Bills would curtail objections at future Jan. 6 vote counts

SmarterthanYou said:
you really got triggered with my truth, didn't you?
Click to expand...

So why did you leave the 3%ers? It obviously had nothing to do with their ideology, so what was the reason? You didn't want to get caught up in their bullshit, yet you still adhere to it here on JPP.

So you didn't really leave them, did you?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the Left is taking away the ability of the people to object to possibly bad election results. then again, the left loves taking away the power of the people to object and protest
Click to expand...

No. They haven't taken away the ability to object. They have made the standard for objection more in line with reality of the current political situation. They then applied that standard to both sides.
Do you think it would be OK to prevent the election of Trump in 2024 if only 2 people object? Or would you prefer that it require a much larger number to object?
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
No. They haven't taken away the ability to object. They have made the standard for objection more in line with reality of the current political situation. They then applied that standard to both sides.
Do you think it would be OK to prevent the election of Trump in 2024 if only 2 people object? Or would you prefer that it require a much larger number to object?
Click to expand...

All of these people don't realize that Kamala Harris will be the VP in 2025 who presides over this count, so I guess they want it to be possible for her to toss the 2024 election results if she doesn't like them.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I do not disagree, however, there can always be exceptions. Imagine a blue states electors giving in to their fears of an elected democrat, therefore they decide to cast their vote for a republican
Click to expand...
If I understand you, then it can be contested in court.
 
LV426 said:
What else could you possibly be talking about? Come on.
Click to expand...

this is the problem with you wacko lefties.....anyone who disagrees with you, even in the slightest, is automatically a trumper.............your selective memory kicks in hard core and you forget everything else. FYI, I was talking about FUTURE elections, dipshit
 
LV426 said:
So why did you leave the 3%ers? It obviously had nothing to do with their ideology, so what was the reason? You didn't want to get caught up in their bullshit, yet you still adhere to it here on JPP.

So you didn't really leave them, did you?
Click to expand...

i've answered this for you simple minded fuckers many times. remember it or shut up about it.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
No. They haven't taken away the ability to object. They have made the standard for objection more in line with reality of the current political situation. They then applied that standard to both sides.
Do you think it would be OK to prevent the election of Trump in 2024 if only 2 people object? Or would you prefer that it require a much larger number to object?
Click to expand...

a single objection should be enough to trigger a state election investigation.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
this is the problem with you wacko lefties.....anyone who disagrees with you, even in the slightest, is automatically a trumper
Click to expand...

Ah, but what is the disagreement rooted in??

It's not like we're disagreeing over what the best Marvel movie is, or Queen's best single, or which beer is the least like drinking piss.

We are disagreeing over the security of the election, which you don't think is secure and I'm not sure why you think that.

Framing it as a "disagreement", and not "fundamental opposition to core democratic principles", certainly glosses over quite a bit.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
i've answered this for you simple minded fuckers many times. remember it or shut up about it.
Click to expand...

You said you left them, but it wasn't over any of the beliefs or ideology.

So you haven't really reformed yourself; you're still a terrorist in your own head.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you're projecting your vision of the world upon others.
Click to expand...

No, you are quite literally doing that shit when you say it's "my truth".

I don't EVER talk in those terms, but you did.

So it's not the truth, it's YOUR truth of which you think you're entitled.
 
LV426 said:
Ah, but what is the disagreement rooted in??

It's not like we're disagreeing over what the best Marvel movie is, or Queen's best single, or which beer is the least like drinking piss.

We are disagreeing over the security of the election, which you don't think is secure and I'm not sure why you think that.

Framing it as a "disagreement", and not "fundamental opposition to core democratic principles", certainly glosses over quite a bit.
Click to expand...

there are several areas of any election that leaves itself vulnerable to fraud
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top