ChiGoose Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 1 minute ago, B-Man said: WHEN ELECTION DAY LASTS FOR A MONTH FTA: Murdock quotes the passage in U.S. election law that says: “The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress,” then asks “what part of that federal statute is unclear?” Americans are casting ballots before candidates have debated; while they know nothing about the health of the candidates they’re voting for; before they realize candidates are going to hide in their basements rather than campaign; before candidates drop out; before events that would change their votes occur (Google searches for “can i change my vote” peaked at 5 a.m. last Tuesday); before the public learns about the debauched and possible criminal behavior of a candidate’s son – and then the ballots are counted for days and weeks after the election, providing more time and access for those determined to change the outcome. No election will ever be perfect. Fallible humans make errors. But ours would be much cleaner it we abandoned early voting and restricted mail-in voting to only “the sick, infirm, and those who will be – Imagine! – absent on Election Day,” as Murdock suggests. Don’t fall for the lie that this is suppression, or that it’s a “threat to our democracy,” or any of the objections that Democrats and their media lackeys will manufacture so that they won’t lose their party advantage. End the corruption before the corruption ends our republic. — Written by the I&I Editorial Board https://issuesinsights.com/2022/11/14/when-election-day-lasts-for-a-month/ “Allowing more people to vote is really bad, you guys.” -People who don’t understand how voting works. 1
B-Man Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: “Allowing more people to vote is really bad, you guys.” -People who don’t understand how voting works. “Making generalized snide replies is fun, you guys” - people who respond within one minute without reading the entire editorial How fortunate for the board that goose’s simplistic posts are easily forgotten.
ChiGoose Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, B-Man said: “Making generalized snide replies is fun, you guys” - people who respond within one minute without reading the entire editorial How fortunate for the board that goose’s simplistic posts are easily forgotten. No state has counted every vote on Election Day in modern history. It hasn’t happened. Getting rid of early voting won’t change that. How unfortunate that B-Man’s misinfo posts are wildly believed on this site. Edited November 15, 2022 by ChiGoose
BillStime Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 7 minutes ago, B-Man said: - people who respond within one minute without reading the entire editorial lol - is this you? You read the headline and didn't watch the video. 8 hours ago, B-Man said: LUNACY.
B-Man Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 ABOUT “DENIERS” It all started with Holocaust deniers. That phrase has a clear meaning: it refers to someone who denies that the Holocaust took place. But liberals saw potential in the locution, an opportunity to disqualify their opponents without actually making an argument. Thus, they started labeling people as “climate deniers.” What does that mean? Someone who denies that we have a climate? There is no such person. Someone who denies that our climate changes? There is no such person. No: a “climate denier” is anyone who questions any of a long list of theories that liberals string together to justify devastating our standard of living for no good reason. But, hey: they are “deniers,” just like Holocaust deniers, so all argument is at an end. Liberals must have thought that strategy worked, because now we have “election deniers.” Again, one asks, what is an election denier? Someone who denies that we have elections? No. An election denier is anyone who worries that our elections might not be entirely on the up-and-up. Someone other than a Democrat, of course. Democrats have denied the legitimacy of every Republican president since George H.W. Bush, and many other elections besides. Cf. Stacey Abrams. But that’s different. Of course, it is a fact that our elections are not always on the up-and-up, as the Democrats themselves have often alleged. But if a Republican makes that observation, he is a “denier” like the Iranian mullahs. Does the Democrats’ crude strategy work? I don’t think so. Despite the Dems’ propaganda blizzard, Americans remain concerned about the integrity of our elections. Rasmussen’smost recent survey documents the point: more at the link: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/11/about-deniers.php
BillStime Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 Just now, B-Man said: ABOUT “DENIERS” It all started with Holocaust deniers. That phrase has a clear meaning: it refers to someone who denies that the Holocaust took place. But liberals saw potential in the locution, an opportunity to disqualify their opponents without actually making an argument. Thus, they started labeling people as “climate deniers.” What does that mean? Someone who denies that we have a climate? There is no such person. Someone who denies that our climate changes? There is no such person. No: a “climate denier” is anyone who questions any of a long list of theories that liberals string together to justify devastating our standard of living for no good reason. But, hey: they are “deniers,” just like Holocaust deniers, so all argument is at an end. Liberals must have thought that strategy worked, because now we have “election deniers.” Again, one asks, what is an election denier? Someone who denies that we have elections? No. An election denier is anyone who worries that our elections might not be entirely on the up-and-up. Someone other than a Democrat, of course. Democrats have denied the legitimacy of every Republican president since George H.W. Bush, and many other elections besides. Cf. Stacey Abrams. But that’s different. Of course, it is a fact that our elections are not always on the up-and-up, as the Democrats themselves have often alleged. But if a Republican makes that observation, he is a “denier” like the Iranian mullahs. Does the Democrats’ crude strategy work? I don’t think so. Despite the Dems’ propaganda blizzard, Americans remain concerned about the integrity of our elections. Rasmussen’smost recent survey documents the point: more at the link: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/11/about-deniers.php 1
B-Man Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 Media outlets call AZ race for Katie Hobbs over Kari Lake https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2022/11/14/media-outlets-call-az-race-for-katie-hobbs-over-kari-lake-as-a-phoenix-station-foretold-last-month/
BillStime Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 7 minutes ago, B-Man said: Media outlets call AZ race for Katie Hobbs over Kari Lake https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2022/11/14/media-outlets-call-az-race-for-katie-hobbs-over-kari-lake-as-a-phoenix-station-foretold-last-month/
The Frankish Reich Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 Hahahaha. Just got back from Arizona - signs all over the place with Kari Lake and Trump pics next to each other saying TRUMP ENDORSED. I guess the Trump-Lake ticket ain't happening after all. 1 1
ChiGoose Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Hahahaha. Just got back from Arizona - signs all over the place with Kari Lake and Trump pics next to each other saying TRUMP ENDORSED. I guess the Trump-Lake ticket ain't happening after all. One of the things I’ve learned taking to campaign people is that campaign staff on big elections hate yard signs because they are a waste of money. They can benefit for name recognition in down ballot races, but are not worth the investment in top races. Yet many people still base their expectations on elections on the prevalence of yard signs for a particular candidate. Which is even worse of a predictor due to our geographic polarization. In any case, now Lake and Trump are both free to run together since they don’t have to worry about doing the responsibilities of elected officials right now.
Andy1 Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 This election will be studied to see why the red wave didn’t occur. One thing I have been wondering is did increased mortality from COVID have an impact on the election? One or two percent makes a difference in some of the close elections. Covid mortality skewed towards older people and republican voters tend to be older. I haven’t seen a study but I would assume that a majority of the over 1 million people who died were republicans. I knew two friends/relatives who died and both were republican. I just wonder what if any impact that had this year.
The Frankish Reich Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 11 minutes ago, Andy1 said: This election will be studied to see why the red wave didn’t occur. One thing I have been wondering is did increased mortality from COVID have an impact on the election? One or two percent makes a difference in some of the close elections. Covid mortality skewed towards older people and republican voters tend to be older. I haven’t seen a study but I would assume that a majority of the over 1 million people who died were republicans. I knew two friends/relatives who died and both were republican. I just wonder what if any impact that had this year. This is an interesting point. Ordinarily an uptick in mortality wouldn't matter in an election. But given how close some elections were, and given the strong Republican skew of older voters in a place like Arizona ... it could be a significant contributing factor.
Big Blitz Posted November 15, 2022 Author Posted November 15, 2022 We’ll take that gavel thank you very much. Democracy has clearly been saved! Good job everyone! 1 1
HomeskillitMoorman Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 3 hours ago, B-Man said: WHEN ELECTION DAY LASTS FOR A MONTH FTA: Murdock quotes the passage in U.S. election law that says: “The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress,” then asks “what part of that federal statute is unclear?” Americans are casting ballots before candidates have debated; while they know nothing about the health of the candidates they’re voting for; before they realize candidates are going to hide in their basements rather than campaign; before candidates drop out; before events that would change their votes occur (Google searches for “can i change my vote” peaked at 5 a.m. last Tuesday); before the public learns about the debauched and possible criminal behavior of a candidate’s son – and then the ballots are counted for days and weeks after the election, providing more time and access for those determined to change the outcome. No election will ever be perfect. Fallible humans make errors. But ours would be much cleaner it we abandoned early voting and restricted mail-in voting to only “the sick, infirm, and those who will be – Imagine! – absent on Election Day,” as Murdock suggests. Don’t fall for the lie that this is suppression, or that it’s a “threat to our democracy,” or any of the objections that Democrats and their media lackeys will manufacture so that they won’t lose their party advantage. End the corruption before the corruption ends our republic. — Written by the I&I Editorial Board https://issuesinsights.com/2022/11/14/when-election-day-lasts-for-a-month/ Cry, cry, cry. I hope you weren't one of the embarrassing Bills fans who said the Miami loss wasn't fair because it was so hot. 1 1
ChiGoose Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 5 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said: Cry, cry, cry. I hope you weren't one of the embarrassing Bills fans who said the Miami loss wasn't fair because it was so hot. Shhhh… you can’t let your facts get in the way of their feelings. It’ll make them very upset!
HomeskillitMoorman Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 1 hour ago, Big Blitz said: We’ll take that gavel thank you very much. Democracy has clearly been saved! Good job everyone! You're right, they should just hand over the Senate and Governor since the Treasurer did well. You don't see anything like this amount of crying and whining over the Dems losing the house. The other side needs to grow up. 3 hours ago, BillStime said: Hahaha, as someone on twitter said "When a Cheney shoots, they don't miss!" 2 2
Doc Brown Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 4 hours ago, Big Blitz said: We’ll take that gavel thank you very much. Democracy has clearly been saved! Good job everyone! How hard would it be to flip 2 to 5 Republicans (depending on the final results) to vote with Democrats in the House on some things depending on the results? Usually there's at least a 10 seat buffer. Is McCarthy the right man for the job? Having a razor thin majority makes it extremely difficult to both put out legislation and obstruct every democratic legislative proposal.
Sundancer Posted November 15, 2022 Posted November 15, 2022 13 hours ago, B-Man said: You are wrong on both counts. You are being led, with your "election denier" silliness. That is the lazy way that many Leftists try and pigeon hole all dissent. Nah. She’s talking about cheating and finding ballots. Fantasy believer. 13 hours ago, B-Man said: Questioning mistakes and delays is not denying. It is when you lead with cheating conclusion. 13 hours ago, B-Man said: And ignoring the decade that I have read responses on here, and just going by today's posts alone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . PPP in not a sane place. . Sane-er.
Recommended Posts