinion' that is criminalized. It is trying to substitute votes that might as well have been pulled out of a fing Cracker Jack box in place of those actually certified by a state. Or do you think that is just a fine dandy thing to do?

So I’ll ask you this Clarence, what if California just decides to declare a winner and forgo the election because they know the winner already?
If the legislature passes a law saying they can do this what is the recourse for the congress of the United States?

Think about it and don’t react to quickly.

(12-06-2023 07:12 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  Because we had fake electors giving Biden the election, we have political witchhunts trying to criminalize honest differences of opinion.

Don't let it be close enough to steal next time.

Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state.

Please be specific which states' electors that were finally counted in full on Jan 7 were 'fake'.

Do you consider the electors that Trump tried to talk Pence into substituting by fiat as 'real' electors? Can you point to any state certification of those if that is the case?

Last I saw, it is each individual state that determines their own electors. That is by an official act. When did this change?

And for your education, the issue isnt a 'difference of opinion' that is criminalized. It is trying to substitute votes that might as well have been pulled out of a fing Cracker Jack box in place of those actually certified by a state. Or do you think that is just a fine dandy thing to do?

So I’ll ask you this Clarence, what if California just decides to declare a winner and forgo the election because they know the winner already?
If the legislature passes a law saying they can do this what is the recourse for the congress of the United States?

Think about it and don’t react to quickly.

A state has pretty much unfettered ability to determine the electors to cast their votes -- provided the process is in place in law prior to any election.

If California wishes to have their electors decided by a best-of-three rock/scissors/ paper -- they have the right to do so.

And when a state certifies those votes cast by their electors in the manner prescribed under their state law, pretty much nothing can overturn that decision by that state.

That is -- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors". End of story.

Congress has zero recourse, they count the ballots. They have zero say in *how* the electors are chosen, nor in how the electors end up voting.

Next stupid question on Congressional recourse? Please do tell us your "theory" on Congressional recourse..... please be specific where in the Constitution the US Congress has any 'recourse' in this issue. This could be entertaining.....

Since my post got you 'agitated', maybe *you* should take a crack at the question. "Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state." Cant wait to see your answer.

(12-06-2023 07:07 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 11:46 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 11:38 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The Wisconsin 2020 election used illegal ballot drop boxes, and allowed mail in voting for those not qualified under the law. Therefore their election was illegitimate.

Enjoy your message board victories, no doubt the vast majority here will agree with what you said or some slightly different version of it that ends in the same place. Meanwhile, we'll enjoy our victories in court where what is legal actually gets determined and get back to work making the country better. Are you tired of winning yet?

What happens in a court room is not always right. Anyone who does not understand that has yet to step foot in one.

Sure, a court does not always get things right. But the odds of some great injustice go WAY down when you're talking about more than sixty courts, as is the case with the Trump 2020 election lies.

(12-06-2023 07:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 07:12 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  Because we had fake electors giving Biden the election, we have political witchhunts trying to criminalize honest differences of opinion.

Don't let it be close enough to steal next time.

Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state.

Please be specific which states' electors that were finally counted in full on Jan 7 were 'fake'.

Do you consider the electors that Trump tried to talk Pence into substituting by fiat as 'real' electors? Can you point to any state certification of those if that is the case?

Last I saw, it is each individual state that determines their own electors. That is by an official act. When did this change?

And for your education, the issue isnt a 'difference of opinion' that is criminalized. It is trying to substitute votes that might as well have been pulled out of a fing Cracker Jack box in place of those actually certified by a state. Or do you think that is just a fine dandy thing to do?

So I’ll ask you this Clarence, what if California just decides to declare a winner and forgo the election because they know the winner already?
If the legislature passes a law saying they can do this what is the recourse for the congress of the United States?

Think about it and don’t react to quickly.

A state has pretty much unfettered ability to determine the electors to cast their votes -- provided the process is in place in law prior to any election.

If California wishes to have their electors decided by a best-of-three rock/scissors/ paper -- they have the right to do so.

And when a state certifies those votes cast by their electors in the manner prescribed under their state law, pretty much nothing can overturn that decision by that state.

That is -- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors". End of story.

Congress has zero recourse, they count the ballots. They have zero say in *how* the electors are chosen, nor in how the electors end up voting.

Next stupid question on Congressional recourse? Please do tell us your "theory" on Congressional recourse..... please be specific where in the Constitution the US Congress has any 'recourse' in this issue. This could be entertaining.....

Since my post got you 'agitated', maybe *you* should take a crack at the question. "Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state." Cant wait to see your answer.

Wow you are right here. And by being right you have opened the can of worms. Next stupid question. What if Trump wins the election but the populous democrat states and states where Trump is not favored by a slim republican legislature, and have many delegates say, you know what, we don’t like Trump so we are going to tell our delegates to cast their votes for Joey Bagodonuts. By adding a third candidate they secure enough votes they will certify to overturn the election and hand it to the candidate of their choice.
A smarter man than you and I said they would eventually try something similar. They want a way to just name a president because all of us rubes are to stupid to pick one. And after this past election they may be right.
I miss Rush Limbaugh.

Life must be so miserable for people like you Gamehole

(12-06-2023 07:45 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 07:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 07:12 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-06-2023 06:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  Because we had fake electors giving Biden the election, we have political witchhunts trying to criminalize honest differences of opinion.

Don't let it be close enough to steal next time.

Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state.

Please be specific which states' electors that were finally counted in full on Jan 7 were 'fake'.

Do you consider the electors that Trump tried to talk Pence into substituting by fiat as 'real' electors? Can you point to any state certification of those if that is the case?

Last I saw, it is each individual state that determines their own electors. That is by an official act. When did this change?

And for your education, the issue isnt a 'difference of opinion' that is criminalized. It is trying to substitute votes that might as well have been pulled out of a fing Cracker Jack box in place of those actually certified by a state. Or do you think that is just a fine dandy thing to do?

So I’ll ask you this Clarence, what if California just decides to declare a winner and forgo the election because they know the winner already?
If the legislature passes a law saying they can do this what is the recourse for the congress of the United States?

Think about it and don’t react to quickly.

A state has pretty much unfettered ability to determine the electors to cast their votes -- provided the process is in place in law prior to any election.

If California wishes to have their electors decided by a best-of-three rock/scissors/ paper -- they have the right to do so.

And when a state certifies those votes cast by their electors in the manner prescribed under their state law, pretty much nothing can overturn that decision by that state.

That is -- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors". End of story.

Congress has zero recourse, they count the ballots. They have zero say in *how* the electors are chosen, nor in how the electors end up voting.

Next stupid question on Congressional recourse? Please do tell us your "theory" on Congressional recourse..... please be specific where in the Constitution the US Congress has any 'recourse' in this issue. This could be entertaining.....

Since my post got you 'agitated', maybe *you* should take a crack at the question. "Which 'fake electors [gave] Biden the election'? Last I saw all the Biden electors were those certified by their respective state." Cant wait to see your answer.

Wow you are right here. And by being right you have opened the can of worms. Next stupid question.

Quote:What if Trump wins the election but the populous democrat states and states where Trump is not favored by a slim republican legislature, and have many delegates say, you know what, we don’t like Trump so we are going to tell our delegates to cast their votes for Joey Bagodonuts. By adding a third candidate they secure enough votes they will certify to overturn the election and hand it to the candidate of their choice.

If Trump 'wins', and loses CA. Call the election 271 EV Trump to 269 EV Biden just for grins.

CA doesnt like Trump, so they tell their 54 votes to vote for Joey Bagodonuts. (big problem with this, but I will address it later....)

Electoral count in the Congress is 271 EV Trump -- 215 EV Biden -- 54 Joey Bagodonuts. Trump still wins.

------------------------

Next case -- say Trump wins CA and the vote is still 271 - 269.

The first problem is the state legislature 'changing the EV'. Most states have in their state laws the legal rule for selecting their EV. Texas has Chapter 192, Sec. 192.001 -- .005
-- The set of elector candidates that is elected is the one that corresponds to the candidates for president and vice-president receiving the most votes, and specifies that the election shall be at a certain time.

In this manner, the 'as provided by each of the legislatures' is *in* their own law. A state cannot under its own law, simply 'choose' another slate after the fact. The only way that the Legislature can 'choose its own' is when it votes to supercede its own election *prior* to the election.

Your angst isnt really justified by a Lege changing the results after the election. There has to be a change to the allocation prior to the election.

Quote:A smarter man than you and I said they would eventually try something similar.

It will be extraordinarily hard for them, if not impossible. Each state house has to follow its own law, and while they *can* change the method of selection, all states would have to do the 'grab back' explicitly and prior to the election in question.

Quote: They want a way to just name a president because all of us rubes are to stupid to pick one.

Well, I would say your concern is well off base.

Quote:And after this past election they may be right.

Yes, the horror of actual certified electors selecting the President. The horror.

Quote:I miss Rush Limbaugh.

On that I agree with you.

I don’t understand the hate for Tanq that some have in this forum. He’s a straight shooter, and even though I disagree with some points he at least tries to back it up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk