Dawn being Dawn at ESPYs

[DeeDave]

Kind of like Stacy Abraham’s and Hillary Clinton?

Yes, exactly.

Abrams was flat out wrong and silly to talk about the election being stolen from her because she didn't win. She was a loser who whined.

and Hillary, while she did graciously concede the election to Trump the day after the election and attended his inauguration, should have been a 1000% more careful with her statements. She was a loser who whined.

and Trump did the same, but took it up about 1,000,000% refusing to concede, convincing millions that the election was stolen but never being able to prove it in court where it counts (really never even trying actually) and not having the grace to attend the inauguration. He is a loser who whined.

Thank God I didn't vote for any of them.

 

[turncock]

I am making perfect sense.

It wouldn't. Sore losers are sore losers. They whine and complain no matter what. If "every vote was counted" and put on a transparent ledger," a sore loser would complain that the vote count was rigged, or they cheated before the votes were counted, or they perpetuated some other fraud in the system. That's because sore losers are sore losers. They always have an excuse or reason that things weren't fair.

Sore loser whiners presenting their version of evidence on social media, talk radio, cable shows, podcasts don't equal evidence. Evidence is presented in courts of law where it counts, where rules of evidence are taken seriously, and where cross examination can occur with input by experts. Not Crazy Charlie on social media.

When those cases have been brought, they haven't went well for the people whining. There is a reason for that. As has been stated many times, even Republican judges have shot a lot of it down.

More importantly are the long list of people that were claiming fraud on tv and online but when in court- didn't claim fraud or election rigging. That was what Rudy Giuliani did- claimed it everywhere but in court where it mattered.

North Carolina has voter ID now. People that lose will still whine about it. if someone is going to cheat, they will find a way to cheat.

Georgia has had their current voter ID law since 2008. Losers still whined about the election not being fair.

Not one Republican who won in 2016 questioned their own election or called it fraudulent or corrupt. Sore losers whine.

Thankfully, we usually catch the few actual cheaters.

Georgia Republican Party official voted illegally nine times, judge rules

Brian Pritchard, first vice chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, was fined $5,000 for voting illegally and registering to vote while serving a sentence for a felony, a judge ruled.

www.nbcnews.com

You're offering your opinion. Both yourself and the big government party cannot explain why you won't move to a universal system and end this swing state voter controversy once and for all.

Unlike what you've stated above, they know these new systems are legit. Their argument is they believe there are people raised by wolves in corners of the country who might not have ID even though most have cell phones and places to live.

It's fraud and the Democrats like it that way.

 

[Ward Jr]

You're offering your opinion. Both yourself and the big government party cannot explain why you won't move to a universal system and end this swing state voter controversy once and for all.

Unlike what you've stated above, they know these new systems are legit. Their argument is they believe there are people raised by wolves in corners of the country who might not have ID even though most have cell phones and places to live.

It's fraud and the Democrats like it that way.

Spot on. Gomer is on this site for entertainment purposes only. If you try to dig into a subject with him beyond the surface, that quickly becomes self-evident.

Following years of posting CNN links, he's pivoted to AI for many of his talking points but can't seem to figure out how to implement and cross-check it properly.

As a result, name calling and deflecting remains his most trusted tools. He mentally chalks it up to being on a site of "right wingers" -- but that doesn't even start to explain why he's constantly been proven incorrect time and time again.

If one would could "short" everything he labels something a conspiracy theory, you're be resting comfortably Bora Bora today.

I personally enjoy watching the whole thing unfold on a regular basis. However, it's also an addiction that I need to work on.

 

[DeeDave]

You're offering your opinion. Both yourself and the big government party cannot explain why you won't move to a universal system and end this swing state voter controversy once and for all.

Unlike what you've stated above, they know these new systems are legit. Their argument is they believe there are people raised by wolves in corners of the country who might not have ID even though most have cell phones and places to live.

It's fraud and the Democrats like it that way.

I've explained it. You refuse to listen because that's you

The great majority of states don't want the federal government telling them how to run elections. That includes most Republican members of Congress.

Congress has passed a law that mandates only citizens can vote. That law, signed in the 1990s, reaffirmed earlier laws.

How states ensure that is up to them through their elected reps in each state. That's our system. Wanting to get the federal government involved in policing that isn't very popular with most of those elected. One reason is that could always backfire. A future Congress and a future President might have a very different idea on that issue than you do.

You can sit around and believe that everyone that you don't like that wins won fraudulently in a corrupt election. That's the Donald Trump approach. But that's you. That's not me.

Three Republican supporters from Trump-backing Florida arrested for voter fraud

The three have been accused of voting more than once in the 2020 elections

www.independent.co.uk

 

[turncock]

I've explained it. You refuse to listen because that's you

The great majority of states don't want the federal government telling them how to run elections. That includes most Republican members of Congress.

Congress has passed a law that mandates only citizens can vote. That law, signed in the 1990s, reaffirmed earlier laws.
How states ensure that is up to them through their elected reps in each state. That's our system. Wanting to get the federal government involved in policing that isn't very popular with most of those elected. One reason is that could always backfire. A future Congress and a future President might have a very different idea on that issue than you do.

You can sit around and believe that everyone that you don't like that wins won fraudulently in a corrupt election. That's the Donald Trump approach. But that's you. That's not me.

Three Republican supporters from Trump-backing Florida arrested for voter fraud

The three have been accused of voting more than once in the 2020 elections

www.independent.co.uk

Not true. Look at the voting in Congress on the subject. It's universal that Republicans want Voter ID and the Democrats do not. The most recent example of this was the vote on the SAVE Act which all Republicans voted yes to and the Democrats did the opposite. It passed the House but will be shot down by the Senate b/c of the Democrats.

 

[DeeDave]

Not true. Look at the voting in Congress on the subject. It's universal that Republicans want Voter ID and the Democrats do not. The most recent example of this was the vote on the SAVE Act which all Republicans voted yes to and the Democrats did the opposite. It passed the House but will be shot down by the Senate b/c of the Democrats.

It's 100% true. I was correct.

This is boring at this point and I'm tired of posting the same thing over and over. We are never going to agree on anything, and I am proud of that fact.

"The SAVE Act requires significant changes to each step of the voter registration process: how voters register, how their identities are verified, and how list maintenance is performed on an ongoing basis. These changes would be costly and time consuming, taking months–if not years–to achieve.

Despite the administrative difficulty of implementation, the SAVE Act prioritizes expediency over precision. The act becomes effective on the date of enactment, giving states no time to adjust processes. It also requires that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission offer implementation guidance to states within just 10 days of enactment.

BPC recommends that policymakers avoid making major changes in an election year, given the likelihood that they result in administrative errors and create confusion for voters. Making matters worse, the SAVE Act is an unfunded mandate, with no funding offered to states to assist with implementation costs."

There are better ways–like REAL ID and data sharing–to improve voter list accuracy.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/five-things-to-know-about-the-save-act/

I will just add one comment to close this out- Republicans in numerous right wing states have passed laws making it illegal for their state agencies to share information with other states that would help state election agencies in states make sure people don't vote in more than one state.

 

[PaleoCock]

Spot on. Gomer is on this site for entertainment purposes only. If you try to dig into a subject with him beyond the surface, that quickly becomes self-evident.

Following years of posting CNN links, he's pivoted to AI for many of his talking points but can't seem to figure out how to implement and cross-check it properly.

As a result, name calling and deflecting remains his most trusted tools. He mentally chalks it up to being on a site of "right wingers" -- but that doesn't even start to explain why he's constantly been proven incorrect time and time again.

If one would could "short" everything he labels something a conspiracy theory, you're be resting comfortably Bora Bora today.

I personally enjoy watching the whole thing unfold on a regular basis. However, it's also an addiction that I need to work on.

BAH. You might need the help of a professional.

 

[PaleoCock]

It's 100% true. I was correct.

This is boring at this point and I'm tired of posting the same thing over and over. We are never going to agree on anything, and I am proud of that fact.

"The SAVE Act requires significant changes to each step of the voter registration process: how voters register, how their identities are verified, and how list maintenance is performed on an ongoing basis. These changes would be costly and time consuming, taking months–if not years–to achieve.

Despite the administrative difficulty of implementation, the SAVE Act prioritizes expediency over precision. The act becomes effective on the date of enactment, giving states no time to adjust processes. It also requires that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission offer implementation guidance to states within just 10 days of enactment.

BPC recommends that policymakers avoid making major changes in an election year, given the likelihood that they result in administrative errors and create confusion for voters. Making matters worse, the SAVE Act is an unfunded mandate, with no funding offered to states to assist with implementation costs."

There are better ways–like REAL ID and data sharing–to improve voter list accuracy.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/five-things-to-know-about-the-save-act/

There's always the next excuse. All Republicans want Voter ID. It can happen if your party would stop the dumb antics.

 

[Ward Jr]

Seems wise.

 

[DeeDave]

I will just add one comment to close this out- Republicans in numerous right wing states have passed laws making it illegal for their state agencies to share information with other states that would help state election agencies in states make sure people don't vote in more than one state.

BTW-

Most of these Republican states left the pact AGAINST the wishes of their own election commission bodies- and have been searching for an alternative ever since- with most saying they'll have to recreate the exact same pact again that they left.

But whatever they come up with will be extremely limited as most other states are still in the original pact. South Carolian remains in the pact. So does Georgia, Kentucky, and states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Before the 2022 election, the states participating in this sharing of information identified 200,000 people that had duplicate voter registrations, and 65,000 deceased voters still on the rolls between the states. The states corrected their rolls before the 2022 elections due to the information sharing.

"It really exposes the hypocrisy of states that are talking the most about voter fraud," Election attorney Alice Clapman said. "They're talking about voter fraud and at the same time pulling out of and damaging the best and only tool that states have to detect voter fraud."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/virginia-becomes-eighth-us-state-exit-voter-data-sharing-pact-2023-08-10/

So give me a damn break about Republicans being concerned about fraud. Take that joke somewhere else and pass it off on some slug who'll believe that lie like most on here.

 

[DeeDave]

There's always the next excuse. All Republicans want Voter ID. It can happen if your party would stop the dumb antics.

For the 10,000th time, I'm fine with voter ID. Every state should pass their version of it and make it mean something.

But Washington DC doesn't need to be involved in it. Passing another law that they don't fund isn't conservative. States run elections.

and I have no party. Just because I reject right wing nut job freaks and the current Donald Trump party, doesn't mean I belong to the Democrat party.

 

[Ward Jr]

BTW-

Most of these Republican states left the pact AGAINST the wishes of their own election commission bodies- and have been searching for an alternative ever since- with most saying they'll have to recreate the exact same pact again that they left.

But whatever they come up with will be extremely limited as most other states are still in the original pact. South Carolian remains in the pact. So does Georgia, Kentucky, and states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Before the 2022 election, the states participating in this sharing of information identified 200,000 people that had duplicate voter registrations, and 65,000 deceased voters still on the rolls between the states. The states corrected their rolls before the 2022 elections due to the information sharing.

"It really exposes the hypocrisy of states that are talking the most about voter fraud," Election attorney Alice Clapman said. "They're talking about voter fraud and at the same time pulling out of and damaging the best and only tool that states have to detect voter fraud."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/virginia-becomes-eighth-us-state-exit-voter-data-sharing-pact-2023-08-10/

So give me a damn break about Republicans being concerned about fraud. Take that joke somewhere else and pass it off on some slug who'll believe that lie like most on here.

Dave, you're now responding to yourself it appears.

Fraud has been proven in all of the states in question from 2020.

You would not know this because you somehow still absorb censored news

 

[Ward Jr]

For the 10,000th time, I'm fine with voter ID. Every state should pass their version of it and make it mean something.

But Washington DC doesn't need to be involved in it. Passing another law that they don't fund isn't conservative. States run elections.

and I have no party. Just because I reject right wing nut job freaks and the current Donald Trump party, doesn't mean I belong to the Democrat party.

You want big government involved in people's lives with the exception of a universal and transparent voting system even though we know states have run fraudulent elections.

Makes total sense.

 

[PaleoCock]

Seems wise.

View embedded media

Haha. This woman is spectacular. You could throw a rock at a Lollapalooza show and get a better candidate. Very sad.

 

[Ward Jr]

Haha. This woman is spectacular. You could throw a rock at a Lollapalooza show and get a better candidate. Very sad.

Yep. Imagine pushing Gabbard out of your party for this?

The pre-conditioned are cool with it though.

They have no idea the actual people in charge seek out the weakest.

 

[uscwatson21]

Not true. Look at the voting in Congress on the subject. It's universal that Republicans want Voter ID and the Democrats do not. The most recent example of this was the vote on the SAVE Act which all Republicans voted yes to and the Democrats did the opposite. It passed the House but will be shot down by the Senate b/c of the Democrats.

Because the SAVE Act is designed to prevent citizens from voting.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Because the SAVE Act is designed to prevent citizens from voting.

I want to prevent non-citizens from voting.

 

[Ward Jr]

Because the SAVE Act is designed to prevent citizens from voting.

I'll bite. Let's hear this one Watson.

 

[PaleoCock]

For the 10,000th time, I'm fine with voter ID. Every state should pass their version of it and make it mean something.

But Washington DC doesn't need to be involved in it. Passing another law that they don't fund isn't conservative. States run elections.

and I have no party. Just because I reject right wing nut job freaks and the current Donald Trump party, doesn't mean I belong to the Democrat party.

That's cool man. When I used to be on with more regularity, you were a CNN echo chamber. Good to see you moving forward.

 

[uscwatson21]

I want to prevent non-citizens from voting.

Then develop a system that ensures every citizen has an ID.

 

[Ward Jr]

Then develop a system that ensures every citizen has an ID.

Multiple technologies have been available for many years now. They are transparent and foolproof.

One party wants it. The other does not.

Check DeeDave's latest ramblings for why our government shouldn't require states use it.

 

[turncock]

Seems wise.

View embedded media

She's her own worst enemy and in the wrong profession. Rough behind a teleprompter and a total disaster without one.

I believe they'll pull her at the convention and she'll end up with a big mansion on the coast in Florida or California.

 

[uscwatson21]

Multiple technologies have been available for many years now. They are transparent and foolproof.

One party wants it. The other does not.

Check DeeDave's latest ramblings for why our government shouldn't require states use it.

It's really a shame you guys choose to be so disigenuous.

At least you're consistent with your idiocracy. It's a shame DeeDave flips back and forth.

 

[DeeDave]

That's cool man. When I used to be on with more regularity, you were a CNN echo chamber. Good to see you moving forward.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they get talking points from CNN. Other than being at a hotel somewhere, I haven't watched CNN more than 10 times in over a decade.

Lots of folks on here - the great majority- including you - repeat talking points from Fox and talk radio. That doesn't mean you watch or listen to either though. But the topics and the almost word for word regurgitation from some posters is interesting.

 

[DeeDave]

Then develop a system that ensures every citizen has an ID.

or the 10,001st time, having an ID doesn't mean someone is a citizen. People intent to vote illegally, can fake an ID, and can even get help with poll watchers and poll workers given few people volunteer for such roles- and it's largely a volunteer process in the United States.

Audits can help determine if non-citizens are voting.

Georgia conducts routine audits to determine if people who voted were property registered, citizens, etc.. - You should be happy with their audit results. Georgia runs them a lot (so does South Carolina).

Georgia review finds no noncitizens voted in recent elections

Georgia election officials said Monday that a review found no ballots cast by noncitizens in recent elections, but 1,634 people whose U.S. citizenship couldn't be verified sought to register to vote. Secretary of State Raffensperger said the review shows Georgia's citizenship precautions are...

www.ajc.com

 

[DeeDave]

I want to prevent non-citizens from voting.

states do a great job of this already. So, no reason to worry about it.

States like Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, South Carolina, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and others have internal audit processes that match up registrations with other state data.

South Carolina's program, like others, takes random precincts, hand counts them to match them against machine totals, and then takes random names on the rolls and matches them with other data to verify the individual. These results are published on various state election commission websites.

The records of these audits are incredibly consistent.

A bigger issue than non-citizens in the 2020 and 2022 elections were people voting twice. But even then, like in Florida, it was a total of less than 25 people.

 

[uscwatson21]

or the 10,001st time, having an ID doesn't mean someone is a citizen. People intent to vote illegally, can fake an ID, and can even get help with poll watchers and poll workers given few people volunteer for such roles- and it's largely a volunteer process in the United States.

Audits can help determine if non-citizens are voting.

Georgia conducts routine audits to determine if people who voted were property registered, citizens, etc.. - You should be happy with their audit results. Georgia runs them a lot (so does South Carolina).

Georgia review finds no noncitizens voted in recent elections

Georgia election officials said Monday that a review found no ballots cast by noncitizens in recent elections, but 1,634 people whose U.S. citizenship couldn't be verified sought to register to vote. Secretary of State Raffensperger said the review shows Georgia's citizenship precautions are...

www.ajc.com

Trust me. I understand that the voter ID laws have no values and are just bad faith attempts to suppress legitimate votes.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Trust me. I understand that the voter ID laws have no values and are just bad faith attempts to suppress legitimate votes.

Tell me who can't get an ID.

 

[turncock]

Trust me. I understand that the voter ID laws have no values and are just bad faith attempts to suppress legitimate votes.

What's in bad faith is your trolling.

 

[DeeDave]

Tell me who can't get an ID.

The argument from some has been that some people with disabilities, senior citizens, and particularly some older african americans and other minority groups might not have access to birth certificates to prove citizenship. Of course, some older white people also were born at home and could be in the same situation.

My grandmother on my dad's side never had a birth certificate. She was born at home. It was a a bit of an issue when it came to securing social security benefits because she only worked for a short time during WW 2 and shortly afterward when my grandfather was in Europe. The rest of the time she was a homemaker.

Some people with disabilities have to rely on other people to advocate for them and in some cases, if they don't have family or have limited understanding of some aspects of the requirements, it's too difficult for them to advocate for themselves or meet the requirements.

particularly with some older african americans and older people belonging to other minority groups, if they were born at home, there is no birth certificate. So providing one or proving one's citizenship becomes much more cumbersome, costly, and difficult, especially if they don't have someone to assist them.

I've long argued that people in these groups, over a certain age, could be exempted from this requirement in some limited fashion- and others have argued for that compromise but it wasn't considered. For example, a woman or man born at home in the late 1930s who never had a birth certificate could be exempted from that requirement.

and then some argue that voting is a right and a person shouldn't have to prove they have a right do something - that it's up to the government to prove they don't have that right.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

So you don't need ID to get gov benefits? We don't know who we're paying benefits to? I'm talking about citizens. And the people you mention would almost certainly be on assistance. They could have someone else buying their booze and smokes for them but those same people could take them where they need to go to get an ID. Are we talking about a handful of people?

 

[uscwatson21]

Tell me who can't get an ID.

A lot more than people who vote illegally. It’s a simple google if you were writing it in good faith.

You guys found it absurd to have to show your covid card to go into a restaurant, but you want people to have to prove they’re a citizen to exercise an enumerated right?

Come on.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

A lot more than people who vote illegally. It’s a simple google if you were writing it in good faith.

You guys found it absurd to have to show your covid card to go into a restaurant, but you want people to have to prove they’re a citizen to exercise an enumerated right?

Come on.

Wouldn't have to if your side didn't cheat like crazy. 🙂

 

[uscwatson21]

Wouldn't have to if your side didn't cheat like crazy. 🙂

Or if so many more people didn't vote Democratic...

Which is the real issue. You're just trying to stop citizens who will vote against you.

 

[turncock]

The argument from some has been that some people with disabilities, senior citizens, and particularly some older african americans and other minority groups might not have access to birth certificates to prove citizenship. Of course, some older white people also were born at home and could be in the same situation.

My grandmother on my dad's side never had a birth certificate. She was born at home. It was a a bit of an issue when it came to securing social security benefits because she only worked for a short time during WW 2 and shortly afterward when my grandfather was in Europe. The rest of the time she was a homemaker.

Some people with disabilities have to rely on other people to advocate for them and in some cases, if they don't have family or have limited understanding of some aspects of the requirements, it's too difficult for them to advocate for themselves or meet the requirements.

particularly with some older african americans and older people belonging to other minority groups, if they were born at home, there is no birth certificate. So providing one or proving one's citizenship becomes much more cumbersome, costly, and difficult, especially if they don't have someone to assist them.

I've long argued that people in these groups, over a certain age, could be exempted from this requirement in some limited fashion- and others have argued for that compromise but it wasn't considered. For example, a woman or man born at home in the late 1930s who never had a birth certificate could be exempted from that requirement.

and then some argue that voting is a right and a person shouldn't have to prove they have a right do something - that it's up to the government to prove they don't have that right.

Good post. My issue is that we can bend over backwards for 10 million illegals coming across the border - phones, checks, citizenship in some cases etc. but we can't get these people on record within a 4 year span? It's not as if there are many situations like this. IMO, it's just another excuse to keep the voting system in muddied waters.

 

[Ward Jr]

Good post. My issue is that we can bend over backwards for 10 million illegals coming across the border - phones, checks, citizenship in some cases etc. but we can't get these people on record within a 4 year span? It's not as if there are many situations like this. IMO, it's just another excuse to keep the voting system in muddied waters.

Of course. It's as easy as fill out a mailer if you're in that situation and have a social worker Genealogist help with your situation. Done.

They don't want the system fixed and transparent for obvious reasons and use lame excuses like this.

Also keep in mind that the same people making this argument desperately are trying to allow those 10 million illegals voting access so that's how much they care about the maybe few thousand people who fall into this category.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Or if so many more people didn't vote Democratic...

Which is the real issue. You're just trying to stop citizens who will vote against you.

Riiiight. 🙂

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

It’s a simple google

Google says the Trump assassination attempt did not really happen. But I'm sure you trust Google. 🙂

 

[adcoop]

Tell me who can't get an ID.

Old people who don't have children or family members to take them to get an ID after they can't drive anymore. My now 87 year old father was not able to get a Driver's License last go around (Eyesight has gotten too bad) and would be one of those persons that fall through the cracks if he didn't have 3 kids to take him to get an ID just so he can vote. Conservatives tend to focus only on unsubstantiated Voter Fraud and take people who have legally voted all their lives through unnecessary hoops.

 

[Lurker123]

Old people who don't have children or family members to take them to get an ID after they can't drive anymore. My now 87 year old father was not able to get a Driver's License last go around (Eyesight has gotten too bad) and would be one of those persons that fall through the cracks if he didn't have 3 kids to take him to get an ID just so he can vote. Conservatives tend to focus only on unsubstantiated Voter Fraud and take people who have legally voted all their lives through unnecessary hoops.

I don't think ID is considered unecessary, at all. It's pretty much mandatory for functioning ad an adult in our society.