heybruce

No, the Republicans had both the House and the Senate. https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Congress_elections,_2016 Trump didn't propose anything because he had nothing.

Perhaps, however in these countries with government provided taxpayer funded health care the people know who to blame if the system isn't working as well as expected. Plus it's much cheaper than what the US is doing. I would consider a hybrid system, but it would have to perform better and cheaper than the current US system. That shouldn't be difficult. Wasn't that one of Trump's 2016 campaign promises; better and cheaper healthcare than Obamacare? I wonder whatever became of that.

I would describe them as Democrats. Will Rogers described Democrats very well long ago: “I belong to no organized party; I am a Democrat,” That description still holds. However every Democrat I know will vote for Biden over Trump regardless of how much they wish they had another option. Biden has done some good things but he's unlikely to go down in history as a great President, unless it is for beating Trump twice. Trump isn't just bad, he's a threat to democracy in this country. He wants to hijack the US government the way Putin hijacked the Russian government, and by using many of the same tactics.

Yeah, real socialized medicine like they have in Canada and much of Europe would be much better.

A much as I wish that were true, I don't think we will ever see a significant number of his base grasping the obvious and realizing they've been conned.

Still got your head up your Trump. The walky talky was used to direct an attack on the Capitol.

Clueless as ever.

It looks like you want a justice system in which no amount of evidence is sufficient to charge Trump or convict his seditionist supporters but "Comer says" innuendo is enough to convict President Biden.

Somewhat desperate denials of reality. The radio was used to coordinate an attack on the Capitol to prevent the Constitutional certification of a legitimate election. People who break the law in protests are generally prosecuted when the evidence is strong enough, the fact that the Jan 6 insurrectionists posted evidence of their crimes on the internet made the evidence especially easy to collect. Many of the judges ruling against the attempts to overturn the election were appointed by Republicans, etc.

Five years? Interesting that the dragging out began under the Trump administration.

I assume you are referring to the hanging chad debacle of the 2000 election. No one claimed that the inability of some vote counting machines using dated hole punch technology to register and count votes was intentional or biasing the election results one way or the other; they simply complicated the recount. The problem was fixed long ago.

Evidence that Hunter Biden hustled people who assumed that the US is as corrupt as their own country. What evidence is there that President Biden was involved in any of this?

Just how was that supposed to prevent the certification of the election result?

bignok has already made it clear that he ignores people who might challenge him to think and learn. It's futile to attempt to educate someone who lives in an echo chamber.

I only hate famous people who are undermining the US; which clearly includes Trump and company.

As placeholder explained, repeated above for your benefit, inadvertent possession of classified is not a crime if the classified is returned promptly and properly. Biden and Pence did that, Trump did not. Why is that so difficult for some people to grasp?

Another rant unsupported by facts. Republicans used to be rational about immigration, now they scapegoat illegal immigrants the way Hitler scapegoated Jews. I doubt there is anyone in the Pentagon who thinks the money spent supporting Ukraine is wasted; the lessons that Ukraine is teaching the US about its military strengths and weaknesses far exceed the cost of the support. We are learning what works, what doesn't, what works for a while before countermeasures are developed, what kind of countermeasures are developed, etc. Most importantly, we are learning (once again) that modern war burns through munitions at a phenomenal rate, and that it takes a long time to gear up the supply chain and replace those munitions. Unfortunately I'm sure that lesson will only last for a few years of peace before it is forgotten. If Ukraine wins this war (likely if the Democrats retain the White House, unlikely under a cut-and-run Republican President) Russia will learn that it can't just invade and seize territory with impunity. That is a lesson with tremendous benefit for the world.

I'm no expert on court affairs, but I'm pretty sure that in court Trump will have to sit quietly and only speak when spoken to, or he will be restrained and removed. Those who think the most important function of a President is entertainment will be disappointed. If anyone who knows court procedures better than me has any corrections to make please do so.

You think wrong. Both mainland China and Taiwan are watching what happens in Ukraine very closely and will make future plans accordingly.

I don't have a high opinion of Gov Kemp, but at least he puts country before party. Or perhaps he recognizes that the current Republican Party is a dangerous cult of personality and wants nothing to do with it.

How will an open system provide evidence without revealing how individuals vote? How? Meaningless. Verifying there is a record of who you voted for will not verify your vote was counted properly, but it will mean there is a record of how everyone voted. This record would supposedly be completely unhackable, but it won't be. The only way an "open" system would prevent the kind of fraud you seem concerned about would be if every vote for every candidate could be traced to the people who cast those votes, and the count could be independently verified. However this would not only open the doors to coercion of voters (which would happen), it would also make possible and inevitable the creation corrupt political machines in which those who are elected would reward those who voted for them and punish those who didn't. Think Tammany Hall on steroids and nationwide. All this because some people believe, without evidence, that the current system isn't trustworthy. Sorry, but I'll stick with a proven system in which there is no evidence of fraud over a backwards leap into an age of rampant corruption.

And how would you design a system in which a record is kept of who the anonymous voter voted for that could only be checked by this anonymous voter?

"Can you show me the evidence it was not rigged?" Can you show me evidence the Easter Bunny doesn't exist? Proving a non-existence is impossible. "Start with my single vote please. Can i see it. Did it get counted and correctly?" In absence of evidence to the contrary, you may safely assume it was counted correctly.

In a system in which half the voters choose to make their vote known and half choose to vote anonymously, how will you verify the votes of those who choose to vote anonymously? If you can't verify these votes, how do you have a system any different from now? Is that easier to understand? Even if 100% of votes have to be public, how do you prevent coercion before and during the vote and coercion of those doing the count? What makes you think this open system is cheat-proof?

I trust that every time I put ten gallons of gas in my truck I'm getting something close to ten gallons. I trust that any business that was cheating would be caught and pay a heavy penalty. In a similar manner I trust that any attempt at widespread cheating on a scale that would change a national election outcome would be found out and the penalties would be severe. All attempts to show such widespread cheating have failed. So I trust the election results are legitimate. Abandoning anonymous voting would not make cheating impossible. It would change the way cheating would have to be done, but it would still be possible. Every type of voting requires some element of trust. It would be very difficult to cheat with electronic counting of votes from a well designed, independently verified system, but it's probably possible (don't ask me how, I haven't a clue). Cheating with hand counting would also be possible, and would delay the election results by days, or much longer if there are challenges and recounts. Such delays would leave ample opportunity to spread rumors/conspiracy theories about cheating. No system is perfect. However in absence of credible evidence that our current system is flawed, I prefer to stick with it.