American Politics

Debate about anything going on in the world. Please remember, everyone has their own opinion.

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:38 pm

User avatar
LMAO
Member of the Year 2019
Member of the Year 2019
 
Posts: 9978
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:48 pm

Lol - adding up all the mysterious spikes in the vote count in PA... 600,000 were for Biden and 3,200 for Trump... :lol:

It's pretty clear listening today that election rigging did happen - whether it can be proven is another matter.
User avatar
jayramfootball
Member of the Year 2021
Member of the Year 2021
 
Posts: 27011
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:48 pm

Va-Va-Voom wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
Jedi wrote:It's not that it can't be done. It's that it shouldn't be done.

Why would you use taxpayer money to subsidize rich people going to college? If you're well off and you can afford to pay for college, you should. How about you deal with the 500k homeless people first?


What??

In your preference then the only people hurt are poor people, the very people who if smart enough deserve to go and who need the help.
Rich people are going regardless because they can afford it.

The whole purpose is to improve social mobility where as you wouldn't do fk all to help it, proving your just a sheep, slogan screamer who doesn't actually put any thought in.

What you should of said is if any students have parents with a wage of 100k total (depending on where they live) then they have to pay.

Your way is simply status quo leaving rich people with all the opportunity........well done liberal, very progressive.


Agree


Yeah.

And tbf, it's free public college and university.

Private colleges and universities, where the rich often go anyway, wouldn't be affected.

It'd let many public schools catch up to private schools. At most elite private institutions, they have need-based financial aid thanks to their massive endowments, so students with less well-off parents can attend without getting themselves into debt. A lot of public institutions don't have that luxury.
User avatar
LMAO
Member of the Year 2019
Member of the Year 2019
 
Posts: 9978
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:49 pm

jayramfootball wrote:Lol - adding up all the mysterious spikes in the vote count in PA... 600,000 were for Biden and 3,200 for Trump... :lol:

It's pretty clear listening today that election rigging did happen - whether it can be proven is another matter.


If it happened, then it should be easy to prove.
User avatar
LMAO
Member of the Year 2019
Member of the Year 2019
 
Posts: 9978
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:56 pm

LMAO wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:Lol - adding up all the mysterious spikes in the vote count in PA... 600,000 were for Biden and 3,200 for Trump... :lol:

It's pretty clear listening today that election rigging did happen - whether it can be proven is another matter.


If it happened, then it should be easy to prove.


Democrats are being accused of destroying evidence in the audit trail.
The details on the voting machines is very troubling.
I really don't know if ANY of what is being claimed is true or not - but my opinion having listened to the witnesses and also seen the data is that the election was indeed rigged. Just my opinion.
I get that Biden will have received a big advantage in mail in votes, but the count of those was actually done first - Biden took a huge lead in PA - then Trump hauled it all back with in person voting... before hundreds of thousands of votes appear in the night at almost 100% for Biden. In itself that seems extremely odd.
What is the explanation for spikes totalling 600k votes at nearly 100% Biden?
User avatar
jayramfootball
Member of the Year 2021
Member of the Year 2021
 
Posts: 27011
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby Va-Va-Voom » Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:35 pm

jayramfootball wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
Jedi wrote:It's not that it can't be done. It's that it shouldn't be done.

Why would you use taxpayer money to subsidize rich people going to college? If you're well off and you can afford to pay for college, you should. How about you deal with the 500k homeless people first?


What??

In your preference then the only people hurt are poor people, the very people who if smart enough deserve to go and who need the help.
Rich people are going regardless because they can afford it.

The whole purpose is to improve social mobility where as you wouldn't do fk all to help it, proving your just a sheep, slogan screamer who doesn't actually put any thought in.

What you should of said is if any students have parents with a wage of 100k total (depending on where they live) then they have to pay.

Your way is simply status quo leaving rich people with all the opportunity........well done liberal, very progressive.


This is one of those rare occasions that I agree with Bernie Sanders - partially.
Tax payer funded college for all... BUT one huge caveat.
Only the most talented should go to college and there should be about 5% of the courses currently available. Get rid of all the nonsense degrees and tax payer fund the education of talented people who will fill up highly skilled professional jobs that will better the whole of society and advance the nation.


And what does everyone else do?

Also it's impossible to quantify "most talented".

Genius comes in all forms.
User avatar
Va-Va-Voom
Member of the Year 2015
Member of the Year 2015
 
Posts: 22641
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:01 am

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:05 pm

jayramfootball wrote:
LMAO wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:Lol - adding up all the mysterious spikes in the vote count in PA... 600,000 were for Biden and 3,200 for Trump... :lol:

It's pretty clear listening today that election rigging did happen - whether it can be proven is another matter.


If it happened, then it should be easy to prove.


Democrats are being accused of destroying evidence in the audit trail.
The details on the voting machines is very troubling.
I really don't know if ANY of what is being claimed is true or not - but my opinion having listened to the witnesses and also seen the data is that the election was indeed rigged. Just my opinion.
I get that Biden will have received a big advantage in mail in votes, but the count of those was actually done first - Biden took a huge lead in PA - then Trump hauled it all back with in person voting... before hundreds of thousands of votes appear in the night at almost 100% for Biden. In itself that seems extremely odd.
What is the explanation for spikes totalling 600k votes at nearly 100% Biden?


Being accused and being proven are two different things. Someone could accuse the GOP of murdering 1,000,000 Democrats in Pennsylvania before the election so that their votes wouldn't count, but unless they have evidence, it means nothing.

Though, at this point, it literally doesn't matter. Pennsylvania certified the presidential election yesterday and has already chosen its slate of electors. It's over.

The only thing that hasn't been certified are the downballot races, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is likely to throw out/overturn the GOP's challenge.

Also, Biden never took a lead in PA until November 5. Trump 'led' before that. I use led in single quotation marks because the PA GOP didn't allow the processing or counting of mail ballots until Election Day, hence the red mirage. I have no idea what this 600k spike is about, unless that's what Trump and his peanut gallery are going with since that was his 'lead' early in the night :lol: https://alex.github.io/nyt-2020-electio ... anges.html Scroll down to Pennsylvania. There was no spike; it was a gradual chipping away as ballots were counted and results updated.

I'm not claiming fraud definitely didn't occur in PA—there have been two instances, after all—but there is nothing pointing to it on the scale the GOP is cawing about.
User avatar
LMAO
Member of the Year 2019
Member of the Year 2019
 
Posts: 9978
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:28 pm

Trump pardons Flynn. I was wondering what was taking that obese c*** so long.
User avatar
LMAO
Member of the Year 2019
Member of the Year 2019
 
Posts: 9978
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby Jedi » Thu Nov 26, 2020 1:59 am

DiamondGooner wrote:
Jedi wrote:It's not that it can't be done. It's that it shouldn't be done.

Why would you use taxpayer money to subsidize rich people going to college? If you're well off and you can afford to pay for college, you should. How about you deal with the 500k homeless people first?


What??

In your preference then the only people hurt are poor people, the very people who if smart enough deserve to go and who need the help.
Rich people are going regardless because they can afford it.

The whole purpose is to improve social mobility where as you wouldn't do fk all to help it, proving your just a sheep, slogan screamer who doesn't actually put any thought in.

What you should of said is if any students have parents with a wage of 100k total (depending on where they live) then they have to pay.

Your way is simply status quo leaving rich people with all the opportunity........well done liberal, very progressive.

Why is every single one of your responses to me emotionally charged and filled with insults? Can you calm your rhetoric a bit, especially when I give a take as cold as "rich people should pay for college"? I think it would be to everyone's benefit if we calmed the fvck down because this thread has been a dumpster fire lately.

Now, where did I say I am against ANY policy progressive policy on student loan debt or free college? I simply stated universal free college is dumb because it gives free access to rich people and I don't see a reason for that to happen.

Perhaps make 4 years of college free, but make it for students under a certain income threshold. Again, why the f**k should rich families get free college for their kids when there are people in the US that can't afford basic necessities? It's ridiculous.

Bottom line, when it comes to the economy, common sense goes out the window. It's too complicated for laymen (and I am including myself) to discuss and pretend they know what they're talking about. I prefer to go with the consensus of economists and most agree Bernie's policies are not very good. Not because they want to uphold the status quo but because there are usually better ways to approach these issues but they aren't as catchy as screaming "FREE SHIT" on the debate stage. And not even Biden is absolved from this - most economists agree that his plan to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 is not good.
User avatar
Jedi
Bertie Mee
Bertie Mee
 
Posts: 8180
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:47 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Thu Nov 26, 2020 10:38 am

LMAO wrote:Trump pardons Flynn. I was wondering what was taking that obese c*** so long.


Justice
User avatar
jayramfootball
Member of the Year 2021
Member of the Year 2021
 
Posts: 27011
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Thu Nov 26, 2020 10:42 am

LMAO wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
LMAO wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:Lol - adding up all the mysterious spikes in the vote count in PA... 600,000 were for Biden and 3,200 for Trump... :lol:

It's pretty clear listening today that election rigging did happen - whether it can be proven is another matter.


If it happened, then it should be easy to prove.


Democrats are being accused of destroying evidence in the audit trail.
The details on the voting machines is very troubling.
I really don't know if ANY of what is being claimed is true or not - but my opinion having listened to the witnesses and also seen the data is that the election was indeed rigged. Just my opinion.
I get that Biden will have received a big advantage in mail in votes, but the count of those was actually done first - Biden took a huge lead in PA - then Trump hauled it all back with in person voting... before hundreds of thousands of votes appear in the night at almost 100% for Biden. In itself that seems extremely odd.
What is the explanation for spikes totalling 600k votes at nearly 100% Biden?


Being accused and being proven are two different things. Someone could accuse the GOP of murdering 1,000,000 Democrats in Pennsylvania before the election so that their votes wouldn't count, but unless they have evidence, it means nothing.

Though, at this point, it literally doesn't matter. Pennsylvania certified the presidential election yesterday and has already chosen its slate of electors. It's over.

The only thing that hasn't been certified are the downballot races, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is likely to throw out/overturn the GOP's challenge.

Also, Biden never took a lead in PA until November 5. Trump 'led' before that. I use led in single quotation marks because the PA GOP didn't allow the processing or counting of mail ballots until Election Day, hence the red mirage. I have no idea what this 600k spike is about, unless that's what Trump and his peanut gallery are going with since that was his 'lead' early in the night :lol: https://alex.github.io/nyt-2020-electio ... anges.html Scroll down to Pennsylvania. There was no spike; it was a gradual chipping away as ballots were counted and results updated.

I'm not claiming fraud definitely didn't occur in PA—there have been two instances, after all—but there is nothing pointing to it on the scale the GOP is cawing about.


No. In the early counts Biden had a big lead in PA.

Where I agree with you is that accusations of fraud must be proven for any change to the election result. Of course.

That does not mean we can't take a view given the way the night unfolded and the subsequent data analysis and witness affidavits. My view is that the election was fraudulent in a number of states but at the same time I understand that my view not proven to be correct.
User avatar
jayramfootball
Member of the Year 2021
Member of the Year 2021
 
Posts: 27011
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby DiamondGooner » Thu Nov 26, 2020 8:57 pm

Jedi wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
Jedi wrote:It's not that it can't be done. It's that it shouldn't be done.

Why would you use taxpayer money to subsidize rich people going to college? If you're well off and you can afford to pay for college, you should. How about you deal with the 500k homeless people first?


What??

In your preference then the only people hurt are poor people, the very people who if smart enough deserve to go and who need the help.
Rich people are going regardless because they can afford it.

The whole purpose is to improve social mobility where as you wouldn't do fk all to help it, proving your just a sheep, slogan screamer who doesn't actually put any thought in.

What you should of said is if any students have parents with a wage of 100k total (depending on where they live) then they have to pay.

Your way is simply status quo leaving rich people with all the opportunity........well done liberal, very progressive.

Why is every single one of your responses to me emotionally charged and filled with insults? Can you calm your rhetoric a bit, especially when I give a take as cold as "rich people should pay for college"? I think it would be to everyone's benefit if we calmed the fvck down because this thread has been a dumpster fire lately.

Now, where did I say I am against ANY policy progressive policy on student loan debt or free college? I simply stated universal free college is dumb because it gives free access to rich people and I don't see a reason for that to happen.

Perhaps make 4 years of college free, but make it for students under a certain income threshold. Again, why the f**k should rich families get free college for their kids when there are people in the US that can't afford basic necessities? It's ridiculous.

Bottom line, when it comes to the economy, common sense goes out the window. It's too complicated for laymen (and I am including myself) to discuss and pretend they know what they're talking about. I prefer to go with the consensus of economists and most agree Bernie's policies are not very good. Not because they want to uphold the status quo but because there are usually better ways to approach these issues but they aren't as catchy as screaming "FREE SHIT" on the debate stage. And not even Biden is absolved from this - most economists agree that his plan to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 is not good.


Bold parts.

Bold point 1 - You reap what you sew, have you seen the way you used to speak to me in here? its only recently you've toned it down.

Bold point 2 - That's exactly what I proposed and considering other countries do it, its not revolutionary.

Bold point 3 - Well you shouldn't listen to economists, I can't think of some of the worst, biased, agenda driven, bribed professions out there.

Since when have economists got any fkin thing right?? economists said Britian would be a 3rd world country the day we voted for Leave.
Economists can't even agree a concensus, one says something for one political party and then another completely disagrees with it.

The reason economists are full of complete utter sh*t is because they work on projection, a projection based on possible scenarios.

No economist making a forecast has all the current / future information hence why its a forecast, i.e "an educated guess", then when you top off the political agenda (i.e they pick the economist who agrees with them) the deliberate falsifying of information etc.

No, economists are the absolute worst to rely on.
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 30379
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:56 am

Just saw that the 'leak' that stopped the vote counting in Fulton County GA on election night was a lie. There was no leak in the building - it was a small leak in the next building. The vote was stopped and a few people stayed inside to continue the counts, whilst all watchers were evacuated.

True? Don;t know - but it is something that should be investigated further. A lie like that, whilst some people stay inside to continue counting would be a red flag.
User avatar
jayramfootball
Member of the Year 2021
Member of the Year 2021
 
Posts: 27011
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:42 pm

Here is a link to a good summary of the election fraud claims and confirmations.
https://hereistheevidence.com/

It's a good site because it is not pro Trump or pro Biden.. seems to just give information and sources, including challenges to claims and some debunking.

Some of the Category 4 issues are pretty significant and need to be cleared up properly IMO before anyone should be sown in as President.
User avatar
jayramfootball
Member of the Year 2021
Member of the Year 2021
 
Posts: 27011
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby Jedi » Fri Nov 27, 2020 7:46 pm

jayramfootball wrote:Here is a link to a good summary of the election fraud claims and confirmations.
https://hereistheevidence.com/

It's a good site because it is not pro Trump or pro Biden.. seems to just give information and sources, including challenges to claims and some debunking.

Some of the Category 4 issues are pretty significant and need to be cleared up properly IMO before anyone should be sown in as President.

Clicked on the first thing I saw that had 4 significance under "Illegal votes". It is titled "2,689 fraudulent address used in GA and PA".

When you click on the "source" it links to a YouTube video. Very solid evidence, I know. Not only that but the video is made by Mark Braynard. A quick google search and turns out he is a former Trump aide who worked on his 2016 election campaign.

But maybe that one was bad, let's try another one:
4! Significance claim - "40,000 mail-in ballots were cast in the names of deceased voters in PA"

What's the source this time? The site links to itself as the source: https://hereistheevidence.com/fact-list/pa-009b20/

On that page, it gives us a number of "FACTS":

FACT 1: Pennsylvania allows for anyone to check on the status of a mail-in ballot online.

It links to an official Pennslyvania government website, but nowhere does it allow me to track ballots. However, it does say this:
How do I find the status of my ballot?
Contact your county election office: https://www.votespa.com/Resources/Pages ... cials.aspx OR contact the department's Voter Hotline at 1-877-VOTESPA (1-877-868-3772) https://www.fvap.gov/search-offices?state=38

So that's a false claim, or they linked to the wrong page. Regardless, it's bullshit.

FACT 2: There are numerous online tools for searching obituaries.

True. No problem with this one.

FACT 3: CheckYourVote.org used the Pennsylvania Voter Registration Database to identify all voters overs the age of 80, then randomly check those voters for a mail-in ballot status and checked online obituaries.
A sample check of random entries from this data set found 1 error, concluding CheckYourVote.org is accurate up to 99%.

Wrong! They didn't check for mail-in ballots. They checked for voter registration, and many dead people are still registered, which is completely normal. Dead people can't call the government and tell them they're dead.

However, nothing linked shows any evidence that any dead people voted. They completely made it up!

FACT 4: There are approximately 40,000 mail-in ballots cast in the name of deceased voters in Pennsylvania, during the 2020 General Election.
This is literally the exact same link as the previous "fact".

Again, dead people sometimes get sent ballots, dead people sometimes don't get purged from voter rolls, but dead people very rarely have their votes counted (typically only in cases when they die between sending their ballot and the election).

Also, this checkyourvote.org website is broken. None of the links to the screenshots work. It's a complete joke.

The other 3 "FACTS" are just general statements that offer no new evidence. They didn't prove that a single dead person voted.

A few other things that make it obvious this site is a joke:
- Literally anyone can post unverified claims. The "Submit evidence" button is on top of the page.
- You said the site is "unbiased" yet they link to a Parler page, which is a social networking service made for Trump supporters and conspiracy theorists. There is literally no reason you would be on there if you're not a Trump supporter.
- They say "Submitted items may be edited or deleted to ensure quality of content" but when you look at the bottom of the page It's literally a cesspool.
User avatar
Jedi
Bertie Mee
Bertie Mee
 
Posts: 8180
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:47 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Big Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests