Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[josh]

A Pennsylvania judge issued an order temporarily preventing the state from taking any further actions to certify the election results.

The ruling stops action until after a Nov. 27 hearing, “to the extent that there remains any further action to perfect the certification of the results of the 2020 General Election..."

"... Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar certified President-elect Joe Biden’s 80,555-vote Pennsylvania victory yesterday, and Governor Tom Wolf appointed electors for the state.
...
McCullough, a Republican, directed Boockvar and Wolf, both Democrats, to file a response by 3 p.m. on Wednesday.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, also a Democrat, said in a statement that he’d file an appeal “momentarily,” adding: “This order does not impact yesterday’s appointment of electors.”

I suspect the judge, despite being a Republican, is going to join a long line of judges who have looked at the suit and determined there is "no there there" and toss it.

The lack of evidence, substance, precedence, and supporting law is compelling.

[josh]

See?  We sort of agree.  Not so hard when you're not being a know it all bombastic COVID cop.

Confused.   Thought you said you Iggy people for "abuse. "  But dispensing insults is fine,  then?   

SINCE I'M ON IGGY COULD SOMEONE REPOST THIS.   WOULD REALLY HELP TO HAVE AN ANSWER.

I fail to understand why an answer would be helpful. Can you explain?

(I get to both do as requested and ask a question at the same time!)

[facilitatorn]

http://www.theweek.com/articles/951759/parents-warned-internet-break-brains-broke-theirs-instead

[barton]

See?  We sort of agree.  Not so hard when you're not being a know it all bombastic COVID cop.

Confused.   Thought you said you Iggy people for "abuse. "  But dispensing insults is fine,  then?   

SINCE I'M ON IGGY COULD SOMEONE REPOST THIS.   WOULD REALLY HELP TO HAVE AN ANSWER.

I fail to understand why an answer would be helpful. Can you explain?

(I get to both do as requested and ask a question at the same time!)

Thanks,  brah!   I just want to comprehend the seeming double standard.   No serious expectation, though.

[barton]

Experimented with the Ignore function,  discovered that it doesn't block the subject line of the ignored party's post.   Cool.

[josh]

Law and Order!

https://cnn.com/politics/live-news/biden-trump-us-election-news-11-25-20/h_2ea9cde73279e6446b5b34db90136057

[REDSTATEWARD]

Any vaccine should first be tested on politicians.
If they survive then it is safe.
If they don’t then WE are safe

Monika Wisniewska
Polish Author

[barton]

Any vaccine should first be tested on politicians.
If they survive then it is safe.
If they don’t then WE are safe

Monika Wisniewska
Polish Author

Good one!

[Kam]

If that is where you are headed, then they win because they keep you playing their game.

The trick is to change the game so as to make the one they play irrelevant.

http://www.salon.com/2020/11/25/trump-isnt-the-reason-we-cant-quit-trump--the-obsession-is-really-about-his-followers/

Better manners and better policies alone won’t get it done. I used to think so, then I used to hope so, but republicans have shown they are immune to good manners and good policy.

Republicans want their war on America. We need to make sure they lose everywhere. Part of that is understanding the war has already begun.

The reason that Trump captures so much attention, year in and year out, is because of his followers. How did this two-bit moron who can barely read manage to attract a loyal following — one that has apparently grown from the 63 million people voted for him in 2016 to the 74 million who turned out in 2020? These people adore him, so much so that a quarter-million Americans dead and millions more unemployed only made them more determined to give it all up for the orange guy in an ill-fitting suit who wants to end democracy as we know it. It's a legitimately fascinating mystery.

Only a mystery if you think his followers really care about democracy.   Judging from the comments seen on thedonald.win and other pro-trump outlets, they want to create a new government and aren't loyal to democracy.

[bankshot1]

Trump pardons the treacherous liar and felon Flynn.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/25/us/politics/michael-flynn-pardon.html?action=click&module=Alert&pgtype=Homepage

WASHINGTON — President Trump pardoned on Wednesday his former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn, who had twice pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about his conversations with a Russian diplomat and whose prosecution Attorney General William P. Barr tried to shut down.

“It is my Great Honor to announce that General Michael T. Flynn has been granted a Full Pardon,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter.

after being crushed at the polls and in court, this is our president being presidential, by pardoning a traitor.

Trump will weaken this country every day until he leaves office.

[LarryBnDC]

If that is where you are headed, then they win because they keep you playing their game.

The trick is to change the game so as to make the one they play irrelevant.

http://www.salon.com/2020/11/25/trump-isnt-the-reason-we-cant-quit-trump--the-obsession-is-really-about-his-followers/

Better manners and better policies alone won’t get it done. I used to think so, then I used to hope so, but republicans have shown they are immune to good manners and good policy.

Republicans want their war on America. We need to make sure they lose everywhere. Part of that is understanding the war has already begun.

Republicans bring guns to knife fights and Democrats bring covered dishes...

[luee]

Ok onward to the Biden administration.

What social scientist told him to make this his top priority? Sounds like the same elitist liberal lost cause  that got the Donald elected 4 long years ago.
Please there is a pandemic going on with many unemployed and homeless.

---“I made a commitment, in the first 100 days, I will send an immigration bill to the United States Senate with a pathway to citizenship for over 11 million undocumented people in America,” Biden continued.---

[Hamilton Samuels]

Trump’s assault on our fair elections is the culmination of the conscious decision by the Republican Party to suppress the votes of marginalized communities rather than reach out in any meaningful way..

It’s no accident the Trump campaign has targeted the votes of black and brown people from the counties that carried Joe Biden to victory in the swing states.

Below is the abstract from a paper I produced in 2014:

“Recent polling data has shown widespread support for the proposal and enactment of new laws changing voting procedures in many states controlled by conservative legislatures. Supporters of these new laws contend they are necessary for electoral security and to prevent in-person voter fraud, while opponents state the new laws are designed to suppress the increasing voting power of racial/ethnic minorities (primarily African Americans) and to maintain the status quo in regions that are experiencing demographic shifts in the voting populations.

The purpose of this study was to try and understand why there is support for these new laws in the face of evidence that voter fraud is extremely rare and the specific target of these new laws, in-person voting fraud is statistically non-existent. This effort examines the relationship between perceptions of African Americans and support for these new voting laws and whether those perceptions are reinforced by exposure to television and television news. Cultivation theory states people who spend more hours watching television than others perceive the real world to be an accurate reflection of the world they see on television. This study was an attempt to determine if the support for these new voting laws has been influenced by the amount of television people watch and the results indicate that this may indeed be the case.

To examine if there was a correlation between the representations of African Americans in the media and the support for new voting laws a cross-sectional survey was distributed through social media networks on the Internet to two hundred fifty participants with one hundred ninety fully completing the survey.

Participants who reported a negative perception of African Americans indicated their support for laws eliminating early voting periods and support for stricter voter identification laws. Participants who reported watching more television than others were more likely to believe portrayals of African Americans on television were accurate and also indicated their support for strict voter identification standards and support for laws eliminating early voting. As such people who watch more television may be exposed to more negative racial imagery in television programming and that may wield influence over their decision making process on issues concerning local and national politics as well as society in general.

Trump isn't the real problem. The real problem is SCOTUS.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-breathtakingly-radical-approach-120048391.html

And Congress has the solution.

Didn’t say Trump was the real problem.

The real problem is the decade long attack on the votes of black people by the Republicans with the tacit support of the majority of white people.

Guess you skipped reading the piece.

h

I read the piece.

What I posted was written six years ago detailing why a majority approved of the assault on black voting rights.

Your data (from 6 years ago, too) is weak, at least in this excerpt, for the assertions you're making. It doesn't mean you're wrong, only that your argument as youve posted it here falls short of being supported.

Post the whole study, not just the conclusions you've drawn.

It’s called an abstract for a reason.

As I said, your argument is weak without the details. So, man up.

[LarryBnDC]

Trump’s assault on our fair elections is the culmination of the conscious decision by the Republican Party to suppress the votes of marginalized communities rather than reach out in any meaningful way..

It’s no accident the Trump campaign has targeted the votes of black and brown people from the counties that carried Joe Biden to victory in the swing states.

Below is the abstract from a paper I produced in 2014:

“Recent polling data has shown widespread support for the proposal and enactment of new laws changing voting procedures in many states controlled by conservative legislatures. Supporters of these new laws contend they are necessary for electoral security and to prevent in-person voter fraud, while opponents state the new laws are designed to suppress the increasing voting power of racial/ethnic minorities (primarily African Americans) and to maintain the status quo in regions that are experiencing demographic shifts in the voting populations.

The purpose of this study was to try and understand why there is support for these new laws in the face of evidence that voter fraud is extremely rare and the specific target of these new laws, in-person voting fraud is statistically non-existent. This effort examines the relationship between perceptions of African Americans and support for these new voting laws and whether those perceptions are reinforced by exposure to television and television news. Cultivation theory states people who spend more hours watching television than others perceive the real world to be an accurate reflection of the world they see on television. This study was an attempt to determine if the support for these new voting laws has been influenced by the amount of television people watch and the results indicate that this may indeed be the case.

To examine if there was a correlation between the representations of African Americans in the media and the support for new voting laws a cross-sectional survey was distributed through social media networks on the Internet to two hundred fifty participants with one hundred ninety fully completing the survey.

Participants who reported a negative perception of African Americans indicated their support for laws eliminating early voting periods and support for stricter voter identification laws. Participants who reported watching more television than others were more likely to believe portrayals of African Americans on television were accurate and also indicated their support for strict voter identification standards and support for laws eliminating early voting. As such people who watch more television may be exposed to more negative racial imagery in television programming and that may wield influence over their decision making process on issues concerning local and national politics as well as society in general.

Trump isn't the real problem. The real problem is SCOTUS.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-breathtakingly-radical-approach-120048391.html

And Congress has the solution.

Didn’t say Trump was the real problem.

The real problem is the decade long attack on the votes of black people by the Republicans with the tacit support of the majority of white people.

Guess you skipped reading the piece.

h

I read the piece.

What I posted was written six years ago detailing why a majority approved of the assault on black voting rights.

Your data (from 6 years ago, too) is weak, at least in this excerpt, for the assertions you're making. It doesn't mean you're wrong, only that your argument as youve posted it here falls short of being supported.

Post the whole study, not just the conclusions you've drawn.

It’s called an abstract for a reason.

As I said, your argument is weak without the details. So, man up.

Take a look at the world around you.

[bankshot1]

knicks

You're sounding like Jenna Ellis

"Your question is fundamentally flawed, when you're asking, 'where's the evidence?' You clearly don't understand the legal process" -- Jenna Ellis