Will it be ok with you when your state decides who wins and who loses and your vote means nothing?

[Jay59]

I can easily interpret the attempt to stop the certification of the election as an "attempt to seize control of the government".

Not without lying and any judge would know it.

Especially when not a one of the folks at the top that led you to believe there was massive fraud actually beleived there was massive fraud.

That's hazy. They are not lacking evidence, just not the kind you can take to court.

They've all been lying to yall's faces.the whole time.

You are eager to believe the worst. Reality is rarely that.

The plausibility of that scenario depends entirely on how much evidence of fraud is needed in order to make the claim and be believed.

Evidence we have always had. Proof, not so much.

As was proved in 2020, you need 0 evidence.

That's not true of anyone of note.

If a conservative legislature claims the election was corrupted and needs to be reversed, millions of conservatives will believe them regardless of the facts.

If MSM claims a stolen election was fair, millions of liberals will believe regardless of the . . .

That may have actually happened.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Lame questions draw lame responses.

Do you believe in US democracy or not? It's a really, really, really easy question to answer for any true patriot.

If you refuse to answer I'll just take that as a no. If yes then how do you tolerate the Republican party attacking our democracy?

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Not without lying and any judge would know it.


That's hazy. They are not lacking evidence, just not the kind you can take to court.


You are eager to believe the worst. Reality is rarely that.


Evidence we have always had. Proof, not so much.


That's not true of anyone of note.


If MSM claims a stolen election was fair, millions of liberals will believe regardless of the . . .

That may have actually happened.

Telling lies is not evidence. And that is really all that the Republicans have been doing. After all, that is what politicians are good at. Or do you think that only liberal politicians lie? Also, do you think that only the news media that you do not like lies?

For the record, all politicians lie, and only a fool would trust the media. One has to take what they say with a grain of salt and check and see if the story has any merit. One thing is for sure though there is going to be a bias slant no matter who you hear anything from.

 

[Jay59]

Do you believe in US democracy or not? It's a really, really, really easy question to answer for any true patriot.

If you believe in American democracy, then Trump has a point.

If you refuse to answer I'll just take that as a no. If yes then how do you tolerate the Republican party attacking our democracy?

This attitude is anti-democratic.

Telling lies is not evidence.

Absolutely true. Evidence is evidence. Saying there is no evidence is not evidence

And that is really all that the Republicans have been doing.

If you mean bringing out the evidence and asking people to look at it, this is true.

After all, that is what politicians are good at.

Pretending everything is good when it isn't.

Or do you think that only liberal politicians lie?

Don't be silly. Still, telling the truth and presenting the evidence is always better, even for liberals. Yet, they bring no evidence and pretend everything is copacetic.

Also, do you think that only the news media that you do not like lies?

Since there is only one news media and it allies with liberals, I have to give them this one.

For the record, all politicians lie, and only a fool would trust the media. One has to take what they say with a grain of salt and check and see if the story has any merit. One thing is for sure though there is going to be a bias slant no matter who you hear anything from.

You say this but you don't do this. There is no lack of evidence, but are not looking into the facts. Instead, you blindly follow the news media.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

If you believe in American democracy, then Trump has a point.


This attitude is anti-democratic.


Absolutely true. Evidence is evidence. Saying there is no evidence is not evidence


If you mean bringing out the evidence and asking people to look at it, this is true.


Pretending everything is good when it isn't.


Don't be silly. Still, telling the truth and presenting the evidence is always better, even for liberals. Yet, they bring no evidence and pretend everything is copacetic.


Since there is only one news media and it allies with liberals, I have to give them this one.


You say this but you don't do this. There is no lack of evidence, but are not looking into the facts. Instead, you blindly follow the news media.

You have no evidence, quit lying.

 

[Bullseye]

Do you believe in US democracy or not? It's a really, really, really easy question to answer for any true patriot.

If you refuse to answer I'll just take that as a no. If yes then how do you tolerate the Republican party attacking our democracy?

We've had this discussion on DP several times, I'm not interested in starting another one.

 

[Bullseye]

The plausibility of that scenario depends entirely on how much evidence of fraud is needed in order to make the claim and be believed.

As was proved in 2020, you need 0 evidence. If a conservative legislature claims the election was corrupted and needs to be reversed, millions of conservatives will believe them regardless of the facts.

And, what EXACTLY happened in 2020 were the results of ANY STATE overridden by ANY legislature? Your example disproves your thesis. And don't even try any "almost" bullshit as rebuttal - they election was always going to be certified and WAS.

 

[The AntiDonald]

Don't think that would ever happen in my state. Could care less what happens in Georgia.

Don't know what state your in. But if you have a majority republican legislator, they are already making plans for just that to happen. They are hiding behind the premise of voter integrity which we all know is horse dung.

In the past months, 99% of voter fraud cases that have risen to the level of prosecution have been illegal votes for Trump. And even those have been miniscule in numbers.

 

[The AntiDonald]

And, what EXACTLY happened in 2020 were the results of ANY STATE overridden by ANY legislature? Your example disproves your thesis. And don't even try any "almost" bullshit as rebuttal - they election was always going to be certified and WAS.

But there can be no denial that we came real damn close to a constitutional crisis. Yes it was certified this time. Unfortunately, I don't see any reason why some of these new GOP state laws if applied wouldn't have turned it over to Trump, even though he lost.

There was NO voter fraud, therefore no reason for all these new laws but to steal the next election if it goes against republicans.

 

[Bullseye]

But there can be no denial that we came real damn close to a constitutional crisis. Yes it was certified this time.

Only if you're a swill-swallowing slave to the Loony left.

Unfortunately, I don't see any reason why some of these new GOP state laws if applied wouldn't have turned it over to Trump, even though he lost.

You're probably correct - the new laws will strictly enforce fair and legal elections - the kind Dems usually lose.

There was NO voter fraud, therefore no reason for all these new laws but to steal the next election if it goes against republicans.

More swill, hope you're hungry.

 

[mike2810]

And, what EXACTLY happened in 2020 were the results of ANY STATE overridden by ANY legislature? Your example disproves your thesis. And don't even try any "almost" bullshit as rebuttal - they election was always going to be certified and WAS.

Didn't happen in Arizona. What stopped it was the current State election laws.

Since the election a few Republicans in Arizona introduced legislation to allow them to override election results. Last I looked it has not been passed.
What is scary is for some elected official to even consider such a bs move.

 

[Variant]

The election is over, candidate A wins fifty four percent of the vote, candidate B receives forty six percent. Candidate A is the clear winner but hold your horses there pardner, your state in its infinite wisdom decides candidate B has won the state. Will this be ok with you?

Nope, they do it and they die.

 

[Bullseye]

Didn't happen in Arizona. What stopped it was the current State election laws.

Yeah, it did. There were close to 50,000 questionable ballots - just because the count matched doesn't mean all those ballots were legitimate. BUT with better laws they might be. You guys are terrified by fair and legal elections.

Since the election a few Republicans in Arizona introduced legislation to allow them to override election results. Last I looked it has not been passed.
What is scary is for some elected official to even consider such a bs move.

Because the Left has repeatedly proven itself to be amoral slimebalms.

 

[KevinKohler]

If you're a closed primary state, it's already that way for many.

 

[mike2810]

Yeah, it did. There were close to 50,000 questionable ballots - just because the count matched doesn't mean all those ballots were legitimate. BUT with better laws they might be. You guys are terrified by fair and legal elections.

Because the Left has repeatedly proven itself to be amoral slimebalms.

Questionable by who? So you support the State Legislature overturning the vote of the people. Got it.

Who was questioning the ballots? Logan?

 

[washunut]

Don't know what state your in. But if you have a majority republican legislator, they are already making plans for just that to happen. They are hiding behind the premise of voter integrity which we all know is horse dung.

In the past months, 99% of voter fraud cases that have risen to the level of prosecution have been illegal votes for Trump. And even those have been miniscule in numbers.

My state is solidly blue and will stay that way.

 

[lurchadams]

The election is over, candidate A wins fifty four percent of the vote, candidate B receives forty six percent. Candidate A is the clear winner but hold your horses there pardner, your state in its infinite wisdom decides candidate B has won the state. Will this be ok with you?

Texas just replaced their Secretary of State with a trump ct attorney, who worked with trump to try to overturn the 2020 election. This person is now the one responsible to certify all elections in the state of Texas. Why people aren't in arms about that is indicative that the slow-moving coup the Republicans are up to will succeed.

 

[lurchadams]

Don't think that would ever happen in my state. Could care less what happens in Georgia.

Well, what happens in GA can effect who is elected to the presidency and Congress. We SHOULD all care about election integrity in every state.

 

[lurchadams]

How is that going to happen. IF candidate A won 54% of the vote wouldn't that suggest the states general slant aligns with A? Which entity of the state is going to interfere.

Such a dumb post. You understand that the Secretaries of State, as well as State legislatures have the power to either certify or decertify votes. Brad Ratzenberger of GA was fired because he wouldn't find 11,000 illegitimate votes. He and his family received death threats from trumpists angry of his disloyalty. You think a trumpist stooge, like TX as for their Secretary of State will have a problem with "finding votes" to win the presidency for the Republicans? If you say "yes" - that's pretty naïve.

 

[lurchadams]

The state legislature. This means that your state legislature vote is also your presidential vote.

Yeah, I mean, that was SUCH a dumb post by poor @Bullseye .

 

[lurchadams]

Sadly, its gonna happen in a state where the GOP runs the legislature in the 2024 election.
Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, or Arizona - One of these states will be the first to ignore the voters.

I sadly agree. We're watching the fall of our democracy in real time.

 

[lurchadams]

I know all the scare stories people - mostly lefties - are peddling as reasons to "reform" voting. You guys keep whipping yourselves into a frenzy over this. Not gonna happen.

Idiotic post #2. Answer this question: Brad Ratzenberger refused to find 11,000 votes and thus lost his authority in GA to certify elections. People who refused to do the wrong thing are being punished for it. Do you really not see this happening? Are you that much of a right-wing partisan?

 

[Perotista]

The election is over, candidate A wins fifty four percent of the vote, candidate B receives forty six percent. Candidate A is the clear winner but hold your horses there pardner, your state in its infinite wisdom decides candidate B has won the state. Will this be ok with you?

All 50 states have laws on the book awarding their electoral votes to the popular vote winner. Until a state legislature rescinds those laws, there's nothing to worry about. now I think we need to remember for approximately the first 60 years of this nation, in many states the people elected, voted for their state legislatures which in turn the state legislatures awarded that states electoral votes without a popular vote taking place in the state. It was part of being a Representative Republic and not a direct democracy.

We've become use to the popular vote, I really don't think any state legislature has the guts to do away with that. But if they did, we'd be returning to the principles of what the Framers of the Constitution had in mind. People vote and elect their state legislatures, their representatives and the state legislature being the representative of the people of that state determine who gets that states electoral votes.

But until a state repeals, rescinds their current state law or laws, there's nothing to worry about.

 

[bongsaway]

Texas just replaced their Secretary of State with a trump ct attorney, who worked with trump to try to overturn the 2020 election. This person is now the one responsible to certify all elections in the state of Texas. Why people aren't in arms about that is indicative that the slow-moving coup the Republicans are up to will succeed.

I saw that earlier today, pretty amazing. They have zero shame as a party.

 

[bongsaway]

All 50 states have laws on the book awarding their electoral votes to the popular vote winner. Until a state legislature rescinds those laws, there's nothing to worry about. now I think we need to remember for approximately the first 60 years of this nation, in many states the people elected, voted for their state legislatures which in turn the state legislatures awarded that states electoral votes without a popular vote taking place in the state. It was part of being a Representative Republic and not a direct democracy.

We've become use to the popular vote, I really don't think any state legislature has the guts to do away with that. But if they did, we'd be returning to the principles of what the Framers of the Constitution had in mind. People vote and elect their state legislatures, their representatives and the state legislature being the representative of the people of that state determine who gets that states electoral votes.

But until a state repeals, rescinds their current state law or laws, there's nothing to worry about.

The framers also had in mind only certain folks were worthy of voting. Why we still insist we follow a piece of paper over two hundred years old is beyond me. We need a serious update to our constitution.