Goonersworld

Took it again to see how different I am from a few months ago. My economic views and cultural views haven't shifted, but apparently I lean libertarian or lean authoritarian depending on the day (still finding a nice balance between the two though) lol

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

LMAO wrote:

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

If you think that dropping an unverified ballot in an anonymous box is 'democracy' welcome to third world elections .... one man one vote or just fill out 50 ballots and drop them in a box, which serves democracy better ... do you even for a second believe both sides won't try cheating now? Lawyers are already counting their money, the legal challengers will be everywhere.

In the days before everyone had two vehicles per household 80% managed to reach polling stations ... now the fat lazy fecks can't manage 50%, if you're to lazy to go to a polling station then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.

EliteKiller wrote:

LMAO wrote:

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

If you think that dropping an unverified ballot in an anonymous box is 'democracy' welcome to third world elections .... one man one vote or just fill out 50 ballots and drop them in a box, which serves democracy better ... do you even for a second believe both sides won't try cheating now? Lawyers are already counting their money, the legal challengers will be everywhere.

In the days before everyone had two vehicles per household 80% managed to reach polling stations ... now the fat lazy fecks can't manage 50%, if you're to lazy to go to a polling station then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.

The Republicans try everything they can to restrict the voting opportunities of likely Democratic voters. Theyve been doing it in various ways for decades and this bs hysteria over "ELECTION FRAUD" is just their latest ruse.

Its got a lot more to do with restricting turnout than anything else

EliteKiller wrote:

LMAO wrote:

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

If you think that dropping an unverified ballot in an anonymous box is 'democracy' welcome to third world elections .... one man one vote or just fill out 50 ballots and drop them in a box, which serves democracy better ... do you even for a second believe both sides won't try cheating now? Lawyers are already counting their money, the legal challengers will be everywhere.

In the days before everyone had two vehicles per household 80% managed to reach polling stations ... now the fat lazy fecks can't manage 50%, if you're to lazy to go to a polling station then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.

Don't pull a muscle reaching that far.

You can provide evidence of ballot dropboxes being used as dastardly instruments of fraud and the wrongdoers aren't caught and dealt with, or you can continue your flimsy speculations while the rest of us welcome a blow to voter suppression attempts.

What has happened to PRISS
Hope he is ok havnt seen him post in a while

Lads, the coronavirus vaccine is out!!!!

Accto Eric Trump, the Donald created and took the vaccine at Walter Reed.

#TrumpNowMoreThanEver

In other news:

In several phone calls last weekend from the presidential suite at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Mr. Trump shared an idea he was considering: When he left the hospital, he wanted to appear frail at first when people saw him, according to people with knowledge of the conversations. But underneath his button-down dress shirt, he would wear a Superman T-shirt, which he would reveal as a symbol of strength when he ripped open the top layer. He ultimately did not go ahead with the stunt.

He should have gone ahead with it.

Angelito wrote:Lads, the coronavirus vaccine is out!!!!

Accto Eric Trump, the Donald created and took the vaccine at Walter Reed.

#TrumpNowMoreThanEver

In other news:

In several phone calls last weekend from the presidential suite at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Mr. Trump shared an idea he was considering: When he left the hospital, he wanted to appear frail at first when people saw him, according to people with knowledge of the conversations. But underneath his button-down dress shirt, he would wear a Superman T-shirt, which he would reveal as a symbol of strength when he ripped open the top layer. He ultimately did not go ahead with the stunt.

He should have gone ahead with it.

Now that would have been funny! But you know the media would pillory him for such an "unpresidential" act.

Royal Gooner wrote:

Angelito wrote:Lads, the coronavirus vaccine is out!!!!

Accto Eric Trump, the Donald created and took the vaccine at Walter Reed.

#TrumpNowMoreThanEver

In other news:

In several phone calls last weekend from the presidential suite at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Mr. Trump shared an idea he was considering: When he left the hospital, he wanted to appear frail at first when people saw him, according to people with knowledge of the conversations. But underneath his button-down dress shirt, he would wear a Superman T-shirt, which he would reveal as a symbol of strength when he ripped open the top layer. He ultimately did not go ahead with the stunt.

He should have gone ahead with it.

Now that would have been funny! But you know the media would pillory him for such an "unpresidential" act.

He should have done it - would have been so funny.

LMAO wrote:

EliteKiller wrote:

LMAO wrote:

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

If you think that dropping an unverified ballot in an anonymous box is 'democracy' welcome to third world elections .... one man one vote or just fill out 50 ballots and drop them in a box, which serves democracy better ... do you even for a second believe both sides won't try cheating now? Lawyers are already counting their money, the legal challengers will be everywhere.

In the days before everyone had two vehicles per household 80% managed to reach polling stations ... now the fat lazy fecks can't manage 50%, if you're to lazy to go to a polling station then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.

Don't pull a muscle reaching that far.

You can provide evidence of ballot dropboxes being used as dastardly instruments of fraud and the wrongdoers aren't caught and dealt with, or you can continue your flimsy speculations while the rest of us welcome a blow to voter suppression attempts.

Protecting the integrity of elections should not be about proving something leads to fraud.
The actions to protect elections should be PREVENTATIVE.

Changing election procedures should not be done lightly and any activity that opens up or extends the possibility of fraud should not be allowed unless water tight procedures are in place.

The left seem to want to dramatically change the election process just months before an election - I wonder why?
Then they ask for proof it's not okay.
BS - THEY Need to prove that these changes will not increase the risk of fraud.
As it stands the left are basically saying you have to trust us unless you can provide evidence our motives are nefarious. Well, f*** that for a game of soldiers.

Example - if the Republicans put forward a plan to have their campaign door knock everyone and fill out ballots for the 'needy' it would be a terrible idea that would massively increase the risk of fraud. But can you prove that it would be fraudulent? No, you could not.

Another example of the control of information to drive a narrative.

Matthew Robert Dolloff shot and killed a Trump supporter in Denver this week.
Nothing to see here, of course, Dolloff was 'just a security gaurd with no political affiliations'

Except his social media tells a different story.

- Boasted of confronting trump supporters and calling them racist
- involved in Occupy Wall St riots
- Registered Democrat and big supporter of Bernie Sanders
- Tweeted 'No justice! No peace! f*** the police'
- He follows a long list of Occupy accounts and far left politicians.

Of course the left wing media don't care - they are too busy trawling through Karl Rittehouse's history.

jayramfootball wrote:Another example of the control of information to drive a narrative.

Matthew Robert Dolloff shot and killed a Trump supporter in Denver this week.
Nothing to see here, of course, Dolloff was 'just a security gaurd with no political affiliations'

Except his social media tells a different story.

- Boasted of confronting trump supporters and calling them racist
- involved in Occupy Wall St riots
- Registered Democrat and big supporter of Bernie Sanders
- Tweeted 'No justice! No peace! f*** the police'
- He follows a long list of Occupy accounts and far left politicians.

Of course the left wing media don't care - they are too busy trawling through Karl Rittehouse's history.

So only right wing supporters are allowed to work as security guards?

And when this guy was assaulted and maced he was wrong to shoot?

Shall we look at your posting history and your laughable claims not to be a right winger?

Bottom line is, in general the far left have a bit of a protesting and looting / breaking windows problem........ the far right have a bit of a murdering people problem

UFGN wrote:

jayramfootball wrote:Another example of the control of information to drive a narrative.

Matthew Robert Dolloff shot and killed a Trump supporter in Denver this week.
Nothing to see here, of course, Dolloff was 'just a security gaurd with no political affiliations'

Except his social media tells a different story.

- Boasted of confronting trump supporters and calling them racist
- involved in Occupy Wall St riots
- Registered Democrat and big supporter of Bernie Sanders
- Tweeted 'No justice! No peace! f*** the police'
- He follows a long list of Occupy accounts and far left politicians.

Of course the left wing media don't care - they are too busy trawling through Karl Rittehouse's history.

So only right wing supporters are allowed to work as security guards?

And when this guy was assaulted and maced he was wrong to shoot?

Shall we look at your posting history and your laughable claims not to be a right winger?

Bottom line is, in general the far left have a bit of a protesting and looting / breaking windows problem........ the far right have a bit of a murdering people problem

Nothing to do with what his job was.
He is a far left activist who murdered a Trump supporter.
Was he entitled to defend himself? - yes. Just as Karl Rittenhouse was entitled to defend himself.

As we know, the far left have been murdering people all summer during their rioting, looting and take over of city blocks.
It just seems less important to the cable and network news channels.

Different rules, different levels of outrage depending on which side is doing is the murdering.

Despising the radical left wing elements of society does not make one a 'right winger'.

As has been stated many times, the major problem society faces is from the radical left, so of course they are the focus.

jayramfootball wrote:

LMAO wrote:

EliteKiller wrote:

LMAO wrote:

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

If you think that dropping an unverified ballot in an anonymous box is 'democracy' welcome to third world elections .... one man one vote or just fill out 50 ballots and drop them in a box, which serves democracy better ... do you even for a second believe both sides won't try cheating now? Lawyers are already counting their money, the legal challengers will be everywhere.

In the days before everyone had two vehicles per household 80% managed to reach polling stations ... now the fat lazy fecks can't manage 50%, if you're to lazy to go to a polling station then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.

Don't pull a muscle reaching that far.

You can provide evidence of ballot dropboxes being used as dastardly instruments of fraud and the wrongdoers aren't caught and dealt with, or you can continue your flimsy speculations while the rest of us welcome a blow to voter suppression attempts.

Protecting the integrity of elections should not be about proving something leads to fraud.
The actions to protect elections should be PREVENTATIVE.

Changing election procedures should not be done lightly and any activity that opens up or extends the possibility of fraud should not be allowed unless water tight procedures are in place.

The left seem to want to dramatically change the election process just months before an election - I wonder why?
Then they ask for proof it's not okay.
BS - THEY Need to prove that these changes will not increase the risk of fraud.
As it stands the left are basically saying you have to trust us unless you can provide evidence our motives are nefarious. Well, f*** that for a game of soldiers.

Example - if the Republicans put forward a plan to have their campaign door knock everyone and fill out ballots for the 'needy' it would be a terrible idea that would massively increase the risk of fraud. But can you prove that it would be fraudulent? No, you could not.

Nope, doesn't work like that. It's on plaintiffs to prove their accusations beyond a reasonable doubt to a judge or a jury.

Ballot drop boxes have been a thing for years, so there should be hard evidence of massive fraud occurring if it actually does. Even a Trump appointed judge shot down the Trump administration's argument to prevent the use of ballot drop boxes because the Trump administration couldn't offer hard evidence that ballot drop boxes would lead to fraud.

Speculation can lead to many things. We should ban vehicles because every one on the road Thursday at noon might get into a fatal accident. We should ban lettuce forever because there might be a chance of E. coli in every head. We should ban applesauce until it's proven to not be the cause of people committing murder. No, speculation doesn't have a place outside of gambling.

LMAO wrote:

jayramfootball wrote:

LMAO wrote:

EliteKiller wrote:

LMAO wrote:

loooool

Democracy lives to fight another day. The judge made the correct ruling.

If you think that dropping an unverified ballot in an anonymous box is 'democracy' welcome to third world elections .... one man one vote or just fill out 50 ballots and drop them in a box, which serves democracy better ... do you even for a second believe both sides won't try cheating now? Lawyers are already counting their money, the legal challengers will be everywhere.

In the days before everyone had two vehicles per household 80% managed to reach polling stations ... now the fat lazy fecks can't manage 50%, if you're to lazy to go to a polling station then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.

Don't pull a muscle reaching that far.

You can provide evidence of ballot dropboxes being used as dastardly instruments of fraud and the wrongdoers aren't caught and dealt with, or you can continue your flimsy speculations while the rest of us welcome a blow to voter suppression attempts.

Protecting the integrity of elections should not be about proving something leads to fraud.
The actions to protect elections should be PREVENTATIVE.

Changing election procedures should not be done lightly and any activity that opens up or extends the possibility of fraud should not be allowed unless water tight procedures are in place.

The left seem to want to dramatically change the election process just months before an election - I wonder why?
Then they ask for proof it's not okay.
BS - THEY Need to prove that these changes will not increase the risk of fraud.
As it stands the left are basically saying you have to trust us unless you can provide evidence our motives are nefarious. Well, f*** that for a game of soldiers.

Example - if the Republicans put forward a plan to have their campaign door knock everyone and fill out ballots for the 'needy' it would be a terrible idea that would massively increase the risk of fraud. But can you prove that it would be fraudulent? No, you could not.

Nope, doesn't work like that. It's on plaintiffs to prove their accusations beyond a reasonable doubt to a judge or a jury.

Ballot drop boxes have been a thing for years, so there should be hard evidence of massive fraud occurring if it actually does. Even a Trump appointed judge shot down the Trump administration's argument to prevent the use of ballot drop boxes because the Trump administration couldn't offer hard evidence that ballot drop boxes would lead to fraud.

Speculation can lead to many things. We should ban vehicles because every one on the road Thursday at noon might get into a fatal accident. We should ban lettuce forever because there might be a chance of E. coli in every head. We should ban applesauce until it's proven to not be the cause of people committing murder. No, speculation doesn't have a place outside of gambling.

Yeah - it does work like that.
In every area of society we protect ourselves against risk. It's not a legal matter, it is pure common sense.
Risking the integrity of elections with no controls - or limited controls - in place is utter madness.
The process of electing Govt should be one that is well tested and changed only after thorough consideration.

Political games are tiring.
You know, I know and everyone else knows that the Democrats are pushing mail in voting as a method of either 1) cheating in elections or 2) creating so much uncertainty that the election itself can be litigated for months.

Please don't try and pretend they are pushing it for noble reasons.
Same with Republicans - they too have been looking for advantage by cheating voters out of a say by gerrymandering districts for years.

These people do not give a flying f*** about Democracy or you and I.
They care about power and they will do anything to achieve it.

Willing fools - or those complicit - keep arguing their cases for them.