Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
We won't see the fruits of the conspiracy until this Tuesday. That doesn't mean it's not being planned.
-
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!
Trump's supporters are trying to intimidate voters
- Thread starter Kapalika
- Start date
This could be.
Both parties are vulnerable to allies embarrassing them at polling locations.
Democratic accusations (which are easy & useful to make) don't mean it is being planned either. But I've read claims that it's already happening. This that which I debunk.
And fun too!
But seriously I agree that there really has not been much in the way of voter intimidation so far, and it may turn out to be nothing more that bluster on the part of Trump and some of his supporters who have threatened to do this. (Which is like saying they have threatened to threaten). It might happen on Tuesday, it might not. I do think it is wise to be prepared and know how to handle it (who to call for example).
The "bluster" is at this point on the part of Trump's accusers.
The threats of voter intimidation are either real, or they are bluster. Which is it?
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Yeah, those are the guys screaming that the vote is rigged, right?
BTW, when did Trump and Hannity become Democrats? I must have missed the big memo.
Perhaps I missed it, but I haven't seen any evidence of actual threats yet.
And no, mischievous claims that poll watching is a threat don't count.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Just listen to your Fuhrer. He's the one making the veiled threats. Oh, you don't want to recognize those threats? How quaint!
To claim the election is rigged is not voter intimidation.
Btw, the US gov has been assuring us that actual rigging (by hacking or other means) is virtually impossible. Our distributed & primitive systems make this claim reasonable. But now, government is behaving otherwise by making cyber-attack threats against Russia.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/u-s-hackers-ready-hit-back-if-russia-disrupts-election-n677936
It seems the Obama admin wants to have it both ways, ie, ridicule Trump's claims,
while validating them for the purpose of demonizing Trump's purported ally, Russia.
I don't care how you characterise it. My question is do you think that a significant portion of those who signed up on Trump's website to be "poll watchers" are actually going to go to other polling stations on Tuesday, or do you think they are bluffing?
From a legal standpoint if the court determines this is being organised by the RNC then it is illegal.
"Fuhrer"?
Geeze, Louise....perhaps this country should give up voting.
Democracy doesn't suit a people where so many believe every election is Hitler v Mother Teresa.
Anyway, I've asked for evidence of threats.
You've offered none.
You only claim that I reject that which you don't offer.
Too much nitrogen in the blood again?
Please practice safe diving.....at least before you vote.
Anyone can stand around polls & watch (from a distance).
What has actually happened that one could call "voter intimidation"....other than the New Black Panther (not likely Trump supporters) incident?
I say it's too early to say the sky is falling.
In this election? No. I already said that.
Now let me ask you a question. Because I am interested in your opinion.
My question is do you think that a significant portion of those who signed up on Trump's website to be "poll watchers" are actually going to go to other polling stations on Tuesday, or do you think they are bluffing?
I think few would do it.
Why?
It's work.
It's fun to promise to do things, but to follow thru is another matter.
(I suppose the argument will become about the definition of "few".....or "is".)
What do you think....significant numbers....intimidation?
I take the cowardly path.....when there's no intimidation, as has been the case so far, I say there's no intimidation. If it appears, then I'll say there's intimidation (if it's real, not imagined because someone saw a guy with a scowl or a Confederate flag).
But the claims that it's already started, or certainty that it will....that bespeaks hubris borne of too much time in the echo chamber....or too little time in the decompression chamber.
I won't go near the polls.
(I dislike crowds....especially the kind that votes.)
I'll just drop off my absentee ballot at the township hall on Monday.
I recommend wearing a Hawaiian shirt.
It will offend, but not politically.
Caution!
Do not wear it tucked in.
That is both a fashion faux pas & uncomfortable.
(Magnum PI was wrong.)