The Killing Of The United States of America

colfax_m

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
24,414
Reaction score
8,034
Points
465
If they were secure Trump would be president. Next.
I get it. You wanted Trump to win. You really believed he would. But he didn’t. You don’t have to invest excuses for him.
Trump did win. He was defrauded. They are not excuses they are the truth.
It’s an excuse. You decided Trump was going to win. You excluded all other possibilities. Then when he lost, you searched for a reason to believe what you wanted to believe.

It’s like if I declared that KC was going to win the super bowl a week before it occurred. Then when they lost, I said it was only because of cheating. You’d question whether I was fairly accusing them because I had decided the outcome even before it occurred.
I did not search the evidence of fraud was all over until it was censored. Why would they censor what supposedly is a lie? Guilt has been admitted in countless ways. Censorship is just one of them.
The evidence came from people similarly conditioned to believe it existed. Trump was saying this the whole time.

Paraphrasing, he said he’d only lose if there was fraud. Now how could he know that before the election? No votes were counted but he was telling people he had already won.

You call censorship, other people call stopping misinformation. I wouldn’t want to be part of perpetuating your lies either.
The evidence came from the states own data. The evidence came from concerned citizens. The evidence came from cardboard being put over windows. The evidence came from stopping the count in states at about the same time only to resume without observers.
The “concerned citizens” were conditioned to believe fraud was occurring. They were told repeatedly to expect it. So when some idiot sees a camera crew wheeling in their equipment, they go straight to Facebook claiming that they were bringing in fake ballots in the middle of the night. Did they see any ballots? No. They saw a suitcase with camera equipment but they assumed it was ballots because that’s what they were told was going to happen. They wanted it to happen. They needed it to happen.

This happened over and over and over again.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: cnm

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
70,421
Reaction score
18,307
Points
2,290
I support HR1. Republicans are dead set on maintaining their grip on power by denying the people the right to vote.
Bull. What we want to is insure politically ignorant people, who mostly vote Democrat don't vote, and not by force, but by not having the mailman walk up to their doorstep with a ballot. If anybody wants to vote, fine. Do it the way we've been doing it for hundreds of years.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
19,995
Reaction score
3,812
Points
290
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.
One thing Democrats and Republicans both understand: The Democrats have no chance at winning in a fair and traditional election system the way our founders designed. With Covid they discovered a way to get the more stupid and politically ignorant to vote; more Obama phone and Obama money ladies. Of course they are going to try and make their plot mandatory in all states.
We know that is not true. Republicans lost a free and fair election in 2020. You have no clue of what the founding fathers would think. Vote by mail has been around since the Civil War. Trump supporters like you are the ones who are stupid and ignorant. That is why you are Trump supporters. Voting is enshrined in the Constiturion. The fesderal government had to step in to stop segregation. They must step in to stop the disenfranchisement of voters.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
70,421
Reaction score
18,307
Points
2,290
Registering people to vote is a huge problem for the Republican Party in this country.
As usual for a leftist, twist my words around to fit what you would have liked me to say.
 
  • Love
Reactions: cnm

cnm

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
33,063
Reaction score
17,144
Points
2,905
Location
Aotearoa
Poor little commie, you're displaying your ignorance again. Democrats were responsible for Jim Crow laws, the rest of your post is full of it.
Southern Krackers were responsible for Jim Crow, much as their descendents are now attempting the modern version - voter restriction - under the Republican label.

Do you really think everyone can't see exactly what's happening?
 
Last edited:

cnm

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
33,063
Reaction score
17,144
Points
2,905
Location
Aotearoa
The evidence came from the states own data. The evidence came from concerned citizens. The evidence came from cardboard being put over windows. The evidence came from stopping the count in states at about the same time only to resume without observers.
Yeah, right.
The evidence the LOTUS's lawyers refused to present in court as they told the judges their cases were not about vote fraud.
 

colfax_m

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
24,414
Reaction score
8,034
Points
465
What we want to is insure politically ignorant people
Sure. We should also have questions on there like “was Obama born in the US”, “did Clinton kill Vince Foster”, “did Obama found ISIS”, “does the ACA have death panels”.

Political ignorance goes both ways. A person may know who the speaker is, but be extremely ignorant anyway.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: cnm
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,600
Reaction score
11,460
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
You mean a third American revolution. The second one occurred on 1/6. It failed. Miserably.


God you're stupid. That wasn't a revolution. If the second one comes, there will be no questions about what it is.

.
 

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
11,100
Reaction score
6,171
Points
1,050
If they were secure Trump would be president. Next.
I get it. You wanted Trump to win. You really believed he would. But he didn’t. You don’t have to invest excuses for him.
Trump did win. He was defrauded. They are not excuses they are the truth.
It’s an excuse. You decided Trump was going to win. You excluded all other possibilities. Then when he lost, you searched for a reason to believe what you wanted to believe.

It’s like if I declared that KC was going to win the super bowl a week before it occurred. Then when they lost, I said it was only because of cheating. You’d question whether I was fairly accusing them because I had decided the outcome even before it occurred.
I did not search the evidence of fraud was all over until it was censored. Why would they censor what supposedly is a lie? Guilt has been admitted in countless ways. Censorship is just one of them.
The evidence came from people similarly conditioned to believe it existed. Trump was saying this the whole time.

Paraphrasing, he said he’d only lose if there was fraud. Now how could he know that before the election? No votes were counted but he was telling people he had already won.

You call censorship, other people call stopping misinformation. I wouldn’t want to be part of perpetuating your lies either.
The evidence came from the states own data. The evidence came from concerned citizens. The evidence came from cardboard being put over windows. The evidence came from stopping the count in states at about the same time only to resume without observers.
The “concerned citizens” were conditioned to believe fraud was occurring. They were told repeatedly to expect it. So when some idiot sees a camera crew wheeling in their equipment, they go straight to Facebook claiming that they were bringing in fake ballots in the middle of the night. Did they see any ballots? No. They saw a suitcase with camera equipment but they assumed it was ballots because that’s what they were told was going to happen. They wanted it to happen. They needed it to happen.

This happened over and over and over again.
People were continually told Trump was a criminal and a traitor and 75 million voted for him. The number is actually higher than that. The spikes are so obvious. No candidate ever gets 94% of a vote drop. Show me another election where that happened.

1614808069588.png


Now find another like that in another presidential election.

1614808166290.png

Similar numbers from another presidential election. I'll wait.
 
Last edited:

White 6

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
6,973
Points
940
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Was wondering how long before the anti-democracy crowd would be bitching about HR-1. It will probably pass. Have you picked your next country yet? Bye.
They want to make DC a state along with other odd laws. Will never pass in the senate.
Nope. If you had read my long post where some air head, wanted me to respond to the right wing talking points post, slanted their way those to ignorant of lazy to read a piece of legislation, you would have seen my comment, saying I do not care about that section and would just as soon DC stay as it is. I am not much of a throw the baby with the bathwater. Never, ever saw a piece of legislation (especially one as complicated as that, thought most are nowadays) that I agreed with every single line. Overall, I still support the bill. It will be tweaked and edited before this is over in the Senate. It goes a long way to requiring securities and accountabilities, and conformance performance across the country in regards to Federal elections, that were complained about by both sides during the 2020, including paper backup that can be viewed by the voter and cross referenced to the electronic count to insure the worst fear (voting machine programming shenanigans) to not take place. It codifies early voting times that is being curtailed in state legislatures, in the effort to keep the opposition party from voting. It makes registering to vote simpler and quicker for all that have trouble standing in line at some location (often DMV) to register or make changes to registration and make the voting database more accessible to states cross referencing voters that might try to register in more than one place. the bill does a host of thing and contribute to greater participation of the populous in voting, which is the basis of our democratically elected representative form of constitutional governance.
So how do you think it will pass when the resolution has DC as a state in it?
Don't know. Just as soon it got stripped in the Senate, as it is not the primary focus of the bill. I prefer clean legislation that stays on topic, just as I prefer clean spending bills that stay on topic, as we all do, but do not get very often anymore. Not sure we ever have, but I didn't start reading entire pieces of legislation until a few years ago, as I too was to lazy to do more than just bitch about what some partisan writer picked out as the most important to make a case for or against based on their political preferences.
Is it the fault of the partisanship of a writer to question why a bill for COVID relief for the American people includes millions of dollars to Ivy League Universities with endowments of billions?

Are you concerned that other reporters and writers dont see an issue with that?

Or is it the "Faux News" organization who is the problem.
You do know you are on the wrong thread, right? HR-1 is about voting, not covid. That last paragraph refers to some dumb ass Representative thinking the bill on securing and codifying voting federal elections should also have statehood for DC. Support it if you like. It is just not an issue I care about and is not associated with voting, voting rights or voting laws. Always dishonest when some jerk tacks on a unrelated matter, standard legislation or spending. Often it is either a tag along to something they will pass or a poison pill to kill good legislation, but always a bad idea in my opinion, as I prefer clean legislation.
My error.
I did not have the patience to read your, as you put it, long post. Not your fault. My lack of free time. I misunderstood the topic and I made an ass of myself.
Happened before and will happen again. But I learn from it every time.

I am sorry I wasted your time.
Nah. It is a long ass post. Worse than that, the post only goes half way through that long ass piece of legislation. There is stuff in there to like and dislike for everybody.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
19,995
Reaction score
3,812
Points
290
I support HR1. Republicans are dead set on maintaining their grip on power by denying the people the right to vote.
Bull. What we want to is insure politically ignorant people, who mostly vote Democrat don't vote, and not by force, but by not having the mailman walk up to their doorstep with a ballot. If anybody wants to vote, fine. Do it the way we've been doing it for hundreds of years.
You are bull. Ignorant people voted for Trump. Maybe you think we should be using traditional transportation. Horses. People have been voting by mail for hundreds of years.
 

colfax_m

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
24,414
Reaction score
8,034
Points
465
If they were secure Trump would be president. Next.
I get it. You wanted Trump to win. You really believed he would. But he didn’t. You don’t have to invest excuses for him.
Trump did win. He was defrauded. They are not excuses they are the truth.
It’s an excuse. You decided Trump was going to win. You excluded all other possibilities. Then when he lost, you searched for a reason to believe what you wanted to believe.

It’s like if I declared that KC was going to win the super bowl a week before it occurred. Then when they lost, I said it was only because of cheating. You’d question whether I was fairly accusing them because I had decided the outcome even before it occurred.
I did not search the evidence of fraud was all over until it was censored. Why would they censor what supposedly is a lie? Guilt has been admitted in countless ways. Censorship is just one of them.
The evidence came from people similarly conditioned to believe it existed. Trump was saying this the whole time.

Paraphrasing, he said he’d only lose if there was fraud. Now how could he know that before the election? No votes were counted but he was telling people he had already won.

You call censorship, other people call stopping misinformation. I wouldn’t want to be part of perpetuating your lies either.
The evidence came from the states own data. The evidence came from concerned citizens. The evidence came from cardboard being put over windows. The evidence came from stopping the count in states at about the same time only to resume without observers.
The “concerned citizens” were conditioned to believe fraud was occurring. They were told repeatedly to expect it. So when some idiot sees a camera crew wheeling in their equipment, they go straight to Facebook claiming that they were bringing in fake ballots in the middle of the night. Did they see any ballots? No. They saw a suitcase with camera equipment but they assumed it was ballots because that’s what they were told was going to happen. They wanted it to happen. They needed it to happen.

This happened over and over and over again.
People were continually told Trump was a criminal and a traitor and 75 million voted for him. The number is actually higher than that. The spikes are so obvious. No candidate ever gets 94% of a vote drop. Show me another election where that happened.
You made the claim. Aren’t you going to substantiate it?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,390
Reaction score
28,650
Points
2,180
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Was wondering how long before the anti-democracy crowd would be bitching about HR-1. It will probably pass. Have you picked your next country yet? Bye.
They want to make DC a state along with other odd laws. Will never pass in the senate.
Nope. If you had read my long post where some air head, wanted me to respond to the right wing talking points post, slanted their way those to ignorant of lazy to read a piece of legislation, you would have seen my comment, saying I do not care about that section and would just as soon DC stay as it is. I am not much of a throw the baby with the bathwater. Never, ever saw a piece of legislation (especially one as complicated as that, thought most are nowadays) that I agreed with every single line. Overall, I still support the bill. It will be tweaked and edited before this is over in the Senate. It goes a long way to requiring securities and accountabilities, and conformance performance across the country in regards to Federal elections, that were complained about by both sides during the 2020, including paper backup that can be viewed by the voter and cross referenced to the electronic count to insure the worst fear (voting machine programming shenanigans) to not take place. It codifies early voting times that is being curtailed in state legislatures, in the effort to keep the opposition party from voting. It makes registering to vote simpler and quicker for all that have trouble standing in line at some location (often DMV) to register or make changes to registration and make the voting database more accessible to states cross referencing voters that might try to register in more than one place. the bill does a host of thing and contribute to greater participation of the populous in voting, which is the basis of our democratically elected representative form of constitutional governance.
So how do you think it will pass when the resolution has DC as a state in it?
Don't know. Just as soon it got stripped in the Senate, as it is not the primary focus of the bill. I prefer clean legislation that stays on topic, just as I prefer clean spending bills that stay on topic, as we all do, but do not get very often anymore. Not sure we ever have, but I didn't start reading entire pieces of legislation until a few years ago, as I too was to lazy to do more than just bitch about what some partisan writer picked out as the most important to make a case for or against based on their political preferences.
Is it the fault of the partisanship of a writer to question why a bill for COVID relief for the American people includes millions of dollars to Ivy League Universities with endowments of billions?

Are you concerned that other reporters and writers dont see an issue with that?

Or is it the "Faux News" organization who is the problem.
You do know you are on the wrong thread, right? HR-1 is about voting, not covid. That last paragraph refers to some dumb ass Representative thinking the bill on securing and codifying voting federal elections should also have statehood for DC. Support it if you like. It is just not an issue I care about and is not associated with voting, voting rights or voting laws. Always dishonest when some jerk tacks on a unrelated matter, standard legislation or spending. Often it is either a tag along to something they will pass or a poison pill to kill good legislation, but always a bad idea in my opinion, as I prefer clean legislation.
My error.
I did not have the patience to read your, as you put it, long post. Not your fault. My lack of free time. I misunderstood the topic and I made an ass of myself.
Happened before and will happen again. But I learn from it every time.

I am sorry I wasted your time.
Nah. It is a long ass post. Worse than that, the post only goes half way through that long ass piece of legislation. There is stuff in there to like and dislike for everybody.
Name one thing any Republican would like.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
19,995
Reaction score
3,812
Points
290
I am ready for the next revolution. I will gleefully enjoy bathing in the blood and guts of my enemies.

Dead commie fucks or Valhalla. I am prepared to die. The leftist commies are not.

We should make them into our slaves.
Instead of blood and guts, it's time we separate the US into two nations: one side for conservatives, and the other side for liberals. We would divide the country from north to south; from the Dakota's to Texas, have a national vote to decide who gets what half of the country, and we each have our own laws and Constitution.

My martial arts teacher taught me an old Chinese proverb many years ago: Only use violence for self-defense or when mind too weak to solve problem. We can solve our differences using our minds instead of death.
Actually you would have to divide it into conservatives and white supremacists. Conservatism in the Republican Party does not exist. Ronald Reagan would never be a part of the Trump Republican Party.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
19,995
Reaction score
3,812
Points
290
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
It won’t pass

Who do you think will stop it?

.
Sane people in the Senate.
The Republican Party in the Senate is insane as well.
 

Likkmee

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
12,182
Reaction score
3,564
Points
215
Location
Second World
I support HR1. Republicans are dead set on maintaining their grip on power by denying the people the right to vote.
Bull. What we want to is insure politically ignorant people, who mostly vote Democrat don't vote, and not by force, but by not having the mailman walk up to their doorstep with a ballot. If anybody wants to vote, fine. Do it the way we've been doing it for hundreds of years.
when I was a boy I had to ride a horse uphill both waze to the voting station.
 

Likkmee

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
12,182
Reaction score
3,564
Points
215
Location
Second World
One specific law, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, forced individuals and local governments in non-slave states to participate in capturing escaped slaves and returning them to their owners, and specifically denied those captured people the right to any sort of trial or hearing prior to be shipped back South. It was a duly-enacted law, "defining the process in legislation", as you smugly put it. Would you consider that due process?
In the US? Absolutely. And many people received it. That they received due process is shown as it was not able to be contested in law.

Do you know anything about the history of your country?
Sure,the military was abolished in 1948
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
75,858
Reaction score
14,836
Points
2,210
anyone to stupid to answer those has no business voting,,,
How about people too stupid to spell "too" are not allowed to vote?
mine is a product of public education not lack of any education,,,

I am sure youre one of those people that cant have a verbal conversation because you dont know if they are spelling correctly or using proper quotations,,,
Uh, no, public education teaches the circumstances required to utilize the spelling, "too." That you don't know when to apply it is solely your fault, not anyone else's. But it figures you blame others for your own limitations.

so I got this right,, youre complaining I put one O where there should be two of them???


you need to find another hobby,,,
No, I was not complaining. I was asking you if that should be a disqualifying factor to prevent folks from being allowed to vote. It was your idea to disqualify voters based on a literacy test. I'm just wondering who gets to decide such a test?
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
75,858
Reaction score
14,836
Points
2,210
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
You mean a third American revolution. The second one occurred on 1/6. It failed. Miserably.

Vandalism is not a revolution. What happened in CHAZ was closer to one. Are you ever not an OCD ridden fool?
LOL

Tell it to the revolutionaries....

 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
27,985
Reaction score
13,461
Points
1,100
anyone to stupid to answer those has no business voting,,,
How about people too stupid to spell "too" are not allowed to vote?
mine is a product of public education not lack of any education,,,

I am sure youre one of those people that cant have a verbal conversation because you dont know if they are spelling correctly or using proper quotations,,,
Uh, no, public education teaches the circumstances required to utilize the spelling, "too." That you don't know when to apply it is solely your fault, not anyone else's. But it figures you blame others for your own limitations.

so I got this right,, youre complaining I put one O where there should be two of them???


you need to find another hobby,,,
No, I was not complaining. I was asking you if that should be a disqualifying factor to prevent folks from being allowed to vote. It was your idea to disqualify voters based on a literacy test. I'm just wondering who gets to decide such a test?
if you think using one O when there should be two O's then you should pass a law,,,

you might try masturbation as a hobby,, I hear it has a great success rate
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top