Forensic Audit in Maricopa County, AZ

Mr. Deez said:
I'm glad you're not saying no, and I agree that he acted with principle. However, you overstate the case. First, we weren't close to losing the US republic. Second, the acts of red states aren't making it easier to overthrow the republic. Third, the Democrats aren't doing anything that would make it harder. (In fact, they rejected efforts to do so.)
Click to expand...
The right has made efforts to primary or replace GOP state officials who stood up to the "stop the steal" fools. They will be one step closer to allowing someone like Ron Johnson (who said on hidden camera that the election wasn't stolen a few months later) try to hand deliver alternate electors. Had the joint session done what they were trying the Republic would have been gone. They now are closer to getting it done.
 
OUBubba said:
The right has made efforts to primary or replace GOP state officials who stood up to the "stop the steal" fools. They will be one step closer to allowing someone like Ron Johnson (who said on hidden camera that the election wasn't stolen a few months later) try to hand deliver alternate electors
Click to expand...

Were the Democrats who said the '00, '04, and '16 elections were stolen or objected to the electoral count threats to the republic?

OUBubba said:
Had the joint session done what they were trying the Republic would have been gone. They now are closer to getting it done.
Click to expand...

Had my grandmother had balls, she would have been my grandfather. The same thing could have been said about the joint sessions in '00, '04, and '16. Nobody's closer to getting it done. And if that's your real concern, why are you all opposing reforming the Electoral Count Act, which actually would make a it difference?
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
Were the Democrats who said the '00, '04, and '16 elections were stolen or objected to the electoral count threats to the republic?



Had my grandmother had balls, she would have been my grandfather. The same thing could have been said about the joint sessions in '00, '04, and '16. Nobody's closer to getting it done. And if that's your real concern, why are you all opposing reforming the Electoral Count Act, which actually would make a it difference?
Click to expand...
They are way closer.

First, Al Gore had some level of a reasonable case when compared to Drumpf.
Second, Al Gore conceded and worked gracefully with Bush. Online Speech Bank: Al Gore - 2000 Presidential Concession Speech
Third, anyone who tries to overturn an election past the point of recounts and reasonable protests are a threat to our government. If you really think that this was no different than then you're not paying attention. The threats have to rise to the level of a majority before it's an actual threat. However,
A. There was a clear plan that was in the works.
B. The plan included getting the VP out of the way.
C. The plan included Chuck Grassley overseeing the counting of electors because "we don't expect him [Pence] to be there".
D. See my signature.
 
OUBubba said:
They are way closer.

First, Al Gore had some level of a reasonable case when compared to Drumpf.
Second, Al Gore conceded and worked gracefully with Bush. Online Speech Bank: Al Gore - 2000 Presidential Concession Speech
Third, anyone who tries to overturn an election past the point of recounts and reasonable protests are a threat to our government. If you really think that this was no different than then you're not paying attention. The threats have to rise to the level of a majority before it's an actual threat. However,
A. There was a clear plan that was in the works.
B. The plan included getting the VP out of the way.
C. The plan included Chuck Grassley overseeing the counting of electors because "we don't expect him [Pence] to be there".
D. See my signature.
Click to expand...

Two things. First, you're right that Gore was gracious and had more room to complain than Trump did. I'm not really talking about him. I'm talking about the members of Congress who resisted the electoral count.

Second, you're right that the '20 challenge was different but with respect to whom? If we're talking about Trump, then absolutely. However, you all are trying to take the smear far beyond him. After all, we already had an impeachment on this matter. This is about partisan gain for the coming election, and you're targeting and trying to smear people who had nothing to do with it beyond what some Democrats pulled in '00, '04, and '16. That's why I'm drawing the comparison.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Two things. First, you're right that Gore was gracious and had more room to complain than Trump did. I'm not really talking about him. I'm talking about the members of Congress who resisted the electoral count.

Second, you're right that the '20 challenge was different but with respect to whom? If we're talking about Trump, then absolutely. However, you all are trying to take the smear far beyond him. After all, we already had an impeachment on this matter. This is about partisan gain for the coming election, and you're targeting and trying to smear people who had nothing to do with it beyond what some Democrats pulled in '00, '04, and '16. That's why I'm drawing the comparison.
Click to expand...
We mostly agree. I lump everyone who's campaigning on "election integrity" and "stop the steal" now into the traitor batch. The idgets who did it before were performative - like that football coach fighting the prayer at the center of the field (That's like when my playlist goes from Charlie Daniels to Mark Ronson to Marty Robbins and back to George Michaels.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Two things. First, you're right that Gore was gracious and had more room to complain than Trump did. I'm not really talking about him. I'm talking about the members of Congress who resisted the electoral count.

Second, you're right that the '20 challenge was different but with respect to whom? If we're talking about Trump, then absolutely. However, you all are trying to take the smear far beyond him. After all, we already had an impeachment on this matter. This is about partisan gain for the coming election, and you're targeting and trying to smear people who had nothing to do with it beyond what some Democrats pulled in '00, '04, and '16. That's why I'm drawing the comparison.
Click to expand...
Was Gore an insurrectionist by pushing an unconstitutional recount and defending it at the SCOTUS? Was Trump one by asking for a peaceful protest at the capitol?
 
Horn6721 said:
So anyone calling for election integrity is a traitor?
Click to expand...
When "election integrity " is invoked by the Trumpsters it's code for"You should have counted votes like the Donald keeps his golf scores with lots of gimmies and mulligans...like the then President demanded of the Georgia Secretary of State.. . It's like in the Old South "state's rights" (a noble concept) was code for "mind your own bidness while we oppress our negros"
 
Last edited:
OUBubba said:
I lump everyone who's campaigning on "election integrity" and "stop the steal" now into the traitor batch.
Click to expand...

Right. You're doing your party's bidding and adopting their self-serving ******** logic (which isn't logical). You lump everyone who disagrees with your party's stance on voting procedure in with the dude with the bison-horned cap.

In the sane world, people can agree that the election wasn't stolen or certainly acknowledge that it hasn't been shown to have been stolen, condemn the January 6 riot, and even condemn Trump's acts and omissions that day but also think that requiring that people vote in person with an ID is a good idea and more secure than not doing so. You can have those policy goals and have nothing to do with the "stop the steal" people and certainly have nothing to do with the rioters or Trump.

And for the record, thinking the election was stolen doesn't make you a traitor either, and frankly, it's kinda dangerous to make that argument or even make the association. For example, even if I don't think he's right on the merits, @Garmel isn't a traitor for thinking things were rigged in Maricopa County. He might be slimy pervert at times, and I'd be reluctant to trust him around my female cat, but he's not a traitor. He's basically a patriotic American with a view different from my own.

People have believed individual elections were stolen as long as elections have existed. Sometimes they've been right. Usually they've been wrong. However, that belief (even when false) has never made one a traitor or been cause to doubt one's loyalty or patriotism. That's a new, self-serving, and fraudulent talking point, and it's one that will go away as soon as a Republican wins a close election and we start hearing Democrats claim the election was stolen as they have every time a Republican has won in the last 30 years.
 
Mr. Deez said:
People have believed individual elections were stolen as long as elections have existed. Sometimes they've been right. Usually they've been wrong. However, that belief (even when false) has never made one a traitor or been cause to doubt one's loyalty or patriotism.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Precisely how I feel and if I think there were shenanigans but no proof it doesn’t mean I do not (reluctantly) accept the results I just don’t believe them in my heart. Doesn’t mean I’m a traitor or, for that matter, a moron.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top