VP Debate

@Finn dAbuzz,

Sorry 'bout that. No way I can vote for Trump.

@roger,

That's fine. I can't either, but neither you or I are Republican politicians.

Trump loses, as I expect he will, and it could easily be the end of the GOP.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

I've never had any inclination to be a politician, but continue to be a registered Republican.

I doubt he will mark the end of the party if he loses, but maybe so if he wins. Just my opinion, it depends on the coat tail effect, and mostly in the House and Senate. I do not see much future for Republicans in politics who continue to support Trump. His problems go way beyond competence, which isn't much in evidence anyway.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

The GOP is pressuring Pence to drop out. Wonder if he will.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Every Republican that feels the need to announce they will not vote for their party's nominee, has a special place in Hell.

By distancing themselves from Trump, they may retain their Senate seats and possibly prevent Clinton from appointing moonbats to the Supreme Court. You don't support that play?

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Every Republican that feels the need to announce they will not vote for their party's nominee, has a special place in Hell.

Your party's nominee is maybe one step up from a rat's turd.

0 Replies

Finn says:

Quote:

Every Republican that feels the need to announce they will not vote for their party's nominee, has a special place in Hell.

This is one of the rare times Finn has been right. Their special place in Hell is the air-conditioned luxury suites, with an endless line of imps bringing them fresh sushi plates, while they watch the poor deluded deplorables who voted for the greasy buffoon Donald Trump suffering all the agonies of the damned. It's still Hell, they are Republicans, after all,, but it's the best spot.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote McGentrix:

Quote:

They [Republican officeholders] can vote for him [Trump] or shut the **** up about it.

They should have publicly ditched him when he said that stuff about Mexicans, kicking off his campaign. Better late than never, I suppose. It all comes down to whether an office holder views himself primarily as a representative of the people who happens to come from a particular party, or if the officeholder views himself primarily as a member of a party who happens to hold an office.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Every Republican that feels the need to announce they will not vote for their party's nominee, has a special place in Hell.

Agreed.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

They can vote for him or shut the **** up about it.

I agree. These republican elected officials had multiple opportunities to publicly announce that they will not be voting for Trump. Trying to keep up with the horrible offensive things Trump has said throughout the whole campaign season would be a full time job. What took them so long? They all should have done this a long time ago. Now, they feel the need to tell the public that they will not be voting for Trump. You are correct. How convenient of them.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

far better late than never.

0 Replies

@roger,

roger wrote:

Sorry 'bout that. No way I can vote for Trump.

Hillary will nominate justices who will allow your Second Amendment rights to be wantonly violated.

Anything other than a vote for Trump will help Hillary win.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

roger wrote:
Sorry 'bout that. No way I can vote for Trump.

Hillary will nominate justices who will allow your Second Amendment rights to be wantonly violated.

Anything other than a vote for Trump will help Hillary win.

Well Hillary has all the votes from the dead soldiers who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. You didnt know they still had the ability to vote while being dead, did you?

1 Reply

@Krumple,

I am well aware that Democrats cheat in elections, and do their utmost to ensure that no anti-voter-fraud measures are ever in place to stop them.

It generally only matters in close elections though.

And sometimes not even then. For instance in 2000 Al Gore tried to cheat W out of the Presidency and Republicans didn't let him get away with it. Then Al Gore tried to launch a scorched earth campaign, and the Supreme Court didn't allow him to get away with that.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

According to the research done at the Brennan Center for Justice of New York University's School of Law, voter fraud is virtually nil.

Why the hell would somebody who is in the country illegally and using a faked ID to get by do something where he had to expose his ID to examination voluntarily? If you want to stay in the country, you use a fake ID as few times as possible and hope that it doesn't get checked out too closely by somebody. You know that the ID doesn't check if they look closely enough-you're gambling that they don't check it closely. That's why you use it as few times as possible.

And you think these immigrants who are trying to escape detection are going to go down to the polling place and try to vote, thereby possibly opening themselves up to investigation?

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

Why the hell would somebody who is in the country illegally and using a faked ID to get by do something where he had to expose his ID to examination voluntarily?

The Democrats do their best ensure that people are able to vote without needing to show any ID.

The idea is that the names of dead people stay on the voting rolls and the Democrats get people to show up and vote in the name of each dead person.

I always figured that this fraud was carried out by natural born US citizens. But legal or illegal, no ID required means no ID checked.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

That is baloney pushed by the Right Wing Noise Machine. From the The Truth About Voter Fraud, by the Brennan Center For Justice, NYU Law School:

Quote:

Voting from the grave offers salacious headlines, and investigators often attempt to match death records to voter rolls in an attempt to produce purported evidence of fraud. Yet in addition to the
problems with inaccurate matching identified above, a simple match of death records to voter rolls may conceal citizens who voted before dying, in quite ordinary fashion. In Maryland in 1995, for example, an
exhaustive investigation revealed that of 89 alleged deceased voters, none were actually dead at the time the ballot was cast. The federal agent in charge of the investigation said that the nearest they came was when they “found one person who had voted then died a week after the election.”

Similarly, in New Hampshire, postcards were sent to the addresses of citizens who voted in the 2004 general election; one card was returned
as undeliverable because the voter died after Election Day, but before the postcard arrived at her home.

http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/The%20Truth%20About%20Voter%20Fraud.pdf
The whole voter fraud thing is about the fact that if you don't live in the inner city, you probably can't get around without a car. The inner city person, however, can get around without one. So more inner city people don't have the usual form of ID, the driver's license, and so this emphasis on voter ID will cut out a certain percentage of inner city votes. Inner city votes tend to be Democratic votes, so the odds on close elections tip to Republicans. That's why Republicans push this voter fraud thing, even though very little evidence supports the idea that voter fraud exists.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

The whole voter fraud thing is about the fact that if you don't live in the inner city, you probably can't get around without a car. The inner city person, however, can get around without one. So more inner city people don't have the usual form of ID, the driver's license, and so this emphasis on voter ID will cut out a certain percentage of inner city votes. Inner city votes tend to be Democratic votes, so the odds on close elections tip to Republicans. That's why Republicans push this voter fraud thing, even though very little evidence supports the idea that voter fraud exists.

Someone from the inner city might have no drivers license, but it seems implausible that they would have no secure ID whatsoever.

How do people in the inner city prove their age to buy alcohol?

At any rate, the solution is easy. Have an implementation period where there is a strong push to get secure ID for anyone who doesn't have it. Then after a reasonable period it should no longer pose any trouble to people when ID is demanded.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

How do people in the inner city prove their age to buy alcohol?

I haven't been asked for ID when buying alcohol for over a decade.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote oralloy:

Quote:

At any rate, the solution is easy. Have an implementation period where there is a strong push to get secure ID for anyone who doesn't have it. Then after a reasonable period it should no longer pose any trouble to people when ID is demanded.

It's done by state, and right now many states are strapped for cash. In Pennsylvania, they used the normally crowded Motor Vehicle Department, and one 90 year old woman had to wait on line for three hours.

It's a lot of hassle and it most certainly will cut down on the number of votes regardless of how much good faith effort goes into the state ID drive. Don't forget, since one party benefits from the inner city citizens being denied, don't count on too much money being spent to make getting their state ID easier in many states.

All to supposedly "remedy" a problem that the studies show doesn't really exist. The "cure" is far worse than the disease.

1 Reply

Quick Links

My Account

able2know