Time for Conservatives to beat the Crazy Ass Libs at their own game of cheating and ballot harvesting

[AmishGangster]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

This is exactly what I meant. I like the gun show idea, although you can bet 99% will still be skeptical and go to the polls on election day.

But there are people at the polls and people can be intimidating to people. How can my dead Aunt vote if I have to drag her ass to the polls only for her to be intimidated by straight white men breathing?

[1pittsburgh]

Originally Posted by AmishGangster

I love when the left wing idiots want to expand the Supreme Court because they are outnumbered.

Outnumbered against the will of the people. Trump appointed 3 SCJ but Clinton received 2.9 million more votes than he did. I"d rather get rid of the EC and allot senators based on population than expand the Supreme Court. Unrig the federal government which was short sightedly set up in a way that now heavily favors the citizens from the rural areas. There's no good reason why one citizen's vote should hold more power in the federal government than another's.

I know it's a pipe dream because we'd never get the consensus necessary to change it. The politicians it favors would never go for it.

[1pittsburgh]

Originally Posted by AmishGangster

But there are people at the polls and people can be intimidating to people. How can my dead Aunt vote if I have to drag her ass to the polls only for her to be intimidated by straight white men breathing?

How would you get your dead mother to vote for Trump:

https://apnews.com/article/election-...4146931127caff

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

This is exactly what I meant. I like the gun show idea, although you can bet 99% will still be skeptical and go to the polls on election day.

Yes, this is absolutely what needs done.

And while you will still have a bunch of GOP who are skeptical and will do whatever it takes to vote on election day in person, harvesting ballots at gun shows, churches, nursing homes, etc. will get those less motivated people to fill out a ballot. Just like the crazy ass libs do it. Hell, maybe the GOP should get the dead to vote just like the cheating libs.

Anyway, this whole concept has gained traction. here is Lee Zeldin who may be challenging McDaniel for RNC chair today:

States shouldn’t be passing laws to allow ballot harvesting, but wherever states decide to do it anyways, Republicans need to start doing ballot harvesting better than Democrats and make those Democrats deeply regret legalizing ballot harvesting in the first place.

[AmishGangster]

Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

Outnumbered against the will of the people. Trump appointed 3 SCJ but Clinton received 2.9 million more votes than he did. I"d rather get rid of the EC and allot senators based on population than expand the Supreme Court. Unrig the federal government which was short sightedly set up in a way that now heavily favors the citizens from the rural areas. There's no good reason why one citizen's vote should hold more power in the federal government than another's.

I know it's a pipe dream because we'd never get the consensus necessary to change it. The politicians it favors would never go for it.

To quote Barry “elections have consequences”. In this case that means consequences for generations for libs. Hillary got her ass beat because she is a horrible candidate and the left will suffer because of it. Republicans held the Senate during Barrys years because he was a divisive POTUS, thats why Garlamd was blocked.

You can try to spin it any way you like but it just won’t work, the failings of the left caused the issue and now, like Obamacare, you have to live with it

[AmishGangster]

Its interesting watching liberal heads exploding while they are still in a power position, imagine what will happen when the Republicans are in complete control again, which may be as soon as 2 years. And can you imagine if its actually Trump? Maybe they will all move to Canada for real this time

[Charley3]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

People who believe such things as men can’t have babies, or countries should have borders, are now labeled “right wing radicals” when just a few years ago they were just considered sane. It’s one seriously crazy train we’re riding on lately.

No. Right wing radicals are the ones who make excuses for Jan 6 or claim every other election lost is an election rigged.
I’m with you on babies and borders, but I’m no radical.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

Outnumbered against the will of the people. Trump appointed 3 SCJ but Clinton received 2.9 million more votes than he did. I"d rather get rid of the EC and allot senators based on population than expand the Supreme Court. Unrig the federal government which was short sightedly set up in a way that now heavily favors the citizens from the rural areas. There's no good reason why one citizen's vote should hold more power in the federal government than another's.

I know it's a pipe dream because we'd never get the consensus necessary to change it. The politicians it favors would never go for it.

You don’t seem to understand the concept of The United ~States~ of America.

[tommy156]

Originally Posted by AmishGangster

To quote Barry “elections have consequences”. In this case that means consequences for generations for libs. Hillary got her ass beat because she is a horrible candidate and the left will suffer because of it. Republicans held the Senate during Barrys years because he was a divisive POTUS, thats why Garlamd was blocked.

You can try to spin it any way you like but it just won’t work, the failings of the left caused the issue and now, like Obamacare, you have to live with it

Yeah, she got her ass beat by receiving 3 million more votes than trump. Lol. The electoral college is a sham, and Republicans know they would never win another Presidential election without it.

[tommy156]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

You don’t seem to understand the concept of The United ~States~ of America.

Yeah, and it's an outdated concept. When Montana has the same number of Senators as New York or California has, a 3rd grader can tell you it's bullshit.

[1pittsburgh]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

You don’t seem to understand the concept of The United ~States~ of America.

The "concept of the United States of America" once in included legalized slavery in half of the states. We subsequently decided that they were wrong about that. Not everything in the constitution is right.

I'll pose the question to you, but I doubt you can provide a logical answer. At most you will once again use an appeal to tradition fallacy. Why should a regular citizen from one state have more federal political power than one form another state? For example, the citizens of North Dakota have the most federal political power. If you were to give an honest answer, you would say that it's because it favors your side, and your side's power would be almost completely diminished without it.

[1pittsburgh]

Originally Posted by AmishGangster

To quote Barry “elections have consequences”. In this case that means consequences for generations for libs. Hillary got her ass beat because she is a horrible candidate and the left will suffer because of it. Republicans held the Senate during Barrys years because he was a divisive POTUS, thats why Garlamd was blocked.

You can try to spin it any way you like but it just won’t work, the failings of the left caused the issue and now, like Obamacare, you have to live with it

Well, your guy got 2.9 million less votes than that "horrible" candidate, so it's not spin to say that he was elected against the will of the American voters.

Garland was blocked because Mitch is a hypocrite.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by tommy156

Yeah, and it's an outdated concept. When Montana has the same number of Senators as New York or California has, a 3rd grader can tell you it's bullshit.

I enjoy the writings of people who, in the grand scheme of things, are nobodies, yet think they are wiser than the country’s founders.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

The "concept of the United States of America" once in included legalized slavery in half of the states. We subsequently decided that they were wrong about that. Not everything in the constitution is right.

I'll pose the question to you, but I doubt you can provide a logical answer. At most you will once again use an appeal to tradition fallacy. Why should a regular citizen from one state have more federal political power than one form another state? For example, the citizens of North Dakota have the most federal political power. If you were to give an honest answer, you would say that it's because it favors your side, and your side's power would be almost completely diminished without it.

It’s called federalism, the foundation of what the country was built on and the reason it’s been so successful in such a short time. Look it up if you don’t understand.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

Garland was blocked because Mitch is a hypocrite.

Garland was blocked because he could be, democrats would’ve done the exact same thing if the situation was reversed.