Cumulus Media to it's right wing radio hosts: Stop claiming the election was stolen, or face termination

[calamity]

only going to make it worse. if they think outright censorship is going to help calm things they're being stupid.

lol...that is not censorship. But, you are right in that Shapiro and Levin will shut up so as not to lose their cash cow.

 

[calamity]

A handful have suggested that, unlike the entirety of the idiot left that bobbed and swallowed and regurgitated the leftist lies for the last 5 years. But hey...if you are comfortable labelling yourself as a whataboutist equal to those types...be my guest.

Sorry, Vance, but it was not the "idiot left" who stormed the US Capitol like a bunch of hooligans, carrying zip tie handcuffs to grab political enemies and take them to the gallows. That was the Trumpian idiots.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

What total dumb asses and idiots don't know that Joe Biden won a fair election by this point?

The claims are called lies for a very good reason: Everyone always knew it was a fair election since November 7.

 

[code1211]

The article says it was released on Wednesday in the aftermath of the Capitol Hill riot.

Seems like they are drawing a fine line.

I think it's possible to say that the election has been decided AND that we need election reform.

I wonder if the entire discussion is cancelled or just that particular sliver of the discussion.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Seems like they are drawing a fine line.

I think it's possible to say that the election has been decided AND that we need election reform.

I wonder if the entire discussion is cancelled or just that particular sliver of the discussion.

I would support discussions into election reform.. so long as its not an excuse to disenfranchise voters.

 

[code1211]

I would support discussions into election reform.. so long as its not an excuse to disenfranchise voters.

Charging admission to get into a movie limits the admission into a movie theatre.

Demanding the people who do vote are qualified to vote also limits that group.

Are you recommending that no qualifications be demanded of any who vote?

 

[Slartibartfast]

Charging admission to get into a movie limits the admission into a movie theatre.

Demanding the people who do vote are qualified to vote also limits that group.

Are you recommending that no qualifications be demanded of any who vote?

Qualified to vote means "you live in this area and you are at least 18", its a pretty broad group and I am in no way suggesting we make that group smaller.

 

[code1211]

Qualified to vote means "you live in this area and you are at least 18", its a pretty broad group and I am in no way suggesting we make that group smaller.

So being a citizen is not one of your requirements? Being a human being?

Is there a minimum length of time of residency? Could a person who lives in the area, but is "living" in a hotel room rented last night, leaving at check-out time, long enough to say "live in this area"?

 

[Slartibartfast]

So being a citizen is not one of your requirements? Being a human being?

Ok you got me on that, I forgot that detail, being a citizen is part of that requirement.

 

[code1211]

Ok you got me on that, I forgot that detail, being a citizen is part of that requirement.

Okay! Now we're getting somewhere.

You agree that there should be defined qualifications that voters must possess in order to cast a ballot that can be counted in an election. I assume that being human is one of your requirements as well. True?

They must have a legally qualifying residence that is established and proven. They must be of a certain age that can be proven. They must be proven to be a citizen. They must be living. They must be human.

How can the qualifications of the particular entity that submitted any particular ballot be established to a reasonable degree to satisfy requirements of proof for all of these qualifications?

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Okay! Now we're getting somewhere.

You agree that there should be defined qualifications that voters must possess in order to cast a ballot that can be counted in an election. I assume that being human is one of your requirements as well. True?

They must have a legally qualifying residence that is established and proven. They must be of a certain age that can be proven. They must be proven to be a citizen. They must be living. They must be human.

How can the qualifications of the particular entity that submitted any particular ballot be established to a reasonable degree to satisfy requirements of proof for all of these qualifications?

But that’ wasn’t Trump’s position. He just wanted the GA SoS to find votes. He didn’t say voters.

So you support making sure every community has equal access to obtaining voter ID, correct?

 

[Slartibartfast]

Okay! Now we're getting somewhere.

You agree that there should be defined qualifications that voters must possess in order to cast a ballot that can be counted in an election. I assume that being human is one of your requirements as well. True?

They must have a legally qualifying residence that is established and proven. They must be of a certain age that can be proven. They must be proven to be a citizen. They must be living. They must be human.

How can the qualifications of the particular entity that submitted any particular ballot be established to a reasonable degree to satisfy requirements of proof for all of these qualifications?

lol, yes I would agree that it should only be humans who can vote.

If we go with reasonable (which is different then fool proof). A proof of residence should work, such as a bill, a driver's license, etc. On top of that, proof of citizenship such as a passport, a birth certificate, etc.

Which as far as I know, tends to be required when registering to vote.

 

[code1211]

lol, yes I would agree that it should only be humans who can vote.

If we go with reasonable (which is different then fool proof). A proof of residence should work, such as a bill, a driver's license, etc. On top of that, proof of citizenship such as a passport, a birth certificate, etc.

Which as far as I know, tends to be required when registering to vote.

So it is important that the people prove all of these things using proper documentation when they register to vote. That's good.

Now, what is a reasonable process to prove that the person who fills out and submits any ballot is the person who registered previously?

I FEEL like the goal is to assure that ballots are cast by registered voters.

I am licensed to drive. I own a car. To help assure that nobody steals my car, I have locks on the doors and an ignition key and a keyless entry system. These features are intended to assure that only I can drive my car.

What are the similar features to assure that nobody steals the ballot "owned" by another?

 

[Slartibartfast]

So it is important that the people prove all of these things using proper documentation when they register to vote. That's good.

Now, what is a reasonable process to prove that the person who fills out and submits any ballot is the person who registered previously?

I FEEL like the goal is to assure that ballots are cast by registered voters.

I am licensed to drive. I own a car. To help assure that nobody steals my car, I have locks on the doors and an ignition key and a keyless entry system. These features are intended to assure that only I can drive my car.

What are the similar features to assure that nobody steals the ballot "owned" by another?

Once the voter is registered to a particular address, send them a voter registration card or mail in ballot if they request one. I think this is feasible until it can be proven in a court of law that these methods have a propensity to materially affect elections and until then any decisive weight should be on making voting accessible.

Alternatively, if mail in ballots are not permissible for some, then I would support having voting offices open 24/7 for one full month before whatever voting deadline along with rides to the voting offices for those who have a disability or do not have the means to get there. Along with provisional ballots available for those who may have their paperwork messed up for some reason, but again the presumption should be that the person is trustworthy (because again, there are no credible statistics showing that any voter fraud is materially affecting outcomes) and the voting offices should be working with that person to make fixing that messed up paperwork as easy to fix as is feasible. If the paperwork cannot be fixed, then perhaps an investigation into the persons eligibility is in order at that time once other avenues are exhausted.

The place I differ from you is the presumption that we need to verify voters. It is reasonable to assume voters are acting in a legal manner until such a time where evidence can show that doesn't happen on a scale needed to change elections. Right now, at best, we have rumors. But even those rumors (the 1,000 or people who swear they saw something wrong) never testified under oath, which could have been done by any republican lead state legislature who truly wanted to get to the bottom of things.

 

[code1211]

Once the voter is registered to a particular address, send them a voter registration card or mail in ballot if they request one. I think this is feasible until it can be proven in a court of law that these methods have a propensity to materially affect elections and until then any decisive weight should be on making voting accessible.

Alternatively, if mail in ballots are not permissible for some, then I would support having voting offices open 24/7 for one full month before whatever voting deadline along with rides to the voting offices for those who have a disability or do not have the means to get there. Along with provisional ballots available for those who may have their paperwork messed up for some reason, but again the presumption should be that the person is trustworthy (because again, there are no credible statistics showing that any voter fraud is materially affecting outcomes) and the voting offices should be working with that person to make fixing that messed up paperwork as easy to fix as is feasible. If the paperwork cannot be fixed, then perhaps an investigation into the persons eligibility is in order at that time once other avenues are exhausted.

The place I differ from you is the presumption that we need to verify voters. It is reasonable to assume voters are acting in a legal manner until such a time where evidence can show that doesn't happen on a scale needed to change elections. Right now, at best, we have rumors. But even those rumors (the 1,000 or people who swear they saw something wrong) never testified under oath, which could have been done by any republican lead state legislature who truly wanted to get to the bottom of things.

I like the idea of sending election officials to certify credentials to those who cannot physically travel the polling place due to disability. Also severe penalties if that system is abused.

I also like the idea of having polling places open 24 hours for a reasonable period before the election. 1 month seems excessive. Maybe 10 days? More than a week accounts for scheduled weekend work.

Ballot drop boxes seem like a feature designed specifically to be promote dishonesties.

Any reasonable measures employed to assure that the person who casts the ballot is the same person that registered to vote are appropriate.

The most recent stats from the FBI show that the rate of burglaries in the US is only about 0.5%. This is far lower than the vastly understated estimated problems of voter fraud and likely inflated due to the source quoting it.

However, I have never seen a primary residence of a human being in America that did not have latches and locks on the doors. Even the ghetto hovel of the condemned house in which I lived in college had locks on the doors.

EVERY AMERICAN acknowledges the need for security against the possibility of dishonesty. Why are Democrat-Socialists demanding that we abandon any basic, reasonable safe guards to assure honesty in elections?

Burglary Statistics: The Hard Numbers | National Council For Home Safety and Security

www.alarms.org

 

[Slartibartfast]

I like the idea of sending election officials to certify credentials to those who cannot physically travel the polling place due to disability. Also severe penalties if that system is abused.

I also like the idea of having polling places open 24 hours for a reasonable period before the election. 1 month seems excessive. Maybe 10 days? More than a week accounts for scheduled weekend work.

Ballot drop boxes seem like a feature designed specifically to be promote dishonesties.

Any reasonable measures employed to assure that the person who casts the ballot is the same person that registered to vote are appropriate.

The most recent stats from the FBI show that the rate of burglaries in the US is only about 0.5%. This is far lower than the vastly understated estimated problems of voter fraud and likely inflated due to the source quoting it.

However, I have never seen a primary residence of a human being in America that did not have latches and locks on the doors. Even the ghetto hovel of the condemned house in which I lived in college had locks on the doors.

EVERY AMERICAN acknowledges the need for security against the possibility of dishonesty. Why are Democrat-Socialists demanding that we abandon any basic, reasonable safe guards to assure honesty in elections?

Burglary Statistics: The Hard Numbers | National Council For Home Safety and Security

www.alarms.org

I think one month is probably fine. There are a lot of people on the lower economic end who's live are very chaotic. Another advantage is that it cuts down on possible shenanigans in red states for when they try to close polling places or purge people. It gives time for things to be made right.

If the term is one month, you can have a clerk instead of a drop box.

The reason I am suspicious of the security at all costs approach to ballots is because that is regularly abused in red areas to purge voters. Right now I don't consider those areas trustworthy so I am not willing to concede unless there are measures in place to prevent disenfranchisement or to abuse existing rules. The vote is a sacred part of our country and why our government has any legitimacy at all. That is my first priority and will remain so as there is no evidence that voter shenanigans have materially affected elections since maybe the 1920s.

 

[code1211]

I think one month is probably fine. There are a lot of people on the lower economic end who's live are very chaotic. Another advantage is that it cuts down on possible shenanigans in red states for when they try to close polling places or purge people. It gives time for things to be made right.

If the term is one month, you can have a clerk instead of a drop box.

The reason I am suspicious of the security at all costs approach to ballots is because that is regularly abused in red areas to purge voters. Right now I don't consider those areas trustworthy so I am not willing to concede unless there are measures in place to prevent disenfranchisement or to abuse existing rules. The vote is a sacred part of our country and why our government has any legitimacy at all. That is my first priority and will remain so as there is no evidence that voter shenanigans have materially affected elections since maybe the 1920s.

Do you have a link that demonstrates the successful efforts of the Red States that you seem to fear so desperately?

 

[snakestretcher]

A handful have suggested that, unlike the entirety of the idiot left that bobbed and swallowed and regurgitated the leftist lies for the last 5 years. But hey...if you are comfortable labelling yourself as a whataboutist equal to those types...be my guest.

I guess you missed the bit in Mueller's report that stated he couldn't exonerate Trump. Trump is an unapologetic crook who regards encounters with the law as an occupational hazard; always was a crook, always will be a crook.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Do you have a link that demonstrates the successful efforts of the Red States that you seem to fear so desperately?

here is one example: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting

the fact that they are even trying is a huge problem in my opinion and needs to have even the kitchen sink thrown in to fight against. That is people's civil rights.

 

[code1211]

I guess you missed the bit in Mueller's report that stated he couldn't exonerate Trump. Trump is an unapologetic crook who regards encounters with the law as an occupational hazard; always was a crook, always will be a crook.

Well, he and the rest of the DOJ did withhold exculpatory evidence wherever and whenever possible and that is why Trump declassified so many docs on the way out the door.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Sorry, Vance, but it was not the "idiot left" who stormed the US Capitol like a bunch of hooligans, carrying zip tie handcuffs to grab political enemies and take them to the gallows. That was the Trumpian idiots.

These Qanoners and other whacko-conspiracy addicts HAVE to realize that in this week alone, the NAMES of these seditionists have grown to enormous proportions.

The very first list I found, it might have even been here, is so long that I am going to make a thread all its own.
Stay tuned for:

The Master List of Seditionists

 

[code1211]

here is one example: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting

the fact that they are even trying is a huge problem in my opinion and needs to have even the kitchen sink thrown in to fight against. That is people's civil rights.

Your source cautions that closing the polling places presents the danger that it will stop people from voting.

The actual real world votes cast in 2020 was 6.6% higher than in 2016 measuring only the percent of registered voters that voted.

That is the highest percentage voter turnout since 1992. However, the population in 1992 was less than half what it is today. 2020 saw the highest number of votes ever cast in an election in Texas.

Your source presents an oddly unsupported conjecture in the article that seems to predict an outcome that simply did NOT occur.

Citing a prediction of dire consequence when the record of actual performance is available seems odd. Your example, in the real world, resulted in the highest voter turnout in history.

Care to try again?

Democrats hoped high turnout would usher in a blue wave across Texas. It didn’t.

In Texas, at least 66% of the 17 million registered voters cast ballots in the 2020 general election. That’s 6.6 percentage points higher than total turnout in 2016.

www.texastribune.org

 

[Slartibartfast]

Your source cautions that closing the polling places presents the danger that it will stop people from voting.

The actual real world votes cast in 2020 was 6.6% higher than in 2016 measuring only the percent of registered voters that voted.

That is the highest percentage voter turnout since 1992. However, the population in 1992 was less than half what it is today. 2020 saw the highest number of votes ever cast in an election in Texas.

Your source presents an oddly unsupported conjecture in the article that seems to predict an outcome that simply did NOT occur.

Citing a prediction of dire consequence when the record of actual performance is available seems odd. Your example, in the real world, resulted in the highest voter turnout in history.

Care to try again?

Democrats hoped high turnout would usher in a blue wave across Texas. It didn’t.

In Texas, at least 66% of the 17 million registered voters cast ballots in the 2020 general election. That’s 6.6 percentage points higher than total turnout in 2016.

www.texastribune.org

It was higher but also the lines in some cases took hours. That should have never happened.

 

[Mashmont]

How right wing radio works:
Tell your listeners that they are smart, they have special knowledge that the others don't have.
Get your listeners angry about something, anything, things that they were never angry about, nor ever needed to be angry about.
Stoke that anger every day.
Tell your listeners that THEY are trying to shut them down because you know the real truth.
Stoke more anger, get your listeners addicted to anger, make them hate the other side irrationally.
Sell them crappy products and bad financial schemes.

Rush’s audience has the among highest percentages of college graduates of any media audience. Sorry to bust your false narrative

 

[snakestretcher]

Rush’s audience has the among highest percentages of college graduates of any media audience. Sorry to bust your false narrative

Academic achievement isn't an indicator of intelligence; it's an indicator that you passed some exams. So, I guess you have Limbaugh's audience demographics at your fingertips, and ready to share with us. Let's see them.