The Killing Of The United States of America

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
18,486
Points
2,290
This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government. Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access and …
And...... it will draw more stupid and politically ignorant people to vote, who always vote Democrat.
 

surada

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
8,795
Reaction score
4,514
Points
893
This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government. Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access and …
And...... it will draw more stupid and politically ignorant people to vote, who always vote Democrat.
Right, Ray... only people as smart as you should be allowed to vote.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,755
Reaction score
11,592
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
well here is the answer to my question i asked earlier,here are the 13 states that have joined sd texas and florida with the no mask mandate.

we just need to find away to get rid of the evil dems in power like in california and new york so the rest of the states can follow them.


one thing i am skeptical about on your governor of tx oktexas is he says the vaccine is being distributed. i hope he is just saying that to be politically correct and not really distributing that poison otherwise he is a traiter.

I posted a link to the States in an edit in my reply to you. But there is no evidence that the vaccine is plosion otherwise I wouldn't have taken it.

.
are you SURE gates did not endorce it? if gates endorces it as i see all over the media all the time,thats signing your death warrent

I don't care who may or may not have endorsed it.

.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,755
Reaction score
11,592
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
That's because you don't regard them as Americans.
Many that cast votes aren't. But you commies don't care about that do you, otherwise you wouldn't object to proof of citizenship to vote.
It's true I'd object to proving my citizenship each time I voted. Last time, I gave my name and address, was marked off the roll, was given my ballots. That's the way I like it.

Kewl, maybe an illegal alien Trump supporter will present themselves as you next time and they'll give them your ballots.

.
 

Utilitarian

co-Cain Manager
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
1,203
Reaction score
596
Points
198
Location
NC
Trump has attacked 17 incumbent Republicans and the chief strategist for the GOP, Karl Rove. He has attacked the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Now he wants the GOP to stop using his name.

CNN reported last week that Trump is weighing the creation of a super PAC as he seeks to assert his authority over the Republican Party and expand his post-presidential political operation.

Creating a super PAC would allow Trump to raise unlimited amounts of money from virtually any source while facing no limits on spending. The former President also made several changes last week to his growing fundraising apparatus.

Trump lacked the intelligence, experience, persona, and leadership qualities to be President. In addition he has mental quirks that do not comply with leadership such as extreme narcissism and vindictiveness. He is sent careening off track by the merest slight and seeks revenge nearly every time.

These are extremely poor qualities for a leader to have. Yet he is extremely popular, has political clout and is able to amass millions of dollars in contributions.

Where is that money coming from?

Why is it his supporters lack the ability to communicate, including his fans in Congress?

Many have long suspected that -- possibly with Russia's help as in election 2016 redux --there is a powerful consortium that wants Trump in a leadership role.

Why? So they can control him, and, by virtue of that control, sharply influence matters within the United States.

With Trump's enormous ego, he would be extremely easy to manipulate as many rulers have done already, rulers like Putin, Kim, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Turkey's Erdoğan, as well as others.

Does this consortium exist? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Under the circumstances, though, the theory is logical.
I wonder if this "consortium" is similar to the one that spent a lot of money and changed a lot of rules to kick Trump out. We already know about the "consortium" that "fortified our democracy."
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,755
Reaction score
11,592
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Trump has attacked 17 incumbent Republicans and the chief strategist for the GOP, Karl Rove. He has attacked the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Now he wants the GOP to stop using his name.

CNN reported last week that Trump is weighing the creation of a super PAC as he seeks to assert his authority over the Republican Party and expand his post-presidential political operation.

Creating a super PAC would allow Trump to raise unlimited amounts of money from virtually any source while facing no limits on spending. The former President also made several changes last week to his growing fundraising apparatus.

Trump lacked the intelligence, experience, persona, and leadership qualities to be President. In addition he has mental quirks that do not comply with leadership such as extreme narcissism and vindictiveness. He is sent careening off track by the merest slight and seeks revenge nearly every time.

These are extremely poor qualities for a leader to have. Yet he is extremely popular, has political clout and is able to amass millions of dollars in contributions.

Where is that money coming from?

Why is it his supporters lack the ability to communicate, including his fans in Congress?

Many have long suspected that -- possibly with Russia's help as in election 2016 redux --there is a powerful consortium that wants Trump in a leadership role.

Why? So they can control him, and, by virtue of that control, sharply influence matters within the United States.

With Trump's enormous ego, he would be extremely easy to manipulate as many rulers have done already, rulers like Putin, Kim, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Turkey's Erdoğan, as well as others.

Does this consortium exist? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Under the circumstances, though, the theory is logical.

OH NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The debunked collusion delusion rears it's ugly head again. Absolute proof that Trump is still living rent free in your head. LMFAO

.
 
Last edited:
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,755
Reaction score
11,592
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.


.
H.R.1 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): For the People Act of ...
This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government. Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access and …

And is the typical commie lie. As usual it will accomplish the exact opposite of its stated intent. Of course that's by design, makes you wonder how many times they focus grouped that title.

.
 

surada

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
8,795
Reaction score
4,514
Points
893
This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government. Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access and …
And...... it will draw more stupid and politically ignorant people to vote, who always vote Democrat.
Why aren't you working to register first time voters?
 

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
100,321
Reaction score
29,405
Points
2,220
Location
Tested Negative For COVID-19
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.


.
Democrats are using this bill to legalize voter fraud.
They came up with this POS bill in 2019...but couldn't get it thru congress.....now they're trying to trick everyone into thinking it's the COVID relief bill.

First they abused our election laws.....and now they're claiming that this is gonna fix what they did.
So really they are the criminals that are trying to legalize their own crimes. It's no small wonder why they're scared enough to build a wall around Washington to protect them from us.

safe_image.php.jpg
 
Last edited:

initforme

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
15,249
Reaction score
2,109
Points
265
Without diverse thinking the country is much weaker. The fact is that 99 percent of voters aren't too worried about things because they are too busy working and don't have extra time to care. With this incredible workforce we have america is in great shape.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
18,486
Points
2,290
Why aren't you working to register first time voters?
Why should I? You shouldn't have to convince anybody to vote. If you want to vote, do what I did, go downtown, and register to vote. If you're too lazy to do that, then you shouldn't be voting.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
20,132
Reaction score
3,937
Points
290
It doesn't need to.

If new rule is made, that targets the voting habits of a particular group which doesn't tend to vote for the party of the rule makers, in such a way that it inhibits their ability to vote then yes, it has the potential to disenfranchise them. You are aiming to make it more difficult for a particular group. With Sunday voting, for example - there is absolutely no fraud-related explanation to it. It is one of many small changes that cumulatively impact specific voting groups and have no relationship to fraud.

Spin it any way your masters tell you to, but it ain't going to change what it is.
It's not targeting any group of voters. But our election system should not be catering to those people either. Hey, I would like it if they held elections at bars, and so would a lot of people including the bar owners, but that doesn't mean we need to cater to the drunks, does it?

Ok..so, you are advocating that only a select elite group of people should be able to vote - one, presumably that meets your standard of political groupthink? The Republicans are well on their way to attempt to make this a one-party system by putting up barriers to voting. It's the only way they can win.
I never said that. What I did say is that we need to keep the election system the way it is, or better yet, the way it was years ago. One day voting, everybody shows up that day. Everybody who is very interested in elections gets to vote no matter which party they support, and we would end up with a much better mix of representatives instead of electing a show clown with dementia. The people who don't understand what they are even voting on will not take the effort or time to vote which would be fantastic. If those people are Democrats, fine. If they are Republicans, that's fine too. But how can you tell me that it's better to have a lower form of electorate than a higher knowledgeable electorate? Please explain that one.

Now if you are at least partly honest, you'd admit that this is the reason Democrats want to make it so easy to vote; to get a lower quality electorate voting so they vote for them.

You've only confirmed that the goal is to make it harder for people who tend to vote Democrat, to vote. You call them idiots.

Are they any more idiotic then the "white trash, bible thumping, rednecks" (to use the common slurs directed at them) who voted for Trump? Should their vote be limited because they are idiots? Or is the vote only for those idiots willing to run an electoral obstacle course in order to vote? (not always easy for people who have multiple jobs and a family to care for).
How would it be an obstacle course to vote? We've been doing it that way since the founding of our country. Never a problem until Democrats realized who the stupid and uninformed mostly vote for. If those bible thumping rednecks don't know or care much about politics, they won't show up either, now will they?

It's like if somebody stopped over my house and had a DVD movie with them. I don't care much for movies, but as long as it's there, I'll watch it. Now if somebody asked me if I want to get dressed up, get my coat on, and freeze halfway to the theater, forget about it. I don't care all that much for movies or plays so it's simply not worth the time or effort on my part. I'd sooner stay home.
Yes it is targeting voters. There has to be a reason for putting a pro0vision in place. There is no reason for putting a provision in place to ban voting on Sunday other than to prevent churches from helping people to vote. That is exactly what black churches has done. We should be catering to voters. We should be making it easier for people to vote.

This may surprise you but the population of the United States has increased. That means that one day voting is no longer viable. Also many people have unusual working hours. That means the standard hours may no longer work. We should be helping people to vote
by accomodating people who have unusual challenges in voting.

Who is the moron? In 2016, we elected a fascist moron as president. You are the fascist moron. You don't get to decide who is worthy to vote or not. You clearly are not the brightest bulb as you regurgitate Trump's lies. Vote by mail has been used since the civil war so it has a long tradition.
It doesn't need to.

If new rule is made, that targets the voting habits of a particular group which doesn't tend to vote for the party of the rule makers, in such a way that it inhibits their ability to vote then yes, it has the potential to disenfranchise them. You are aiming to make it more difficult for a particular group. With Sunday voting, for example - there is absolutely no fraud-related explanation to it. It is one of many small changes that cumulatively impact specific voting groups and have no relationship to fraud.

Spin it any way your masters tell you to, but it ain't going to change what it is.
It's not targeting any group of voters. But our election system should not be catering to those people either. Hey, I would like it if they held elections at bars, and so would a lot of people including the bar owners, but that doesn't mean we need to cater to the drunks, does it?

Ok..so, you are advocating that only a select elite group of people should be able to vote - one, presumably that meets your standard of political groupthink? The Republicans are well on their way to attempt to make this a one-party system by putting up barriers to voting. It's the only way they can win.
I never said that. What I did say is that we need to keep the election system the way it is, or better yet, the way it was years ago. One day voting, everybody shows up that day. Everybody who is very interested in elections gets to vote no matter which party they support, and we would end up with a much better mix of representatives instead of electing a show clown with dementia. The people who don't understand what they are even voting on will not take the effort or time to vote which would be fantastic. If those people are Democrats, fine. If they are Republicans, that's fine too. But how can you tell me that it's better to have a lower form of electorate than a higher knowledgeable electorate? Please explain that one.

Now if you are at least partly honest, you'd admit that this is the reason Democrats want to make it so easy to vote; to get a lower quality electorate voting so they vote for them.

You've only confirmed that the goal is to make it harder for people who tend to vote Democrat, to vote. You call them idiots.

Are they any more idiotic then the "white trash, bible thumping, rednecks" (to use the common slurs directed at them) who voted for Trump? Should their vote be limited because they are idiots? Or is the vote only for those idiots willing to run an electoral obstacle course in order to vote? (not always easy for people who have multiple jobs and a family to care for).
How would it be an obstacle course to vote? We've been doing it that way since the founding of our country. Never a problem until Democrats realized who the stupid and uninformed mostly vote for. If those bible thumping rednecks don't know or care much about politics, they won't show up either, now will they?

It's like if somebody stopped over my house and had a DVD movie with them. I don't care much for movies, but as long as it's there, I'll watch it. Now if somebody asked me if I want to get dressed up, get my coat on, and freeze halfway to the theater, forget about it. I don't care all that much for movies or plays so it's simply not worth the time or effort on my part. I'd sooner stay home.
 

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
100,321
Reaction score
29,405
Points
2,220
Location
Tested Negative For COVID-19
This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government. Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access and …
And...... it will draw more stupid and politically ignorant people to vote, who always vote Democrat.
Why aren't you working to register first time voters?
Don't you mean fabricating fake voter registrations?
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
18,486
Points
2,290
Right, Ray... only people as smart as you should be allowed to vote.
I didn't say that. Why do you leftists lie so much?

What I'm saying is that people who won't take the time or effort to vote obviously don't care. The reason they don't care is they don't pay any attention to politics. If you don't pay attention to what's going on in our political world, then you don't know much about it either.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
20,132
Reaction score
3,937
Points
290
Mail in voting has been in place for humdreds of years as well.
Only for those who didn't have the ability to vote in person. It was only the last couple of decades where we started to cater the the lowlife lazy people.
You are a lowlife who wants to make it harder to vote just so morons like you can retain your power. No one should have to wait in line for hours to vote. This lazy shit you push is just a new form of voter suppression.
 

surada

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
8,795
Reaction score
4,514
Points
893
Right, Ray... only people as smart as you should be allowed to vote.
I didn't say that. Why do you leftists lie so much?

What I'm saying is that people who won't take the time or effort to vote obviously don't care. The reason they don't care is they don't pay any attention to politics. If you don't pay attention to what's going on in our political world, then you don't know much about it either.
You are assuming....

Lots of Americans don't have transportation.. Some use walkers or wheel chairs.. Some simply can't stand for 5-6 hours. Then there are women who are pregnant or have small children.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
20,132
Reaction score
3,937
Points
290
There was a record turnout because voters opposed Trump. Many stayed home in 2016 and as a result Trump won. Voters were determined to not make the same mistake in 2020. Trump has sold you fools tghe equivalent of a bridge. He is laughing at you suckers all the way to the bank.

There is no reason why people should wait for hours to vote when it is not necessary. That does not prove anything. it shou;ld be a regular thingb as there is no reason why it should not be. The fact is that you are not honest. The fact is that as the baby boomers die, there will be fewer people to man polling places so mail in balloting could be a necessity.
Then what you are saying is that most of our country are stupid people. You'd have to be stupid to put somebody in office that spent 47 years in federal government, with dementia, with a dope head son under FBI investigation, that's been involved in shady deals and corruption as President.

There is only two possible reasons Biden could have won: mail-in voting to attract the lazy and politically stupid, or they did indeed rig the election.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
20,132
Reaction score
3,937
Points
290
There was a record turnout because voters opposed Trump. Many stayed home in 2016 and as a result Trump won. Voters were determined to not make the same mistake in 2020. Trump has sold you fools tghe equivalent of a bridge. He is laughing at you suckers all the way to the bank.

There is no reason why people should wait for hours to vote when it is not necessary. That does not prove anything. it shou;ld be a regular thingb as there is no reason why it should not be. The fact is that you are not honest. The fact is that as the baby boomers die, there will be fewer people to man polling places so mail in balloting could be a necessity.
Then what you are saying is that most of our country are stupid people. You'd have to be stupid to put somebody in office that spent 47 years in federal government, with dementia, with a dope head son under FBI investigation, that's been involved in shady deals and corruption as President.

There is only two possible reasons Biden could have won: mail-in voting to attract the lazy and politically stupid, or they did indeed rig the election.
You are saying that. That is typical of you. Anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. That shows you are the stupid one. There is no evidence that Biden has dementia nor was involved in any shady deals. Hunter Biden is not using drugs anymore. If Hunter Biden is a dope head then so was Rush Limbaugh who had to go through a drug treatment program.

There is a third reason for supporting mail-in balloting. To allow more people the opportunity to vote.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
70,719
Reaction score
18,486
Points
2,290
Yes it is targeting voters. There has to be a reason for putting a pro0vision in place. There is no reason for putting a provision in place to ban voting on Sunday other than to prevent churches from helping people to vote. That is exactly what black churches has done. We should be catering to voters. We should be making it easier for people to vote.

This may surprise you but the population of the United States has increased. That means that one day voting is no longer viable. Also many people have unusual working hours. That means the standard hours may no longer work. We should be helping people to vote
by accomodating people who have unusual challenges in voting.

Who is the moron? In 2016, we elected a fascist moron as president. You are the fascist moron. You don't get to decide who is worthy to vote or not. You clearly are not the brightest bulb as you regurgitate Trump's lies. Vote by mail has been used since the civil war so it has a long tradition.
Mail-in voting was used by solders, not lowlife welfare types so Democrats could get more votes. The law is your employer must allow you time to vote, so don't give me this working hours bullshit.

Look, just be honest, even if only one time in your life. The only reason the commies want to destroy our election system is because it benefits them. The more stupid people voting, the more power they have politically.

The last election had record turnout of voters. They voted for a guy with dementia, who's son was under FBI investigation that the candidate was associated with, who worked in government 47 years and accomplished nothing, who said he was going to increase the cost of our fuel, make it difficult to impossible for law abiding citizens to get guns, who will tax our job creators when we need them the most, who promised to bring back Commie Care with it's fines that penalized the most financially unfortunate Americans, and people voted for him in record numbers.

From the outside looking in, there is only one explanation for this: American voters are completely stupid. WTF would you vote for such an incompetent boob like this? Even his own party is trying to strip him of is sole ability to launch nukes because he's so feeble minded, they don't even trust him.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top