3 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Who are these "election deniers" that you post of daily? Are they only in the GOP? If they are in both parties and include president biden would constantly implying that all "election deniers" are in the GOP be an example of misinformation/disinformation?

 

I did not witness any authoritarian moves from Trump. Can you give specific things he actually did that were authoritarian? Nothing brazen like the current admin trying to create a ministry of truth headed up by a notorious liar and conspiracy theorist to make sure only false narratives that suit the democrat party are allowed to flourish online. This was the single biggest display of fascism in our lives. Luckily it failed, temporarily.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/good-riddance-to-the-ministry-of-truth-nina-jankowicz/

Election deniers are those who believe the elections are rigged when they lose and the overwhelming majority of them are Republican. This isn't a case of "there's good people on both sides".

Good work Voters!

The level of success against these anti democracy pro fascist Trumpists has been beyond my wildest hopes. 

They aren't going away though. The struggle continues. 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Good work Voters!

The level of success against these anti democracy pro fascist Trumpists has been beyond my wildest hopes. 

They aren't going away though. The struggle continues. 

I disagree, I think it is over. Just watch the blood letting among the GOP in the next congressional session. Do you think these wierdos can oust McConnell and his allies?

Edited November 15, 20223 yr by ozimoron

52 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Not at all. But they DID encourage it and did so at the risk of "dangerous" candidates winning the GOP primaries.  It was part of an effort to keep more mainstream but stronger GOP hopefuls out of various races.

That’s politics for you.

 

Help the opposition choose a candidate you know you can beat.

5 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Who are these "election deniers" that you post of daily? Are they only in the GOP? If they are in both parties and include president biden would constantly implying that all "election deniers" are in the GOP be an example of misinformation/disinformation?

 

I did not witness any authoritarian moves from Trump. Can you give specific things he actually did that were authoritarian? Nothing brazen like the current admin trying to create a ministry of truth headed up by a notorious liar and conspiracy theorist to make sure only false narratives that suit the democrat party are allowed to flourish online. This was the single biggest display of fascism in our lives. Luckily it failed, temporarily.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/good-riddance-to-the-ministry-of-truth-nina-jankowicz/

You still trying that one on about Biden? Someone in an audience asked him if he thought Trump was an illegitimate President. Biden replied yes.

But first of all, Biden didn't raise the issue.

Second, it was never defined what was meant by "illegitimate". It could mean that Trump was behaving in ways that were illegitimate. Like twisting the arm of President Zelensky to announce an investigation of Biden.

And of course, this was basically a one off. Frequency counts. And I don't think there's an integer high enough to tally all the times Trump and company have claimed that the elections were fraudulent. And no one has to ask Trump to comment, either. He's his own trigger.

The real win here is Lake won’t be rigging voting rights and access to voting in the 2024 election.

54 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Not at all. But they DID encourage it and did so at the risk of "dangerous" candidates winning the GOP primaries.  It was part of an effort to keep more mainstream but stronger GOP hopefuls out of various races.

The republicans chose who they chose because that is who they wanted to choose.

 

They need to own that...

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

You still trying that one on about Biden? Someone in an audience asked him if he thought Trump was an illegitimate President. Biden replied yes.

But first of all, Biden didn't raise the issue.

Second, it was never defined what was meant by "illegitimate". It could mean that Trump was behaving in ways that were illegitimate. Like twisting the arm of President Zelensky to announce an investigation of Biden.

And of course, this was basically a one off. Frequency counts. And I don't think there's an integer high enough to tally all the times Trump and company have claimed that the elections were fraudulent. And no one has to ask Trump to comment, either. He's his own trigger.

not to mention that Trump lost the popular vote and that counts as illegitimate in my book. Maybe Biden's too.

13 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I did not witness any authoritarian moves from Trump. Can you give specific things he actually did that were authoritarian? Nothing brazen like the current admin trying to create a ministry of truth headed up by a notorious liar and conspiracy theorist to make sure only false narratives that suit the democrat party are allowed to flourish online. This was the single biggest display of fascism in our lives. Luckily it failed, temporarily.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/good-riddance-to-the-ministry-of-truth-nina-jankowicz/

Really? Where were you when Trump called for a redo of the elections in violation of the Constitution? Taking a very long siesta?

14 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Who are these "election deniers" that you post of daily? Are they only in the GOP? If they are in both parties and include president biden would constantly implying that all "election deniers" are in the GOP be an example of misinformation/disinformation?

 

I did not witness any authoritarian moves from Trump. Can you give specific things he actually did that were authoritarian? Nothing brazen like the current admin trying to create a ministry of truth headed up by a notorious liar and conspiracy theorist to make sure only false narratives that suit the democrat party are allowed to flourish online. This was the single biggest display of fascism in our lives. Luckily it failed, temporarily.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/good-riddance-to-the-ministry-of-truth-nina-jankowicz/

Here’s a check list for you:

 

https://protectdemocracy.org/the-authoritarian-playbook/

21 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Not much evidence of the open southern border Lake spoke of? I suppose out of frame there will be an official checking passports and stamping the news arrivals in. Because the southern border being open is a "conspiracy theory". If the millions of photos do not constitute "direct evidence" then clearly nothing will.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/us/politics/border-crossings-immigration-record-high.html

 

I will always have an issue with being forced to pretend something does not exist, contrary to factual evidence, merely because it does not promote the democrat parties interests.

Calm down. No one say that immgration is not a problem. Saying immgration was an invasion to scare the voters didn't work for Lake. Following up with her intention of sending the National Guard troops and who knows what else down to the border just demonstrated how clueless she was. 

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

This one was a shocker. Hobbs has all the personal charm of a potato.  I think it shows the extent of the taint that being too closely aligned with the Trump brand influenced voting. Lake is clearly the better speaker and more charismatic, but she erred in not clearly distancing herself and developing her own brand.

It's fortunate that charisma and ability to give a good speech isn't the main arbiter of who wins elections. We remember a person in the past who was also a good speaker and had charisma. That was unfortunate.

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

More Maga tears. ????

A lake full.

1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

I've been waiting on this one.  Not that it impacts my life at all, but because I can't stand that woman.  A total nutbag who lies constantly.  Kari Lake's 15 minutes of fame is over....thank God.

Bite your tongue, er, fingertips, she could be DT's VP running mate. 

Bannon is the one who advocated for corrupting the electoral system from the ground up, down to the people who work the polls.  Arizona was to be his illustration of vote corruption and basis for the argument that voting is passe.  He said this was his plan on a broadcast, in not as many words, e.g. effort was applied to have the count process dragged out, the idea being the longer it takes the more suspicious it looks and the less confidence in the system.  The guy is a disgrace to humanity.

https://www.mediamatters.org/steve-bannon/watch-rachel-maddow-connect-steve-bannon-potential-election-denialism-arizona

 

 

37 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The republicans chose who they chose because that is who they wanted to choose.

 

They need to own that...

Absolutely.

 

AND the Democrats need to own that they were lying when they cried wolf about "the threat to Our Democracy" and then tried to get candidates who they claimed WERE "threats to Our Democracy" on the ballot in numerous states.  

 

Can't have it both ways. 

14 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Bite your tongue, er, fingertips, she could be DT's VP running mate. 

 

5555....I doubt it.  Trump needs a counterbalance as running mate, not a clone mini-Trump.  Someone like a Tim Scott or Larry Hogan.  Besides, having two losers on the ticket doesn't look good.

6 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Absolutely.

 

AND the Democrats need to own that they were lying when they cried wolf about "the threat to Our Democracy" and then tried to get candidates who they claimed WERE "threats to Our Democracy" on the ballot in numerous states.  

 

Can't have it both ways. 

Nonsense. As I have already pointed out, there was very little substantive difference between the Republican candidates the Democrats pushed and their opponents. It was mostly about optics. And, in fact, those who appeared to be more reasonable because of their affect, are actually more dangerous.

45 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

not to mention that Trump lost the popular vote and that counts as illegitimate in my book. Maybe Biden's too.

Are you not aware that the popular vote isn't a factor in US presidential elections? For very good reasons.

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Are you not aware that the popular vote isn't a factor in US presidential elections? For very good reasons.

I know that it isn';t but there are no good reasons. The US has the worst election system in the developed world.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-10-07/us-elections-compare-poorly-to-other-democracies-research-shows

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

I know that it isn';t but there are no good reasons. The US has the worst election system in the developed world.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-10-07/us-elections-compare-poorly-to-other-democracies-research-shows

Of course there are good reasons for it. I suggest you do some research. It's not complicated.

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Nonsense. As I have already pointed out, there was very little substantive difference between the Republican candidates the Democrats pushed and their opponents. It was mostly about optics. And, in fact, those who appeared to be more reasonable because of their affect, are actually more dangerous.

Newsweek disagrees.

 

"This choice by the DCCC to put a huge amount of money into supporting far-right candidates who support the conspiracy theories about a fraudulent election, is another egregious attack on people's trust in our government," Carolyn Lukensmeyer, the founding executive director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse, told Newsweek.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-spent-43-million-helping-election-deniers-win-their-primaries-1731068

 

The Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars trying to get MAGA extreme candidates on the ballot at the expense of less extreme ones.

Some folks who are taking their cue from the ex-President. Well, at least I believe he's the ex-President. Them, not so much.

 

https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1591890660940185600?cxt=HBwWgIDQ6eaHxJcsAAAA&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

 

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Of course there are good reasons for it. I suggest you do some research. It's not complicated.

I have done, long ago, you tell me what's good about winning with a minority of votes unless you think you can never get a majority.

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Not at all. But they DID encourage it and did so at the risk of "dangerous" candidates winning the GOP primaries.  It was part of an effort to keep more mainstream but stronger GOP hopefuls out of various races.

You are being a typical apologist.  Did the Democrats support who they perceived as being the weaker candidates.  Of course, just like Republicans support the Democrats when they pick someone they perceive as being weak, but the keyword is 'perceive'.  Kari Lake was a strong contender for the Arizona throne, but she blew it on her own.  She did not have the backing of the sitting Republican governor.   She also made strong anti-McCain statements, including saying she'd stuck a knife in the heart of the McCain republicans.  That was an unwise move in Arizona.   

 

Arizona did not experience a blue wave.  Hobbs won, Kelly won and then when you start moving down the ballot a lot of Republicans start winning and of those who lost, most were, to be truthful, election liars.  They gave unwavering support to Trump and his myopic message. 

 

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

They are bad for doing it IF they deliberately back candidates who you ALSO claim are direct threats to the country.  It is the height of hypicrisy to pretend to be scared of election denyers and also support them.

 

See CNN on this;

 

 

 Democrats have expressly said that the 2020 election and its aftermath are about more than hardball politics. Those events threatened the fabric of our democracy and the people who pushed them need to be punished. 

 

Playing politics – as Democrats are doing – elevates these false views about both the election and January 6 whether or not the Republican nominees spouting those opinions wind up winning.

 

You can’t have it both ways. Either the lies about the election – and those who propagate them – are an active danger to our democracy or they’re not.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/26/politics/peter-meijer-dccc-january-6/index.html

WOW. If they keep being reasonable I might have to change my mind about CNN.

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Are you not aware that the popular vote isn't a factor in US presidential elections? For very good reasons.

I know of some people who would disagree with you:

Op-Ed: Even the Founders hated the electoral college

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-11-22/electoral-college-popular-vote-founders-james-madison-great-compromise

That would include James Madison who is known as the Father of the Constitution.

6 minutes ago, Credo said:

You are being a typical apologist.  Did the Democrats support who they perceived as being the weaker candidates.  Of course, just like Republicans support the Democrats when they pick someone they perceive as being weak, but the keyword is 'perceive'.  Kari Lake was a strong contender for the Arizona throne, but she blew it on her own.  She did not have the backing of the sitting Republican governor.   She also made strong anti-McCain statements, including saying she'd stuck a knife in the heart of the McCain republicans.  That was an unwise move in Arizona.   

 

Arizona did not experience a blue wave.  Hobbs won, Kelly won and then when you start moving down the ballot a lot of Republicans start winning and of those who lost, most were, to be truthful, election liars.  They gave unwavering support to Trump and his myopic message. 

 

Trump trashing McCain and then his daughter in AZ is testament to his intellectual incapacity. He simply did not understand the implications of trashing a national war hero who defended Obama Care because he knew it was the right thing to do given a 50/50 split. He wasn't going to thwart public opinion just because of a party line vote. AZ punished him and his MAGA accolytes. He lived as a hero and died a hero. If I'm not mistaken he essentially got out of his death bed to cast that vote.

Edited November 15, 20223 yr by ozimoron

5 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Newsweek disagrees.

 

"This choice by the DCCC to put a huge amount of money into supporting far-right candidates who support the conspiracy theories about a fraudulent election, is another egregious attack on people's trust in our government," Carolyn Lukensmeyer, the founding executive director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse, told Newsweek.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-spent-43-million-helping-election-deniers-win-their-primaries-1731068

 

The Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars trying to get MAGA extreme candidates on the ballot at the expense of less extreme ones.

 

8 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Newsweek disagrees.

 

"This choice by the DCCC to put a huge amount of money into supporting far-right candidates who support the conspiracy theories about a fraudulent election, is another egregious attack on people's trust in our government," Carolyn Lukensmeyer, the founding executive director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse, told Newsweek.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-spent-43-million-helping-election-deniers-win-their-primaries-1731068

 

The Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars trying to get MAGA extreme candidates on the ballot at the expense of less extreme ones.

The article was noticeably lacking in analyzing these supposedly more moderate Republicans actual political positions. I see you have nothing to say about the Arizona race in this regard.

Trump lost his own election in AZ and the GOP let him lose the senate in AZ in the mid terms. Dumb and dumber.

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 

 

I did not witness any authoritarian moves from Trump. Can you give specific things he actually did that were authoritarian? Nothing brazen like the current admin trying to create a ministry of truth headed up by a notorious liar and conspiracy theorist to make sure only false narratives that suit the democrat party are allowed to flourish online. This was the single biggest display of fascism in our lives. Luckily it failed, temporarily.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/good-riddance-to-the-ministry-of-truth-nina-jankowicz/

Perhaps you've been sequestered on a tropical isle like Tom Hanks in that movie. Just in case, I'll provide one example.

 

45 planned and fomented an attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election. He told his goobers to come to DC on the 6th of Jan 2021 "it will be wild", he tweeted), then incited them to move on the Capitol. It wasn't to buy souvenirs at the Capitol gift shop. He then sat idle for 187 minutes watching the insurrection by his terrorist mob on TV, doing absolutely nothing to stop it. He heard the chants of "Hang Mike Pence", yet he made no calls to get National Guard or law enforcement to stop the attempted coup.

 

That is an example of an authoritarian move by 45. It also falls under the definition of Sedition, a capital offense.

 

He should be indicted, tried, and if found guilty, executed according to the law. No half mast flags when he's executed, and no burial at Arlington where real patriots rest.