welp, i was wrong. there totally was an election security breach, and it was from exactly the political party you all expected.

[sonatine]

https://www.gjsentinel.com/breaking/...a804129e6.html




team GOPtard with another breath taking own goal.

[Walter Sobchak]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

[dwai]

LOL ANOTHER GREAT THREAD BROUGHT TO YOU BY TDS INFECTED, NEVER LEAVES HIS HOUSE FAT DOOMER SONATINE

AND I WONDER WHAT POLITICAL PROPAGANDA HE'S PUSHING

[BartHanson]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

[ftpjesus]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections?

Nope but we do care however about unelected activist judges violating the Constitution by arbitrarily changing election laws set forth by the State Legislature and which is specifically enumerated in the US Constitution.. Prime Facia is what happened in Georgia and Pennsylvania.. In both cases unelected appointed judges did an end run around dually elected State Legislatures and altered election rules in those states.. The question one asks is why were ballots allowed to be accepted well after the state mandated cutoff period.. None of those ballots shouldve been counted or allowed and I dont care if they were for Trump or Biden it was a clear and concise violation of Constitutional requirements for states rights.. The only time courts have been allowed to intercede is when proven unfair election actions such as poll taxes etc were going on and those were still addressed in the normal method.. These actions were undertaken literally a short time before the elections.. Not saying there was fraud outright but again votes were counted and forced to do so in direct violation of state passed laws.. That shouldnt have happened end of story.

[NickyPipes]

Brother the idea that all elections do not have “security” “breaches” is not reasonable

[Jayjami]

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections?

Nope but we do care however about unelected activist judges violating the Constitution by arbitrarily changing election laws set forth by the State Legislature and which is specifically enumerated in the US Constitution.. Prime Facia is what happened in Georgia and Pennsylvania.. In both cases unelected appointed judges did an end run around dually elected State Legislatures and altered election rules in those states.. The question one asks is why were ballots allowed to be accepted well after the state mandated cutoff period.. None of those ballots shouldve been counted or allowed and I dont care if they were for Trump or Biden it was a clear and concise violation of Constitutional requirements for states rights.. The only time courts have been allowed to intercede is when proven unfair election actions such as poll taxes etc were going on and those were still addressed in the normal method.. These actions were undertaken literally a short time before the elections.. Not saying there was fraud outright but again votes were counted and forced to do so in direct violation of state passed laws.. That shouldnt have happened end of story.

There was zero point zero federal court intervention in this election, because states pretty much get to run their elections as they see fit, and state judges get to say what state law is. That’s what the Constitution says. Read it sometime.

[sonatine]

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

something you hear a lot from people who knew like, school shooters, is that they totally saw the signs but thought it was all some sort of bit or joke.

druff's demurely white nationalist trumpism isnt a bit or a joke. its exactly what he's wanted to say for decades. and the reason he embraced trumpism so totally is because it validated those opinions and made them essentially mainstream, imo.

[Dan Druff]

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

something you hear a lot from people who knew like, school shooters, is that they totally saw the signs but thought it was all some sort of bit or joke.

druff's demurely white nationalist trumpism isnt a bit or a joke. its exactly what he's wanted to say for decades. and the reason he embraced trumpism so totally is because it validated those opinions and made them essentially mainstream, imo.

Druff the White Nationalist Trumpist Jew, y'all

[NickyPipes]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

Brother you live in the fantasy land of the poker world

Brother go tell a crackhead on the street on Tamarind Avenue in WPB about upholding the countries “norms” and get back to me ok?

Brother go tell Bucktooth Billy from the Everglades about “traditional democracy”

Do you understand?

[Dan Druff]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

Every time you ask the question, I give you essentially the same response.

I do not believe the election was stolen, and I don't agree with the various attempts by some on the far right to call the election into doubt.

However, it's absurd to think that the Democrats haven't done the same. Remember all of the talk about how Stacey Abrams was the real governor of Georgia, due to "voter suppression"? Remember all of the nonsense that Russian collusion handed the 2016 election to Trump, and that Hillary should have been the real President?

If Democrats care so much about the norms of a traditional democracy, they wouldn't do shit like that. Everything today is so partisan and toxic that there are forces on each side which will do whatever they can in order to maintain power -- or to undermine the other party's power.

Even if this were just a Republican phenomenon (it's not), that still wouldn't bring me to vote Democrat. Today's Democrats are about as far from my own political beliefs as they've ever been. When I cast a vote for a Republican candidate, that doesn't mean I think he/she is perfect, or that the party is perfect. It means that I'm choosing the person whom I believe will overall govern in a fashion closest to what I think is correct.

[MumblesBadly]

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

Every time you answer the question, I give you essentially the same response.

What’s with this trend I’m seeing in English grammar among the younger generations in using the opposite word? It’s like they are trying to transport us to Opposite Universe with their innovations to the language. Because I was taught way back in grammat school many decades ago that people give responses to questions that are asked, not already answered.

[Texter]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

Bart you are clearly a card carrying liberal who lives in a white bread suburb...you talk the talk but when push comes to shove you live in 4% African American town. A hypocrite phony of highest magnitude. BLM...just not in your town...cuz there aren’t any.

[Walter Sobchak]

Brother the idea that all elections do not have “security” “breaches” is not reasonable

Actually it’s very reasonable. Because it’s true, in America at least. Except when the Republicans fuck it up.

[Kalam]

It’s almost as if there are professionals who look after these things and the Republicans who are trying to monkey around with elections are doing so to steal elections rather than make them “more secure.”

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

Is supporting violent rioting and looting upholding the norms of a traditional democracy? Is whatever the Texas Democrats are doing upholding the norms of a traditional democracy?

Anyways, it seems neither side is very interested in upholding democratic norms anymore. And no one really seems to care about democratic norms if they feel whatever going on is to their benefit. So it is hard to take these kind of arguments coming from either side very sincerely.

[Walter Sobchak]

I'm surprised that Druff hasn't spoke out more on this topic. He's for the most part rational and understands that there is no widespread voter fraud, especially at any sort of level that should cause the GOP's base to consider "election integrity" to be the most important issue that our country faces. How he can play along with this farce is beyond me.

For all you GOP sympathizers, do you care if a state's legislature ignores their state's popular vote winner and appoints electors to the losing side, under the guise of phantom fraud (the legislature just saying that there is fraud with no credible evidence)? Or is it that you think that the democrats are so bad that you don't care if the GOP actually doesn't win an election playing by our country's traditional election norms/rules and that they should just be in power anyway because it is good for the country? And I mention traditional rules/norms because there is nothing in the constitution that stops a state from appointing any presidential electors that they choose.

I'll conclude by asking the same question that I have directly asked Druff a half dozen times on this forum throughout the last year--which is more important, upholding the norms of a traditional democracy or having political policies in place that align with your own personal views, even if those views are in the vast minority and cannot win playing by the traditional state winner take all rules of our presidential elections? And btw Black Lives Matter is not relevant to any of my questions.

Is supporting violent rioting and looting upholding the norms of a traditional democracy? Is whatever the Texas Democrats are doing upholding the norms of a traditional democracy?

Anyways, it seems neither side is very interested in upholding democratic norms anymore. And no one really seems to care about democratic norms if they feel whatever going on is to their benefit. So it is hard to take these kind of arguments coming from either side very sincerely.

False equivalence

[sonatine]

Is supporting violent rioting and looting upholding the norms of a traditional democracy?

pop quiz how the fuck do you think this nation was formed?

liberals kicked the shit out of the monarchy, then we kicked the shit out of the slavers south of the mason dixon.

jesus christ dude log off and read a book or something.

[Texter]

You can’t take credit for founding the country and being anti slavery but nice try.

[Walter Sobchak]

You can’t take credit for founding the country and being anti slavery but nice try.

Wrong. Many of the founders were against slavery. That conflict defined the first 90 years of the country’s existence.

[Dan Druff]

Is supporting violent rioting and looting upholding the norms of a traditional democracy?

pop quiz how the fuck do you think this nation was formed?

liberals kicked the shit out of the monarchy, then we kicked the shit out of the slavers south of the mason dixon.

jesus christ dude log off and read a book or something.

So the violent rioters in 2020 were equivalent to the American heroes of the Revolutionary and Civil Wars.

They weren't criminals and opportunists. Heroes.

And I'm sure you would've been super supportive of those heroes if they were rioting in your neighborhood and burning down houses there.