POLITICS SCHMALITICS

[gehringer_2]

7 minutes ago, buddha said:

i think its just as likely that king would have supported kamala harris, barack obama, and tried to get stacey abrams to run than he would have supported your old white man candidate.

We have airbrushed away King's economic radicalism to make him more palatable as a cultural icon. With both US parties having capitulated to big money interests (including Obama) I would say it's hard to guess where he would come down today - but for sure Bernie Sanders is probably as good a guess as any.

Edited January 19, 2022 by gehringer_2

[Motown Bombers]

Bernie Sanders got weak support from blacks as it is. Whether tater likes it or not, blacks would rather support Bill Clinton and Joe Biden than Bernie Sanders. I'm not sure how or if MLK changes their thinking on that. 

[buddha]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

We have airbrushed away King's economic radicalism to make him more palatable as a cultural icon. With both US parties having capitulated to big money interests (including Obama) I would say it's hard to guess where he would come down today - but for sure Bernie Sanders is probably as good a guess as any.

we also airbrush away his attitudes on race and white supremacy in favor of select comments that appear to be race neutral so we dont have to feel so bad about american racism.

the idea that king would have supported a black candidate over almost any white candidate is more likely.

[chasfh]

19 hours ago, Archie said:

Election security and integrity is a good thing. 

We already have that, in spades.

[gehringer_2]

17 minutes ago, buddha said:

we also airbrush away his attitudes on race and white supremacy in favor of select comments that appear to be race neutral so we dont have to feel so bad about american racism.

the idea that king would have supported a black candidate over almost any white candidate is more likely.

though not mutually exclusive, in the case of Obama vs Bernie they were not running in the same elections.

Edited January 19, 2022 by gehringer_2

[buddha]

2 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

though not mutually exclusive, Obama and Bernie were not running in the same elections.

kamala harris was.

[gehringer_2]

Just now, buddha said:

kamala harris was.

true. I admit finding it hard to take VP choices as a serious consideration  (well, at least other than ones that are all 'mavericky' - )

[Archie]

13 minutes ago, chasfh said:

We already have that, in spades.

The mail in ballot rules were changed for covid in a lot of places.  In some places strict controls were not in place and signatures not checked.  This has been proven. People here will deny this all day because they were happy with the results.  If the dems can somehow push through their voting fraud bill our elections will not be secure and will have the integrity of a vote in a third world country. Once again that's acceptable here because almost all of you are far left liberals and their voting rules give the dems the power to control elections.  

 

[chasfh]

4 minutes ago, Archie said:

The mail in ballot rules were changed for covid in a lot of places.  In some places strict controls were not in place and signatures not checked.  This has been proven. People here will deny this all day because they were happy with the results.  If the dems can somehow push through their voting fraud bill our elections will not be secure and will have the integrity of a vote in a third world country. Once again that's acceptable here because almost all of you are far left liberals and their voting rules give the dems the power to control elections.  

 

Here’s my link:

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/its-official-election-was-secure

Now let’s see yours.

[Tiger337]

35 minutes ago, chasfh said:

We already have that, in spades.

If we didn't, Trump surely would have taken maximum advantage of it.  

[chasfh]

2 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

If we didn't, Trump surely would have taken maximum advantage of it.  

He was caught on the phone already trying to!

[Tiger337]

18 minutes ago, Archie said:

The mail in ballot rules were changed for covid in a lot of places.  In some places strict controls were not in place and signatures not checked.  This has been proven. People here will deny this all day because they were happy with the results.  If the dems can somehow push through their voting fraud bill our elections will not be secure and will have the integrity of a vote in a third world country. Once again that's acceptable here because almost all of you are far left liberals and their voting rules give the dems the power to control elections.  

 

Do you have any strong evidence that the election was not secure?  Thinking that mail-in ballots might be less secure than in-person is not evidence.  

[Motown Bombers]

Reminder, there was nothing wrong with mail in ballots when Republicans used them more than Democrats. 

[Tigerbomb13]

1 minute ago, Motown Bombers said:

Reminder, there was nothing wrong with mail in ballots when Republicans used them more than Democrats. 

I was just about to type this in. Republicans love mail in ballots when it favors them. Both parties had equal opportunity to use mail in ballots last year. Didn’t Michigan voters also pass mail in ballots like four years ago?

[Tiger337]

Trump told MAGAs not to use mail-in ballots because he planned to sabotage them.  

Edited January 19, 2022 by Tiger337

[Motown Bombers]

2 minutes ago, Tigerbomb13 said:

I was just about to type this in. Republicans love mail in ballots when it favors them. Both parties had equal opportunity to use mail in ballots last year. Didn’t Michigan voters also pass mail in ballots like four years ago?

Michigan voters supported mail in ballots by a two thirds majority. Then more Democrats started using mail in ballots and Republicans did a complete 180. 

[buddha]

voter id laws dont hurt democrats and dont help republicans.  they dont do much at all, really.  the democrats picking this hill to die on, and using ridiculously hyperbolic language about "freedom to vote," "jim crow", and "saving democracy" is going to backfire on them.  i assume its a sop to the left wing of the party but its an issue most voters dont care about.  cause its a non issue.  similarly, the republicans constant bleating about fraud in elections and how their bills prevent that is a sop to the low information right wing voter.  the effects of their bills are marginal at best and may end up helping democrats as much as it helps republicans.

the REAL issue is the electoral vote reform measures that both parties are working on right now and has a good chance of passing.  that's the important one to prevent 2020 type shenanigans from trump again.  

[Motown Bombers]

Yeah Georgia purging all their election boards of Democrats and moving closer to be able to over turn the results of elections in individual counties is nothing to worry about. The fact Harris County Texas is rejecting absentee ballots at an alarming rate is nothing to worry about and only marginal. Cutting dropbox locations in inner cities like Milwaukee by 80-90% is just marginal.  

[buddha]

10 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Yeah Georgia purging all their election boards of Democrats and moving closer to be able to over turn the results of elections in individual counties is nothing to worry about. The fact Harris County Texas is rejecting absentee ballots at an alarming rate is nothing to worry about and only marginal. Cutting dropbox locations in inner cities like Milwaukee by 80-90% is just marginal.  

"The first big development on the rules front that many progressives seem to have overlooked is that there’s a growing body of evidence suggesting that voter suppression tactics are marginally effective at best, and maybe not effective at all. Studies of voter ID laws used to find small effects: This study that looked at 2012 found that voter ID laws lowered turnout in two states by two percent, and this somewhat-disputed study found a similar-sized effect (but, strangely, the effect was smallest on Black voters, one of the obvious targets of these laws). Some analyses that claimed to find larger effects were later found to be flawed. When German Lopez reviewed the literature on voter ID laws in 2016, he found that the effect was small to non-existent. Voter turnout among all minority groups rose between 2016 and 2020, and also between the 2014 and 2018 midterms. "

from jeff maurer.

[buddha]

and i did say the electoral reform act was the important issue, which would help stop the issue of replacing electoral approval boards with party hacks who will veto anything.

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, Archie said:

The mail in ballot rules were changed for covid in a lot of places.  In some places strict controls were not in place and signatures not checked.  This has been proven. People here will deny this all day because they were happy with the results.  If the dems can somehow push through their voting fraud bill our elections will not be secure and will have the integrity of a vote in a third world country. Once again that's acceptable here because almost all of you are far left liberals and their voting rules give the dems the power to control elections.  

 

Proof?

[oblong]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

Do you have any strong evidence that the election was not secure?  Thinking that mail-in ballots might be less secure than in-person is not evidence.  

The pillow guy said so...

This is all a circle jerk by republicans.  Whine and cry with no evidence then use that whining and crying to say "People don't have faith".

There's been no evidence of fraud beyond onesys and twoseys here and there in which republicans tried to vote twice.

Nothing of any significant scale.   Republicans just don't want black votes to count. We saw that in Detroit at Cobo center. "They're moving boxes.... look!"  They trot out strippers/escorts who get hired to wipe down the glass of election tabulators as experts.

 

[CMRivdogs]

57 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Michigan voters supported mail in ballots by a two thirds majority. Then more Democrats started using mail in ballots and Republicans did a complete 180. 

And in most of the places where the vote was contested the rules were proposed and put in place by the party who later changed the laws

[Archie]

It happened right under your noses from another corrupt dem in Michigan. 

 I will repeat..everyone here thinks this is good because it benefits them and their political party.  I guarantee you if roles were reversed and Republicans benefited from this you would be holding your breath until u turned blue and would be throwing a fit.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/15/judge-rules-secretary-state-bensons-ballot-signature-verification-guidance-invalid/4699927001/

[oblong]

3 minutes ago, Archie said:

It happened right under your noses from another corrupt dem in Michigan. 

 I will repeat..everyone here thinks this is good because it benefits them and their political party.  I guarantee you if roles were reversed and Republicans benefited from this you would be holding your breath until u turned blue and would be throwing a fit.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/15/judge-rules-secretary-state-bensons-ballot-signature-verification-guidance-invalid/4699927001/

That was a procedural finding... from the article:

 

 But Genetski did not allege that Benson's directive "caused him to accept a signature that he believed was invalid," according to Murray's decision.

The judge didn't rule on whether Benson's directive violated state election law, but did say the directive violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the process that must be followed when an agency creates new rules.