Ukraine

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Huh? Jan 6 was stupid but it was not the greatest threat to American Democracy since the Civil War. No matter what Rachel Maddow says.

January 6th isn’t about just that day, it’s the entire effort to manipulate fair election results, gaslight the public and undermine confidence in our democratic process. What we’ve learned already from the commission should be alarming to everyone.

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by spence

January 6th isn’t about just that day, it’s the entire effort to manipulate fair election results, gaslight the public and undermine confidence in our democratic process. What we’ve learned already from the commission should be alarming to everyone.

Not to the right, who are trying every which way they can to regain or hold on to power.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

January 6th isn’t about just that day, it’s the entire effort to manipulate fair election results, gaslight the public and undermine confidence in our democratic process. What we’ve learned already from the commission should be alarming to everyone.

and after the 2016 election when democrats were asking the electors not to cast their votes for Trump, what was that, exactly?

i’m with you on january 6, but i can’t help but notice how, well, selective you are in terms of when you’re opposed to interfering with the democratic process, and when you seem to be fine with it. shockingly, you’re consistently ok with it when your side does it. but that’s just a coincidence.

when elected democrats in the TX state legislature hopped on a chartered jet to flee
the state so that the legislative process could not function, did you call that out?

When rioters stormed the WI state capital because the republicans had passed legislation weakening labor union influence, that was ok with you.

When stacey abrams says her election was stolen, not a peep from you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

and after the 2016 election when democrats were asking the electors not to cast their votes for Trump, what was that, exactly?

i’m with you on january 6, but i can’t help but notice how, well, selective you are in terms of when you’re opposed to interfering with the democratic process, and when you seem to be fine with it. shockingly, you’re consistently ok with it when your side does it. but that’s just a coincidence.

when elected democrats in the TX state legislature hopped on a chartered jet to flee
the state so that the legislative process could not function, did you call that out?

When rioters stormed the WI state capital because the republicans had passed legislation weakening labor union influence, that was ok with you.

When stacey abrams says her election was stolen, not a peep from you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

More false equivalencies

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

More false equivalencies

More as in added to yours.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

More false equivalencies

Trump won fair and and square in 2016, and some in your side asked the electors to subvert democracy and cast their votes for someone else.

saying “false equivalencies” with zero support (as usual) makes you look stupid, weak,,and desperate.

the whole idea of superdelegates on the left, is a specific attempt to give the democrats the ability to undermine democracy when they don’t happen to like the results of the democratic process. it’s completely antithetical to democracy. the superdelegates aren’t elected, yet they get to overrule the democratic process in primaries.

try making that even a little bit wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Trump won fair and and square in 2016, and some in your side asked the electors to subvert democracy and cast their votes for someone else.

saying “false equivalencies” with zero support (as usual) makes you look stupid, weak,,and desperate.

the whole idea of superdelegates on the left, is a specific attempt to give the democrats the ability to undermine democracy when they don’t happen to like the results of the democratic process. it’s completely antithetical to democracy. the superdelegates aren’t elected, yet they get to overrule the democratic process in primaries.

try making that even a little bit wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pretty simple to make it wrong
There’s no provision for “primaries” in the Constitution.
In fact the current two party system is the founder’s nightmare.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Pretty simple to make it wrong
There’s no provision for “primaries” in the Constitution.
In fact the current two party system is the founder’s nightmare.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ok.

how about the left, after the 2016 election, asking electors to ignore the outcome of our democratic process, the left didn’t like the outcome, so they tried to change the outcome after a free election.

isn’t that pretty much what trump was asking for on january 6th?

have fun with that.

there are democrats in congress today, who objected to states’ electors casting their votes for trump after the 2016 election. but as always, it’s ok when they do it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

ok.

how about the left, after the 2016 election, asking electors to ignore the outcome of our democratic process, the left didn’t like the outcome, so they tried to change the outcome after a free election.

isn’t that pretty much what trump was asking for on january 6th?

have fun with that.

there are democrats in congress today, who objected to states’ electors casting their votes for trump after the 2016 election. but as always, it’s ok when they do it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, You’re wrong
It’s not fun, it’s the greatest threat to the constitution since the war between the states.
And let’s not forget Y’all are acting like you’ve never seen a 43 year old Governor who only won by 30k votes in a State with 21m people who he failed to protect from a deadly virus for 2 years so he could suck-up to MAGA base & imitate a septuagenarian grifter go missing for 2 weeks at Xmas before.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Trump won fair and and square in 2016, and some in your side asked the electors to subvert democracy and cast their votes for someone else.

Couple a Sanders supporters, a few wanted some to go against Clinton also.

saying “false equivalencies” with zero support (as usual) makes you look stupid, weak,,and desperate.

No it just means I’m tired of your - I read on a tabloid two years ago and can’t drop it - level of insight.

the whole idea of superdelegates on the left, is a specific attempt to give the democrats the ability to undermine democracy when they don’t happen to like the results of the democratic process. it’s completely antithetical to democracy. the superdelegates aren’t elected, yet they get to overrule the democratic process in primaries.

Actually super delegates represented a small minority of overall delegates, but it’s kid of moot anyway as they only use them in contested primaries now.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Couple a Sanders supporters, a few wanted some to go against Clinton also.


No it just means I’m tired of your - I read on a tabloid two years ago and can’t drop it - level of insight.


Actually super delegates represented a small minority of overall delegates, but it’s kid of moot anyway as they only use them in contested primaries now.

that whole post s a joke.

yes, superdelegates only matter in close primaries. but why not just trust the democrat voters? why do unelected superdelegates get to overrule the results of a free and fair election?

why was it ok when democrats asked electors not to cast their votes for trump? why wasn’t that undermining free and fair elections?

you can’t begin to make that wrong. lobbing baseless insults just proves my point.

everything is ok when democrats do it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device