But Magas need to believe anything
possible that could look bad for Harris.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Florida in Play for Democrats?
- Thread starter Wandering Monk
- Start date
possible that could look bad for Harris.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Even when the running mate openly says "I lied."
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I said might, I didn't say it was.
His language was cagier....
Not "lie"...just "create stories".
Soandso
ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
Huh. Did you pull that tidbit from anywhere in particular?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Pull what? I just surmised. Were you even paying attention the first time? Seems not.
Soandso
ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
Oh yah, you're right. I wasn't anticipating you were just pulling scenarios out of thin air. My mistake
Clizby Wampuscat
Well-Known Member
He never said that. This is what he said.
“The things they had in there were crazy. They had things, levels of voting that if you’d ever agreed to it, you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again, They had things in there about election days and what you do and all sorts of clawbacks. They had things that were just totally crazy and had nothing to do with workers that lost their jobs and companies that we have to save.”
He was talking about democrats trying to make it easier to cheat.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I wasn't pulling scenarios out of thin air. I was surmising. So incredibly daft, it's unbelievable.
He was talking about making it easier for eligible people across the nation to vote -- where we know full-well that Republicans have routinely tried to exclude "some" voters with strategies like what kinds of identification are acceptable. If you know that poor, black people are less likely to have some of those bits of ID, often for economic reasons, you get to exclude them.
The Guardian, March 30, 2020 -- just after Trump's remarks -- interpreted those remarks correctly as meaning: "making it easier to vote in America would hurt the Republican party."
Question for you: how many fair voting acts have Republicans allowed to pass either House in the last 10 years? They know easier voting isn't good for them.
In any case, what the heck does it matter? The US doesn't have national elections for their national President and VP. A small minority of voters in a small minority of states will make the decision for the vast majority, and everybody else might as well have stayed home!
Think of the vast amounts of money to be saved every election year if you only allowed those 7 swing states to play!
Alien826
No religious beliefs
There's a category of citizens that would be excluded if that were to be strictly true, that is naturalized citizens that don't have a passport. What they have is a Certificate of Naturalization, which is sufficient to register to vote. I suspect that would be accepted, do you know?
This might apply to me as I am currently applying for citizenship. I had hoped to be able to vote in November, but that now looks unlikely due to estimated processing times. I will be getting a passport, but that takes time, so there would be a period during which I wouldn't have either a US birth certificate or a passport.
Clizby Wampuscat
Well-Known Member
You guys like to tell us what we think huh. I posted the quote but instead you go to a democrat to tell you what Trump actually said.
The truth is it is easy to vote. Extending voting times, no ID required to vote, mailing ballots to everyone, mail in ballots, drop boxes all make it easier to cheat. That is an objective truth.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Prove that is has made it easier to cheat. That is the Republican claim, but when it comes to cheating at voting most of the cases were of Republicans in the last election and the numbers were never ever high enough to threaten any of the elections that they were involved with. Voting experts, which has people from both parties swore that the last Presidential election was the most secure ever.
Clizby Wampuscat
Well-Known Member
I never said it wasn’t. Please read what I said. See you guys love to tell us what we think. Masters of straw men.
"What you think?" Are you sure we go that far?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I read what you said and my post refuted your implication. There is no good reason for higher security. Here is the metric that one has to use. If more people are prevented from voting than the number of bad votes that a new security measure would prevent then the security measure is worthless and not needed.