Is It Right That American Citizens Should Have To Stand Over 5 or 6 Hours In Line Just To Vote?

[sealybobo]

I already saw it. He was clearly trying to strongarm the Ukraine president. It's so obvious except with Trump supporters. That's why you're going to be surprised when you lose bad. Moderates and independents see reality even if they were duped into voting for Trump in 2016. I get it why they did it in 2016 but not now.

He never threatened Zelensky once. Do you know what the definition of a favor is? It's asking for somebody to do something for you with no expectation of reward. That's exactly what Trump did. As I said, it's all in the transcript.

Whatever. Then add to the list of shady shit all the whistle blowers that have come out or leaked about Trump and you guys don't even care what they are saying. You're mad at the whitleblower's not Trump.

Think of all the people who heard Trump trying to get the Ukraine President to help him win and they all said it was inappropriate. You don't believe any of them either? All of them are out to get Trump?

I forgot, you guys are conspiracy theorists.

 

[sealybobo]

I already saw it. He was clearly trying to strongarm the Ukraine president. It's so obvious except with Trump supporters. That's why you're going to be surprised when you lose bad. Moderates and independents see reality even if they were duped into voting for Trump in 2016. I get it why they did it in 2016 but not now.

He never threatened Zelensky once. Do you know what the definition of a favor is? It's asking for somebody to do something for you with no expectation of reward. That's exactly what Trump did. As I said, it's all in the transcript.

President Donald Trump is pushing back against a damning whistleblower complaint about his dealings with Ukraine by falsely claiming the complaint has been debunked.
According to a CNN analysis, however, the overwhelming majority of allegations in the complaint have been corroborated by official government documents, Trump’s public statements, and news reporting.

Trump has relied on lies and falsehoods to undermine the complaint. Trump said the whistleblower “knew almost nothing” and that the complaint was “almost completely wrong” and contained “totally inaccurate and fraudulent” information. These are among the nearly 20 times Trump claimed the whistleblower was inaccurate in the two weeks since the complaint was publicly released in September.

Oh yea, and don't forget his efforts to cover up the call by putting the call in a server that's not normally meant for calls like this

EFFORTS TO COVER UP RECORDS OF THE CALL

Stop being intellectually dishonest. Just admit you don't care that Trump does all these shady things. Just like Putin supporters don't mind that he poisons his political opponents. If Trump wins a second term who knows.

 

[sealybobo]

I already saw it. He was clearly trying to strongarm the Ukraine president. It's so obvious except with Trump supporters. That's why you're going to be surprised when you lose bad. Moderates and independents see reality even if they were duped into voting for Trump in 2016. I get it why they did it in 2016 but not now.

He never threatened Zelensky once. Do you know what the definition of a favor is? It's asking for somebody to do something for you with no expectation of reward. That's exactly what Trump did. As I said, it's all in the transcript.

If you believe Trump on the Ukraine thing, then I bet if you heard a mafia guy on tape talking about wacking someone, you would argue that he was talking about wacking him off sexually. The question is do you honestly believe what you are saying or are you just going to argue to your grave rather than admit.

What's the harm? He wasn't thrown out of office. So just admit it now that he did it. We all know what he was trying to do Ray.

And do you still not believe he colluded with Russia?

Bipartisan Senate Report Shows How Trump Colluded With Russia in 2016

Bipartisan Senate Report Shows How Trump Colluded With Russia in 2016

Trump and his advisers acted guilty because they were.

nymag.com

The Republican-controlled committee has taken Russian interference seriously and conducted at least somewhat bipartisan investigations, occasionally infuriating Trump and his allies. Perhaps to soften the blow, the committee surprisingly released a damning 966-page report on Russian measures and the counterintelligence threat in the middle of the Democratic convention. And its Republican members covered themselves by insisting, preposterously, that its contents vindicated Trump.
“We can say, without any hesitation, that the committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election,” claimed acting chairman Marco Rubio.

That assessment is so bizarre that it has no relationship to the report at all. One could debate whether the report contains proof of collusion, depending on how you define the terms “proof” and “collusion.” But evidence of collusion? Well, there is unquestionably a whole lot of it.
Since the Mueller report came out last year, Trump and his minions have insisted it found no evidence of collusion. In fact, Mueller explicitly wrote that he was not investigating collusion at all. (“We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term. Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy.”)
Unlike Mueller’s tightly circumscribed criminal probe, the Senate Intelligence Committee report did investigate collusion. The most important evidence of collusion has either already been exposed (Trump officials taking a meeting with a Russian agent offering Vladimir Putin’s help with the campaign) or happened right in front of our eyes (Trump going on television to ask Russia to steal and publish Hillary Clinton’s emails). The real question is how extensively or tightly Trump’s campaign managed to coordinate its activity with Russia. And while it lacked the broad-ranging investigative powers Mueller could have used if he wanted, the Senate Intelligence Committee turned up damning evidence.

Bipartisan Senate Report Shows How Trump Colluded With Russia in 2016

Trump and his advisers acted guilty because they were.

nymag.com

 

[sealybobo]

The problem is that we have too many voters who use the criteria to vote representatives into office that they used when they voted for their favorite American Idol contestant. Who could be voting against Trump based on his record? Who could be voting for Biden for his, especially now that scandalous emails from his son came up?

No one. In fact, their records rarely come up even during the debates. Almost the entire campaign for Biden with the DNC has been a personal attack against Trump! I remember years ago working with a very liberal person and one night our having a (friendly) argument about whether integrity mattered in a president. I think we were talking about Clinton. Her position was that Bill's integrity DID NOT matter so long as he did his job and did it well, what difference his personal life! Now last night, what did the media want to know about? Integrity. False integrity. Donald, will you disavow white supremacism? Donald, where are your tax returns? Donald, did you really pay $750? Very little about his actual policies much less accomplishments.

Biden ads make a point of dwelling on suggestive imagery that Trump is highly driven in his Covid policy based on EGO, ATTENTION, and stock markets for the rich. Rally's are for attention. They very much play how Trump is a callous, insensitive brute while making out Biden as a caring, loving, forgiving, inclusive man. Nothing could be farther from the truth, in fact, quite the opposite.

So now we're going to have millions of voters getting ballots sent to their homes, without having to lift a finger, voting on a US President based on how nice of a guy they are instead of having the understanding that Trump did three times as much as President in four years than Joe did as Senator/ VP in 47 years.

Quite so. I've seen some libs argue they should be able to vote on line! What the unsolicited mail in voting does is put a ballot in every person's hands whether they follow or have any interest at all, so that many people with no desire or intention to vote will now vote. Many will say that since all they have to do is check a box and stick it back in the mail, they might as well, which means that you will have many low information people who normally don't vote, voting for the hell of it, because it is right under their nose.

The Democrat strategists know that plays into their hand. Through TV, newspapers and other media, they constantly paint Trump as a rogue and a failure, meanwhile making Biden out as the iconic family man hero. Low information people go by superficial impressions, will naturally know nothing of Trump's accomplishments because these media suppress it, and will likely go by nothing more than the caricatures that THEY and the media paint. This leaves the vote nothing more than in the hands of who spends the most money to character-assassinate the other with lies.

Voting for leaders should not be based on a personality contest.

Quite the opposite. History shows that most great leaders who were true change-agents of history in difficult and pivotal times were not cardboard cutouts of handsome men with warm personalities, they were anything but that. They were bold, fearless, daring, high-risk, cunning and ambitious. Kill or be killed. Survivors. Fighters. Winners. Not the sort of person that could be played up as a commodity on color TV. In fact, through most of history, there WAS no color TV, no media like today, so all folks really HAD to go by WAS their real accomplishments!!!

That's why my idea (and yours) about taking a very simple test should apply. Yes, it would require a constitutional amendment, however while no chance at passing, such a vote would expose which party is fearful of having intelligent or politically ignorant voters. You, I and many others both know which party that would be.

Well, obviously, it is the party of the smart, educated Democrats who would oppose it because they know so many of their base are not so smart or educated, otherwise, their media fakery wouldn't buy them as voters in the first place!

The RIGHT TO VOTE means that the government shall make available to every person the ability to cast their vote. It says nothing about it being easy, simple or for the uninformed. An uninformed vote pollutes the balloting as noise because it is arbitrary, random, meaningless. The uninformed low-information voter casts their vote based on which name they like more, who appeals to them in looks more, impressions, sound bites; a guess, a whim. In effect, a roll of the dice and as such, in effect-- -- noise. An uninformed voter pollutes the balloting with noise and is less a measure of the will of the populous who care, are affected and notice, and more a measure of the mere effectiveness of political ADVERTISING to influence and sway shallow opinion.

I will have a lot more to say about this later in a thread of mine called A Tale of Two Debates, when I have time to write it.

Republicans still think this Hunter Biden story has legs. LOL. I heard fox news' spin on this story. Basically, who cares if the story isn't true. It's not fair that twitter took trump's lies down.

Trump can't spread his misinformation. Waaah. You birthers crack me up. You want free speech to mean free to spread your lies unchecked.

Quid Pro Joe sold the office of VP so he and his crackhead son could take millions from the Chicoms and Russia.

You have no problem with that, Sillyboob.

Not if you don't have a problem with the 1000 shady things Trump has done while in office. The hypocrisy is mind blowing. Biden could murder someone on 5th ave and not lose one supporter.

Plus it doesn't matter we all already voted. Too late to change our votes.

List those "shady things", Sillyboob.

Google them and stop telling others to cater to your idiocy and laziness.

He made a claim, Asswipe. It's on him to back it up. STFU and butt out.

A no. The fact you even have to ask. He has broken several laws if you look them up you’ll see them. Small stuff and the senate won’t do anything about it so he goes unchecked. Then there are all the rules he breaks. Not laws, rules.

There are just too many to list. Go back to his inappropriate conversation with comey where he asked if he was loyal.

Trump is shady. Look up the word in the dictionary there’s a picture of trump.

"Too many to list"?

Explains why you can't bring a single one, Sillyboob.

I thought I did. He asked comey if he was loyal. That’s shady even paul Ryan house leader admitted it. His excuse was trump was new and didn’t know better.

This is just one of hundreds of shady things trump has done.

How about the emoluments clause?

Too many of these shady things to remember even a percentage of them. It was daily. So many we are numb to it. He’s got to go

So, even though there are “too many to list”, the best you can come up with is “He asked Comey if he was loyal”????????

I think you are done here, Hack.

I'm having fun recalling all the shady shit.

Factbox: Here are eight Trump associates arrested or convicted of crimes

Steve Bannon has been charged with defrauding Trump supporters in a campaign to help build the president's signature wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, prosecutors said on Thursday.

www.reuters.com

 

[sealybobo]

The problem is that we have too many voters who use the criteria to vote representatives into office that they used when they voted for their favorite American Idol contestant. Who could be voting against Trump based on his record? Who could be voting for Biden for his, especially now that scandalous emails from his son came up?

No one. In fact, their records rarely come up even during the debates. Almost the entire campaign for Biden with the DNC has been a personal attack against Trump! I remember years ago working with a very liberal person and one night our having a (friendly) argument about whether integrity mattered in a president. I think we were talking about Clinton. Her position was that Bill's integrity DID NOT matter so long as he did his job and did it well, what difference his personal life! Now last night, what did the media want to know about? Integrity. False integrity. Donald, will you disavow white supremacism? Donald, where are your tax returns? Donald, did you really pay $750? Very little about his actual policies much less accomplishments.

Biden ads make a point of dwelling on suggestive imagery that Trump is highly driven in his Covid policy based on EGO, ATTENTION, and stock markets for the rich. Rally's are for attention. They very much play how Trump is a callous, insensitive brute while making out Biden as a caring, loving, forgiving, inclusive man. Nothing could be farther from the truth, in fact, quite the opposite.

So now we're going to have millions of voters getting ballots sent to their homes, without having to lift a finger, voting on a US President based on how nice of a guy they are instead of having the understanding that Trump did three times as much as President in four years than Joe did as Senator/ VP in 47 years.

Quite so. I've seen some libs argue they should be able to vote on line! What the unsolicited mail in voting does is put a ballot in every person's hands whether they follow or have any interest at all, so that many people with no desire or intention to vote will now vote. Many will say that since all they have to do is check a box and stick it back in the mail, they might as well, which means that you will have many low information people who normally don't vote, voting for the hell of it, because it is right under their nose.

The Democrat strategists know that plays into their hand. Through TV, newspapers and other media, they constantly paint Trump as a rogue and a failure, meanwhile making Biden out as the iconic family man hero. Low information people go by superficial impressions, will naturally know nothing of Trump's accomplishments because these media suppress it, and will likely go by nothing more than the caricatures that THEY and the media paint. This leaves the vote nothing more than in the hands of who spends the most money to character-assassinate the other with lies.

Voting for leaders should not be based on a personality contest.

Quite the opposite. History shows that most great leaders who were true change-agents of history in difficult and pivotal times were not cardboard cutouts of handsome men with warm personalities, they were anything but that. They were bold, fearless, daring, high-risk, cunning and ambitious. Kill or be killed. Survivors. Fighters. Winners. Not the sort of person that could be played up as a commodity on color TV. In fact, through most of history, there WAS no color TV, no media like today, so all folks really HAD to go by WAS their real accomplishments!!!

That's why my idea (and yours) about taking a very simple test should apply. Yes, it would require a constitutional amendment, however while no chance at passing, such a vote would expose which party is fearful of having intelligent or politically ignorant voters. You, I and many others both know which party that would be.

Well, obviously, it is the party of the smart, educated Democrats who would oppose it because they know so many of their base are not so smart or educated, otherwise, their media fakery wouldn't buy them as voters in the first place!

The RIGHT TO VOTE means that the government shall make available to every person the ability to cast their vote. It says nothing about it being easy, simple or for the uninformed. An uninformed vote pollutes the balloting as noise because it is arbitrary, random, meaningless. The uninformed low-information voter casts their vote based on which name they like more, who appeals to them in looks more, impressions, sound bites; a guess, a whim. In effect, a roll of the dice and as such, in effect-- -- noise. An uninformed voter pollutes the balloting with noise and is less a measure of the will of the populous who care, are affected and notice, and more a measure of the mere effectiveness of political ADVERTISING to influence and sway shallow opinion.

I will have a lot more to say about this later in a thread of mine called A Tale of Two Debates, when I have time to write it.

Republicans still think this Hunter Biden story has legs. LOL. I heard fox news' spin on this story. Basically, who cares if the story isn't true. It's not fair that twitter took trump's lies down.

Trump can't spread his misinformation. Waaah. You birthers crack me up. You want free speech to mean free to spread your lies unchecked.

Quid Pro Joe sold the office of VP so he and his crackhead son could take millions from the Chicoms and Russia.

You have no problem with that, Sillyboob.

Not if you don't have a problem with the 1000 shady things Trump has done while in office. The hypocrisy is mind blowing. Biden could murder someone on 5th ave and not lose one supporter.

Plus it doesn't matter we all already voted. Too late to change our votes.

List those "shady things", Sillyboob.

Google them and stop telling others to cater to your idiocy and laziness.

He made a claim, Asswipe. It's on him to back it up. STFU and butt out.

A no. The fact you even have to ask. He has broken several laws if you look them up you’ll see them. Small stuff and the senate won’t do anything about it so he goes unchecked. Then there are all the rules he breaks. Not laws, rules.

There are just too many to list. Go back to his inappropriate conversation with comey where he asked if he was loyal.

Trump is shady. Look up the word in the dictionary there’s a picture of trump.

"Too many to list"?

Explains why you can't bring a single one, Sillyboob.

I thought I did. He asked comey if he was loyal. That’s shady even paul Ryan house leader admitted it. His excuse was trump was new and didn’t know better.

This is just one of hundreds of shady things trump has done.

How about the emoluments clause?

Too many of these shady things to remember even a percentage of them. It was daily. So many we are numb to it. He’s got to go

So, even though there are “too many to list”, the best you can come up with is “He asked Comey if he was loyal”????????

I think you are done here, Hack.

Not Just Roger Stone: A Shockingly Long List of Trump’s Controversial Pardons and Commutations
Corrupt officials, political allies, and right-wing icons.


Do I need to go on?

 

[sealybobo]

Roger Stone, a longtime adviser convicted of lying to Congress, obstruction, and witness tampering in connection with the Russia investigation. Stone’s 2019 trial revealed that Trump likely lied to special counsel Robert Mueller about his own role in the scandal, but Stone himself has remained staunchly loyal to the president. Trump returned the favor. He repeatedly sought to intervene on Stone’s behalf—publicly berating federal prosecutors, the judge in the case, and even a juror. Senior Justice Department officials allegedly pressured government attorneys to “cut Stone a break.” And on Friday evening, Trump commuted Stone’s sentence, just days before he would have been required to report to prison.

Shady

 

[depotoo]

Get there before the polls open.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

President Donald Trump is pushing back against a damning whistleblower complaint about his dealings with Ukraine by falsely claiming the complaint has been debunked.
According to a CNN analysis, however, the overwhelming majority of allegations in the complaint have been corroborated by official government documents, Trump’s public statements, and news reporting.

Trump has relied on lies and falsehoods to undermine the complaint. Trump said the whistleblower “knew almost nothing” and that the complaint was “almost completely wrong” and contained “totally inaccurate and fraudulent” information. These are among the nearly 20 times Trump claimed the whistleblower was inaccurate in the two weeks since the complaint was publicly released in September.

Oh yea, and don't forget his efforts to cover up the call by putting the call in a server that's not normally meant for calls like this

EFFORTS TO COVER UP RECORDS OF THE CALL

Stop being intellectually dishonest. Just admit you don't care that Trump does all these shady things. Just like Putin supporters don't mind that he poisons his political opponents. If Trump wins a second term who knows.

The complaint had no merit. There is no whistleblower. It was Vindman all along. It's not a he-said, she-said deal. The exact transcript was provided to all the representatives and even us in the public. I know what he said and you know what he said, but you can't claim guilt based on your assumptions of what he meant. That's not how it works. You have to go by the actual words used.

Let me tell you what this is really about: When Vindman ran back to the rest of the deep state and told them about Trump's curiosity of Biden, they knew they were in trouble. They had to find a way to shut Zelensky up and not tell Trump anything, and they had to do it fast.

They couldn't directly threaten Zelensky, so they created this phony impeachment. Zelensky knew his money came from both Congress and the President, and he was not about to get in the middle of a pissing contest between them. So Zelensky didn't tell Trump a thing, and he won't tell him either.

Now these emails have surfaced, and neither the FBI nor Joe commented on them. They seem pretty legitimate, so it substantiates the Presidents concern at the time.

 

[Unkotare]

...
Florida elections have been rigged since 2000.

You mean the election Al Gore lost?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

I noticed in Metro Detroit it takes 20 minutes and they have plenty of machines and in the city they have backed up lines. Even I would go home if it took 2 hours to vote. Even I might decide not to even bother. Luckily we have a Democratic governor now in MI so if this happens, we only have ourselves to blame.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

No. That is a clear indication that their either are not enough polling places, not enough hours for polls to be open, or there needs to be more early voting.

Not everyone has that amount of time to stand in line...they have to work.

There's no excuse for a lack of polling places.

I live by a small town called Noel, it takes me about five minutes to vote.

Of course it isn't right. No one really believes it is.

The Party Of Contradiction strikes again....hahaha
So you hate the idea of American Citizens waiting in line behind fellow citizens to vote yet you have no problem with Americans waiting for hours behind illegals in an Emergency Room for emergency care?
Does that really seem reasonable to you?

 

[sealybobo]

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

I noticed in Metro Detroit it takes 20 minutes and they have plenty of machines and in the city they have backed up lines. Even I would go home if it took 2 hours to vote. Even I might decide not to even bother. Luckily we have a Democratic governor now in MI so if this happens, we only have ourselves to blame.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

No. That is a clear indication that their either are not enough polling places, not enough hours for polls to be open, or there needs to be more early voting.

Not everyone has that amount of time to stand in line...they have to work.

There's no excuse for a lack of polling places.

I live by a small town called Noel, it takes me about five minutes to vote.

Of course it isn't right. No one really believes it is.

The Party Of Contradiction strikes again....hahaha
So you hate the idea of American Citizens waiting in line behind fellow citizens to vote yet you have no problem with Americans waiting for hours behind illegals in an Emergency Room for emergency care?
Does that really seem reasonable to you?

No and that's not our position

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I already saw it. He was clearly trying to strongarm the Ukraine president. It's so obvious except with Trump supporters. That's why you're going to be surprised when you lose bad. Moderates and independents see reality even if they were duped into voting for Trump in 2016. I get it why they did it in 2016 but not now.

He never threatened Zelensky once. Do you know what the definition of a favor is? It's asking for somebody to do something for you with no expectation of reward. That's exactly what Trump did. As I said, it's all in the transcript.

If you believe Trump on the Ukraine thing, then I bet if you heard a mafia guy on tape talking about wacking someone, you would argue that he was talking about wacking him off sexually. The question is do you honestly believe what you are saying or are you just going to argue to your grave rather than admit.

What's the harm? He wasn't thrown out of office. So just admit it now that he did it. We all know what he was trying to do Ray.

And do you still not believe he colluded with Russia?

Bipartisan Senate Report Shows How Trump Colluded With Russia in 2016

Bipartisan Senate Report Shows How Trump Colluded With Russia in 2016

Trump and his advisers acted guilty because they were.

nymag.com

The Republican-controlled committee has taken Russian interference seriously and conducted at least somewhat bipartisan investigations, occasionally infuriating Trump and his allies. Perhaps to soften the blow, the committee surprisingly released a damning 966-page report on Russian measures and the counterintelligence threat in the middle of the Democratic convention. And its Republican members covered themselves by insisting, preposterously, that its contents vindicated Trump.
“We can say, without any hesitation, that the committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election,” claimed acting chairman Marco Rubio.

That assessment is so bizarre that it has no relationship to the report at all. One could debate whether the report contains proof of collusion, depending on how you define the terms “proof” and “collusion.” But evidence of collusion? Well, there is unquestionably a whole lot of it.
Since the Mueller report came out last year, Trump and his minions have insisted it found no evidence of collusion. In fact, Mueller explicitly wrote that he was not investigating collusion at all. (“We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term. Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy.”)
Unlike Mueller’s tightly circumscribed criminal probe, the Senate Intelligence Committee report did investigate collusion. The most important evidence of collusion has either already been exposed (Trump officials taking a meeting with a Russian agent offering Vladimir Putin’s help with the campaign) or happened right in front of our eyes (Trump going on television to ask Russia to steal and publish Hillary Clinton’s emails). The real question is how extensively or tightly Trump’s campaign managed to coordinate its activity with Russia. And while it lacked the broad-ranging investigative powers Mueller could have used if he wanted, the Senate Intelligence Committee turned up damning evidence.

Bipartisan Senate Report Shows How Trump Colluded With Russia in 2016

Trump and his advisers acted guilty because they were.

nymag.com

Oh please. This article reads like a child's storybook. It's loaded with assumptions and no evidence. If there was, trust me, the commies would use it to go after Trump again.

 

[sealybobo]

The problem is that we have too many voters who use the criteria to vote representatives into office that they used when they voted for their favorite American Idol contestant. Who could be voting against Trump based on his record? Who could be voting for Biden for his, especially now that scandalous emails from his son came up?

No one. In fact, their records rarely come up even during the debates. Almost the entire campaign for Biden with the DNC has been a personal attack against Trump! I remember years ago working with a very liberal person and one night our having a (friendly) argument about whether integrity mattered in a president. I think we were talking about Clinton. Her position was that Bill's integrity DID NOT matter so long as he did his job and did it well, what difference his personal life! Now last night, what did the media want to know about? Integrity. False integrity. Donald, will you disavow white supremacism? Donald, where are your tax returns? Donald, did you really pay $750? Very little about his actual policies much less accomplishments.

Biden ads make a point of dwelling on suggestive imagery that Trump is highly driven in his Covid policy based on EGO, ATTENTION, and stock markets for the rich. Rally's are for attention. They very much play how Trump is a callous, insensitive brute while making out Biden as a caring, loving, forgiving, inclusive man. Nothing could be farther from the truth, in fact, quite the opposite.

So now we're going to have millions of voters getting ballots sent to their homes, without having to lift a finger, voting on a US President based on how nice of a guy they are instead of having the understanding that Trump did three times as much as President in four years than Joe did as Senator/ VP in 47 years.

Quite so. I've seen some libs argue they should be able to vote on line! What the unsolicited mail in voting does is put a ballot in every person's hands whether they follow or have any interest at all, so that many people with no desire or intention to vote will now vote. Many will say that since all they have to do is check a box and stick it back in the mail, they might as well, which means that you will have many low information people who normally don't vote, voting for the hell of it, because it is right under their nose.

The Democrat strategists know that plays into their hand. Through TV, newspapers and other media, they constantly paint Trump as a rogue and a failure, meanwhile making Biden out as the iconic family man hero. Low information people go by superficial impressions, will naturally know nothing of Trump's accomplishments because these media suppress it, and will likely go by nothing more than the caricatures that THEY and the media paint. This leaves the vote nothing more than in the hands of who spends the most money to character-assassinate the other with lies.

Voting for leaders should not be based on a personality contest.

Quite the opposite. History shows that most great leaders who were true change-agents of history in difficult and pivotal times were not cardboard cutouts of handsome men with warm personalities, they were anything but that. They were bold, fearless, daring, high-risk, cunning and ambitious. Kill or be killed. Survivors. Fighters. Winners. Not the sort of person that could be played up as a commodity on color TV. In fact, through most of history, there WAS no color TV, no media like today, so all folks really HAD to go by WAS their real accomplishments!!!

That's why my idea (and yours) about taking a very simple test should apply. Yes, it would require a constitutional amendment, however while no chance at passing, such a vote would expose which party is fearful of having intelligent or politically ignorant voters. You, I and many others both know which party that would be.

Well, obviously, it is the party of the smart, educated Democrats who would oppose it because they know so many of their base are not so smart or educated, otherwise, their media fakery wouldn't buy them as voters in the first place!

The RIGHT TO VOTE means that the government shall make available to every person the ability to cast their vote. It says nothing about it being easy, simple or for the uninformed. An uninformed vote pollutes the balloting as noise because it is arbitrary, random, meaningless. The uninformed low-information voter casts their vote based on which name they like more, who appeals to them in looks more, impressions, sound bites; a guess, a whim. In effect, a roll of the dice and as such, in effect-- -- noise. An uninformed voter pollutes the balloting with noise and is less a measure of the will of the populous who care, are affected and notice, and more a measure of the mere effectiveness of political ADVERTISING to influence and sway shallow opinion.

I will have a lot more to say about this later in a thread of mine called A Tale of Two Debates, when I have time to write it.

Republicans still think this Hunter Biden story has legs. LOL. I heard fox news' spin on this story. Basically, who cares if the story isn't true. It's not fair that twitter took trump's lies down.

Trump can't spread his misinformation. Waaah. You birthers crack me up. You want free speech to mean free to spread your lies unchecked.

Quid Pro Joe sold the office of VP so he and his crackhead son could take millions from the Chicoms and Russia.

You have no problem with that, Sillyboob.

Not if you don't have a problem with the 1000 shady things Trump has done while in office. The hypocrisy is mind blowing. Biden could murder someone on 5th ave and not lose one supporter.

Plus it doesn't matter we all already voted. Too late to change our votes.

List those "shady things", Sillyboob.

Google them and stop telling others to cater to your idiocy and laziness.

He made a claim, Asswipe. It's on him to back it up. STFU and butt out.

A no. The fact you even have to ask. He has broken several laws if you look them up you’ll see them. Small stuff and the senate won’t do anything about it so he goes unchecked. Then there are all the rules he breaks. Not laws, rules.

There are just too many to list. Go back to his inappropriate conversation with comey where he asked if he was loyal.

Trump is shady. Look up the word in the dictionary there’s a picture of trump.

"Too many to list"?

Explains why you can't bring a single one, Sillyboob.

I thought I did. He asked comey if he was loyal. That’s shady even paul Ryan house leader admitted it. His excuse was trump was new and didn’t know better.

This is just one of hundreds of shady things trump has done.

How about the emoluments clause?

Too many of these shady things to remember even a percentage of them. It was daily. So many we are numb to it. He’s got to go

So, even though there are “too many to list”, the best you can come up with is “He asked Comey if he was loyal”????????

I think you are done here, Hack.

Maybe you want something more current

Fauci Confirms White House Is Controlling When He Speaks To Media
The nation’s top infectious disease expert gives his bluntest interview yet about the rising tensions between him and President Donald Trump’s administration.


Now go ahead and throw Fauci under the bus like you have everyone else who has disagreed with the president. They are the experts not Trump. Trump is a jackass and they say he doesn't have the temperment to lead this nation. But forget about all that. This isn't a "deep state" republican who's going against the president. This isn't a RINO who's a sellout to the lobbyists. He's a scientist. So it doesn't matter who disagrees with Trump. Other republicans, independents, liberals, scientists.... You think Trump knows best. Is that right?

Well I think this is another thing to add to the shady list. He's fighting with his lead scientist. You guys really are at war with science. Must be part of your propoganda to deny global warming for as long as you can because the oil company lobbyists pay Republicans to muddy the waters and cause confusion or uncertainty on what should be a fact. Fake news! Say Trump supporters.

This is a fight for the heart and soul of our nation. Unfortunately Trump got to appoint 3 Supreme Court Justices so the fighting hasn't even begun. Scary what's to come. So we need a Liberal in the white house not someone Wallstreet wants. Republicans said last week the stock market wants Trump to win again. Corporations want those Trump tax breaks to continue. Meanwhile cuts to social security and medicare if Trump wins re election. Why? To pay for those tax breaks.

Then there's this today

Trump Blames ‘Fauci And These Idiots’ For His Own Coronavirus Ineptitude


rump on Monday lashed out at medical experts and complained about people being tired of hearing about COVID-19, as the confirmed death toll in the U.S. ticked closer to 220,000 and the spread of the disease continued to accelerate.


“Every time he goes on television, there’s always a bomb, but there’s a bigger bomb if you fire him,” Trump added. “This guy’s a disaster.”
The president was referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert and a member of the White House coronavirus task force. Trump has repeatedly sought to undermine and distort Fauci’s comments as the public health expert has called for the implementation of safety protocols throughout the pandemic.
“If there’s a reporter on [the call], you can have it just the way I said it, I couldn’t care less,” Trump said.


Trump knows he's losing. He's frustrated. LOL.


The comments represent a doubling down on a new presidential pandemic strategy: Blame the experts.
On Sunday, Trump attacked Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden by saying his opponent would follow expert guidance if he were elected.
“He’ll listen to the scientists,” Trump warned at a campaign rally in Nevada.

Evidence suggests, however, that his inaction has inflamed the pandemic and its economic repercussions, not made the situation better.

Trump Blames 'Fauci And These Idiots' For His Own Coronavirus Ineptitude

“People are tired of Covid,” the president complained on a call with campaign staff.

www.huffpost.com

 

[pknopp]

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

I noticed in Metro Detroit it takes 20 minutes and they have plenty of machines and in the city they have backed up lines. Even I would go home if it took 2 hours to vote. Even I might decide not to even bother. Luckily we have a Democratic governor now in MI so if this happens, we only have ourselves to blame.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

No. That is a clear indication that their either are not enough polling places, not enough hours for polls to be open, or there needs to be more early voting.

Not everyone has that amount of time to stand in line...they have to work.

There's no excuse for a lack of polling places.

I live by a small town called Noel, it takes me about five minutes to vote.

Of course it isn't right. No one really believes it is.

The Party Of Contradiction strikes again....hahaha
So you hate the idea of American Citizens waiting in line behind fellow citizens to vote yet you have no problem with Americans waiting for hours behind illegals in an Emergency Room for emergency care?
Does that really seem reasonable to you?

This is known as an Argumentum ad hominem .

 

[Dragonlady]

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

I noticed in Metro Detroit it takes 20 minutes and they have plenty of machines and in the city they have backed up lines. Even I would go home if it took 2 hours to vote. Even I might decide not to even bother. Luckily we have a Democratic governor now in MI so if this happens, we only have ourselves to blame.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

No. That is a clear indication that their either are not enough polling places, not enough hours for polls to be open, or there needs to be more early voting.

Not everyone has that amount of time to stand in line...they have to work.

There's no excuse for a lack of polling places.

I live by a small town called Noel, it takes me about five minutes to vote.

Of course it isn't right. No one really believes it is.

The Party Of Contradiction strikes again....hahaha
So you hate the idea of American Citizens waiting in line behind fellow citizens to vote yet you have no problem with Americans waiting for hours behind illegals in an Emergency Room for emergency care?
Does that really seem reasonable to you?

One of these things is NOT like the other.

What does a public health crisis have to do with the electoral process? The answer is nothing. It's just another racist attack on illegals to deflect from the illegal and unConstitutional attempts of the Republican Party to suppress the vote in poor areas.

Ignorance and racism is what makes you a "Broke Loser", and will ensure that you will always be a "Broker Loser".

 

[Flash]

I think the real question is "is it right to let stupid worthless welfare queens, racist looting Blacks and Illeglas to vote".

 

[Dogbiscuit]

What does a public health crisis have to do with the electoral process?

It depends on if a public health crisis was effecting a specific geographical area, hence certain states.
Currently that doesnt seem to be the case, but your statement is essentially incorrect.

 

[sartre play]

Will do as always have, vote in person, hope my town will count every vote & uphold their motto a safe place to live.

 

[sartre play]

Because you can no longer count on a high level of honesty, one side says voter fraud rampant, other side says voter suppression rampant. Just vote.

 

[sealybobo]

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

I noticed in Metro Detroit it takes 20 minutes and they have plenty of machines and in the city they have backed up lines. Even I would go home if it took 2 hours to vote. Even I might decide not to even bother. Luckily we have a Democratic governor now in MI so if this happens, we only have ourselves to blame.

Or should something be done about that so that it's made as quick, easy and efficient as possible?

Give your reasons for your answer.

No. That is a clear indication that their either are not enough polling places, not enough hours for polls to be open, or there needs to be more early voting.

Not everyone has that amount of time to stand in line...they have to work.

There's no excuse for a lack of polling places.

I live by a small town called Noel, it takes me about five minutes to vote.

Of course it isn't right. No one really believes it is.

The Party Of Contradiction strikes again....hahaha
So you hate the idea of American Citizens waiting in line behind fellow citizens to vote yet you have no problem with Americans waiting for hours behind illegals in an Emergency Room for emergency care?
Does that really seem reasonable to you?

One of these things is NOT like the other.

What does a public health crisis have to do with the electoral process? The answer is nothing. It's just another racist attack on illegals to deflect from the illegal and unConstitutional attempts of the Republican Party to suppress the vote in poor areas.

Ignorance and racism is what makes you a "Broke Loser", and will ensure that you will always be a "Broker Loser".

And even if he isn't broke he'll still be a loser and bad person. Selfish, liar, racist (probably), greedy, ignorant.

I'm so proud of rich Democrats. Apparently they don't have the greedy gene. They understand we are all in this together and they don't mind paying a bit more in taxes to make life better for the poor and middle class.

Unfortunately the GOP is controlled by corporate rich. All corporations care about is maximizing profits. Like Walmart. Do the owners need to be so rich? Can't give all their employees a $5 an hour raise?

According to Bloomberg's Billionaires Index, the Walmart heirs now have a combined wealth of $163.2 billion, which is more than Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett. In fact, they are worth more than $70 billion more than the second-richest family in the United States, the Kochs.

The Kochs? Another rich greedy family.

Walmart employs 1.5 million people. Give them $63 billion and the Walton's still have $100 billion. Mind blowing.

It's a question we used to ask ourselves

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

At what point does great wealth held in a few hands actually harm democracy, threatening to turn a democratic republic into an oligarchy? It's a debate we haven't had freely and openly in this nation for nearly a century, and last week, by voting to end the Estate Tax, House Republicans tried to...

www.commondreams.org