Election 2020 - Page 265 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By Doug64
#15131143
colliric wrote:Gore(who I supported in 2000) made the mistake of trying to get manual recounts in 4 select counties, when a full recount would have been better.

That was a mistake only in retrospect, learned to be such when the news media performed a statewide recount of its own after the Supreme Court shut down the recounts and Florida was declared for Bush. The Gore campaign tried to finesse its way to victory an blew it. But that mess did leave us with that utterly bizarre opinion from the Supreme Court—a case where the majority made the correct ruling, but was unwilling to apply the obvious constitutional justification because it would open a can of worms they wanted to keep closed ... a can of worms that may well be opened this election, the Supreme Court being forced to give more scrutiny to elections.

Rancid wrote:Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe will be monitoring this election. THey have been monitoring US elections for the last 20 years or so.

They monitor elections of various countries, but point out the US is a bit harder because it's effectively like monitoring the elections of 50 countries at the same time.

That’s essentially what it is, the joys of Federalism at work—the playoffs of the world’s largest political league.
User avatar
By Rancid
#15131144
Doug64 wrote:That’s essentially what it is, the joys of Federalism at work—the playoffs of the world’s largest political league.


Sure, but I don't like the sports analogies with this stuff. Elections are more important than mere sport.

Anyway, I think one thing people don't appreciate, is the fact that every state effectively has it's own voting procedures and laws, makes it harder to hack the election.

Centralization is efficient, but it becomes easier to take over.
By Doug64
#15131147
Rancid wrote:Sure, but I don't like the sports analogies with this stuff. Elections are more important than mere sport.

More important certainly, but still similar. I personally like the comparison of US elections where the winner in the Electoral College loses the popular vote to the 1960 World Series, where the Yankees scored the most total runs in World Series history and still lost.

Anyway, I think one thing people don't appreciate, is the fact that every state effectively has it's own voting procedures and laws, makes it harder to hack the election.

Centralization is efficient, but it becomes easier to take over.

Very true, and one of the advantages of our system—especially the way that the very existence of battleground states means everyone knows which states are mostly likely to be at risk of voter fraud of whatever sort. Most people aren’t going to care much if someone uses voter fraud to run up the Democratic votes for president in California.
User avatar
By Rancid
#15131151
Doug64 wrote:More important certainly, but still similar. I personally like the comparison of US elections where the winner in the Electoral College loses the popular vote to the 1960 World Series, where the Yankees scored the most total runs in World Series history and still lost.


Yea, I know you do, you bring it up as often as Rush Limbaugh does. :lol: For the record, I'm not against the electoral system.

Doug64 wrote:Most people aren’t going to care much if someone uses voter fraud to run up the Democratic votes for president in California.


Are you suggesting there is massive voter fraud in California?
By Doug64
#15131154
Rancid wrote:Yea, I know you do, you bring it up as often as Rush Limbaugh does. :lol: For the record, I'm not against the electoral system.

It’s been years since I listened to Rush Limbaugh, but I rather doubt that’s possible. :lol:

Are you suggesting there is massive voter fraud in California?

No, I’m saying that if there was massive Democratic voter fraud in the California presidential election most people would just shrug, or worry about possible fraud in down-ticket elections. Everyone knows who’s going to win California, and committing fraud to run up the total is kinda pointless.

And as a reminder that the presidency isn’t the only thing on the ballots this year. It’s good to see that at least a plurality—and probably a majority—of California voters can recognize basic fairness even if their political masters can’t:

California Democrats take aim at historic initiatives on affirmative action, property taxes
This was supposed to be the year that California Democrats finally took out two of their least favorite citizens’ initiatives, Propositions 13 and 209, but the citizens are proving less than cooperative.

Proposition 16, which would repeal Proposition 209, the 1996 ballot measure banning affirmative action in government, was trailing by 38% to 49% in a Berkeley IGS survey Monday despite a spending advantage of 20-to-1.

Proposition 15, a “split roll” proposal that would gut California’s 1978 tax revolt measure Proposition 13, was leading 49% to 42% in the Berkeley survey, which may not be good enough on Election Day.

“Unfortunately, for the proponents of these measures, ballot initiatives that register less than 50% support in the weeks before an election rarely win in California politics,” said Thad Kousser, chairman of the University of California, San Diego, political science department.

He cited his research and that of other analysts showing that “most ballot measures drop in the polls as the campaign nears Election Day.”

Such are the frustrations of California Democrats, whose dominance of state politics and policy can be foiled by an unpredictable electorate via the initiative process.

Proposition 16, which the state Legislature referred to the ballot, was predicted to win easily, buoyed by momentum from the Black Lives Matter movement and increasing support on the left for affirmative action.

“I’ve been surprised, given California’s demographic changes and the strong consensus on social justice this year, the Prop. 16 has done so poorly,” Mr. Kousser said.

Proposition 16’s supporters include a who’s who of state and national liberals, including Sen. Kamala D. Harris, California Democrat, and Patrisse Cullors and Alicia Garza, co-founders of the Black Lives Matter Global Network whom Ms. Cullors described in a 2015 interview as “trained Marxists.”

“Yes on Prop 16 takes on discrimination in California public contracts, employment and education and restores an improved affirmative action so women and people of color can compete on equal footing,” says a Yes on 16 ad. “Level the playing field for women and people of color in California.”

Proponents have raised about $20 million, according to Ballotpedia, versus about $1 million for the No on 16 campaign. Yet the lopsided fundraising has failed to move the needle on public sentiment.

“The more the yes campaign is spending, the worse they’re doing,” said Manny Klausner, vice chairman of No on 16 and co-founder of the Reason Foundation. “The message against it isn’t appealing to most people unless they’re really hard-core progressives and the state can do no wrong. It rubs people the wrong way to hear that you’ve got to categorize people based on their race or their gender.”

The fundraising fight is more evenly matched with Proposition 15, which would not repeal Proposition 13 but would “drive a hatchet into its heart,” said Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association spokeswoman Susan Shelley.

Proposition 15 would amend the state constitution to tax commercial and industrial properties based on their market value instead of their purchase price as required under the tax-cutting measure Proposition 13.

Residential properties would remain under the Proposition 13 umbrella, as would small businesses and agricultural land — hence the “split roll” — but taxing commercial holdings at a higher rate would bring in an estimated $8 billion to $12.5 billion per year, 40% of which would be designated for schools.

Supporters include former Vice President Joseph R. Biden and Ms. Harris, along with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and a plethora of labor and liberal groups.

“A corporate tax loophole has allowed billions to be drained from our public schools and local communities. No more,” Ms. Harris says in an ad from Schools and Communities First, the Yes on 15 campaign.

The opposition, which includes the California Chamber of Commerce, California Farm Bureau and California Business Roundtable, argue that the measure’s passage would represent “the biggest property tax increase in the history of California.”

Ms. Shelley said the measure would harm small businesses by forcing malls, office buildings and other property owners to raise rents on their tenants. She described it as economically disastrous for a state already hobbled by the coronavirus shutdown.

“It would crush small businesses, and it’s not great for big businesses,” said Ms. Shelley. “It’s going to raise the price of food. It’s going to be brutal on the cost of living in California, which already has the highest poverty rate in the United States. It’s a catastrophe.”

While Democratic legislators seek to upend Propositions 13 and 209, other initiatives on the November ballot take aim at the Legislature’s recent left-tilting laws on criminal justice, cash bail and reducing the prison population.

Proposition 20 would toughen laws by reimposing limits on offenders eligible for parole and felony sentences for crimes reduced to misdemeanors. Proposition 25 would repeal Senate Bill 10, the 2018 legislation that ended cash bail and replaced it with a system evaluating a defendant’s flight risk.

Proposition 22 would override Assembly Bill 5, which restricted the use of independent contractors in favor of full-time employees, by again allowing “app-based drivers” to be independent contractors.

Yes on Proposition 22 has raised nearly $200 million primarily from Uber, Lyft and Door Dash, about 10 times more than the No on 22 campaign funded by labor groups, which have advocated for the drivers to be unionized. The measure led by 46% to 42% in the Berkeley IGS poll Monday.

Analysts are watching to see whether voters will side with or defy the increasingly liberal legislature.

IGS co-director Eric Schickler said that “the fates of Propositions 15 and 22 will be important signals of whether the state’s Democrats can translate their electoral advantage into substantive policy changes in taxes and corporate governance.”
User avatar
By Rancid
#15131155
Doug64 wrote:It’s been years since I listened to Rush Limbaugh, but I rather doubt that’s possible. :lol:


I occasionally will tune into his show (haven't done it since Trump has been elected though), and he loves to bring up the world series story. In fact, my guess is, he is the originator of that analogy and it has effectively gone viral among conservatives over the years. I usually only hear conservatives bringing up that analogy. Hence my hypothesis that it probably came from the conservative radio media (and further, I'm guessing Rush).

No, I'm not a Rush fan, but it's important to hear people like him out, as he can give us a pulse on conservatism in America. I also occasionally read Fox news for the same reason.
User avatar
By Rancid
#15131166
Doug64 wrote:m saying that if there was massive Democratic voter fraud


What if there was massive Republican voter fraud? Is that ok?

My point here is all this fraud shit is just fucking trash. The psychological priming, the social engineering around this "fraud" garbage is insidious as fuck and will turn America into a shit hole country.

This bullshit attitude that's going to play out where if Trump loses "IT HAS TO BE FRAUD", but if he wins then "no fraud" is just such a shithole country thing.
By Doug64
#15131175
Rancid wrote:I occasionally will tune into his show (haven't done it since Trump has been elected though), and he loves to bring up the world series story. In fact, my guess is, he is the originator of that analogy and it has effectively gone viral among conservatives over the years.

I listened to Rush until I got a job that came with a cubicle. Oddly enough, I found out I was happier without the three-hour-a-day dose. What’s the point spending all your time being angry over things you can’t do anything about?

Whether or not Rush is the origin, I can’t say I’m surprised it’s gone viral—it’s a short, easy to understand analogy that both explains and justifies the Electoral College in a single whack. I would imagine the Left hates and despises it for the same reason.

And it isn’t just the Left and Right that are worried about the election, if for a very different reason:

'Cities burn regardless of who wins': Police gearing up for widespread violence after election
Law enforcement agencies from Washington to Los Angeles are bracing for planned protests, spontaneous demonstrations and potential rioting on Election Day when 2020’s political tension reaches the breaking point.

Thousands are expected to take to the streets for election demonstrations that will dovetail with racial justice protests still unfolding in cities such as Philadelphia and Portland. Police agencies won’t rule out civil unrest that rivals or exceeds the widespread upheaval that followed the death of George Floyd this summer.

“Law enforcement is really ramping up for the election not only in urban areas but suburban areas as well,” said Sgt. Betsy Branter Smith, an executive with the National Police Association. “If there is no clear winner, we are going to see violence and we are preparing for that.”

Ms. Smith estimates that 80% of the country could see some form of unrest, but doesn’t expect that it will all be violent. She said the demonstrations will likely range from peaceful protests to widespread mayhem and looting.

Law enforcement in major cities and small towns are planning for potential unrest the night of the Nov. 3 election and in the days that follow if there is not an immediate winner.

A pair of protests planned for Washington on Tuesday is expected to draw more than 10,000 people and potentially spark violence just steps from the White House.

In New York, Police Commissioner Dermot Shea warned that most officers will be required to report for duty in uniform, including those who don’t normally work in uniform such as detectives. More than 1,200 officers have been deployed to polling places around the city.

A memo issued by Commissioner Shea told officers to “anticipate and prepare for protests growing in size, frequency and intensity leading up to the election and likely into the year 2021.”

Officials in Beverly Hills, California, announced it will close retail mecca Rodeo Drive to cars and pedestrian traffic on Election Day and the day after as a “proactive approach to possible protests.”

Local businesses in Washington this week began nailing wooden boards to cover windows as protection against rioters.

Chicago officials recently held an “all-hazards drill” to walk through how to respond to election-related threats and Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison said his department is creating deployment protocols for Nov. 3.

Small towns, too, are preparing for potential unrest, fearing their community could be the next Kenosha, Wisconsin, which became the epicenter of anti-police protests after the police shooting of Jacob Blake.

The riots in Kenosha saw militia activity and two protesters killed during demonstrations in August.

“We are following the intelligence coming to us from the Chicago or state police,” said Tom Weitzel, the police chief in suburban Riverside, Illinois. “If they get concrete intelligence that there will be some type of violence, we will take steps.”

Law enforcement officials say they are not seeing a specific threat, but with the nation bitterly divided, it’s imperative to prepare for a worst-case scenario. Recent headlines reveal plenty of violence by the left and the right in the run to Election Day.

Earlier this month six men were arrested and accused of plotting to kidnap and kill Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, in part because of her onerous coronavirus restrictions. In September, federal prosecutors in California arrested a man they say firebombed the headquarters of a local Republican women’s organization.

There also is concern that distrust of the election results could spur violence by the losing side, regardless of who loses.

Both sides also fuel those worries, with Democrats warning of Russian meddling in the election and Mr. Trump warning that mail-in voting could be rigged.

The president called on his supporters to observe the polls as unofficial election monitors, which could lead to confrontations at polling places.

The Antifa movement, which has stoked unrest in cities this summer, will likely riot regardless of the election outcome, said Sgt. Smith.

“I think you are going to see cities burn regardless of who wins,” she said. “If Donald Trump wins and wins handily, they will take the frustration of the left and channel it into these demonstrations. If there is a Joe Biden victory, anarchists are not fans of Joe Biden.”

Michael Anton, a former senior national security official in the Trump administration, said the president will need to be more forceful with election protesters than he has been with racism demonstrations.

But Mr. Anton acknowledged that any action will be opposed by Democratic mayors and governors in those locations that resisted the president’s call for federal officers to quell rioting earlier this year.

“If cities are burning or being destroyed, I tend to think [Mr. Trump] would be a lot less lenient in the post-election environment than he was earlier this year,” Mr. Anton said at an event sponsored by the conservative Center for Security Policy.

“If cities are on fire, you have to get it under control. But it puts the president in a horrible spot because he’s taking action without the cooperation of the locations,” he continued. “It can be hard to know effectively what to do. It’s possible even the best-intentioned action could make things worse if you are opposed by people on the ground.”

Portland, Oregon, Mayor Ted Wheeler, who initially rebuffed Mr. Trump’s offer to use federal troops to stop the months of rioting, said Monday the city is working on a mutual aid agreement with state and federal law enforcement.

“It has to be done in a way that is not alarmist and doesn’t suggest that this type of activity is expected to be widespread,” Mr. Wheeler said. “And it needs to very carefully distinguish between peaceful protest and acts of violence.”

Personally, I don’t expect much if any violence anywhere Conservative groups alone are protesting or demonstrating, that isn’t generally Conservatives’ style. But where you get Conservatives and Liberals demonstrating beside each other or—less likely but still a real possibility—where Leftists are protesting alone ... yeah. Especially if Trump wins, or looks like he’s going to.
By Doug64
#15131178
Rancid wrote:What if there was massive Republican voter fraud? Is that ok?

My point here is all this fraud shit is just fucking trash. The psychological priming, the social engineering around this "fraud" garbage is insidious as fuck and will turn America into a shit hole country.

This bullshit attitude that's going to play out where if Trump loses "IT HAS TO BE FRAUD", but if he wins then "no fraud" is just such a shithole country thing.

My example was California, if you want to use Texas and Republicans it applies just as well. But considering that any voter fraud in the presidential election this time is most likely to involve the massive piles of mail-in ballots, I’d say Republicans have a right to be worried. Though again, our electoral system allows them to focus on a handful of states and ignore the rest, at least as far as the presidential election is concerned.
By Pants-of-dog
#15131181
I think the worry about fraudulent mail in votes is as realistic as the 2016 worry about undocumented migrants voting; i.e. it exists solely in the minds of one group.
User avatar
By Rancid
#15131183
Pants-of-dog wrote:I think the worry about fraudulent mail in votes is as realistic as the 2016 worry about undocumented migrants voting; i.e. it exists solely in the minds of one group.


Indeed, "It's always something" is the phrase that comes to mind with conservatives and their baseless obsessions with fraud. It's a baseless social engineering tactic by conservatives.
User avatar
By Chad
#15131188
In America the Red Wave is happening. Dumb, dirty, and despicable Leftist Democrats will not discuss Sleepy China Joe Biden's crack headed son's dealings with foreign countries.
Doug64 wrote:My example was California, if you want to use Texas and Republicans it applies just as well. But considering that any voter fraud in the presidential election this time is most likely to involve the massive piles of mail-in ballots, I’d say Republicans have a right to be worried. Though again, our electoral system allows them to focus on a handful of states and ignore the rest, at least as far as the presidential election is concerned.

Even with massive voter fraud and New York's Electoral Fraud...Clinton...Cuomo.etc. (It is going to happen and it will be caught in time) The Leftist Commie Pinko Democrats are going to lose the White House and Porky Pelosi's House of ill repute. The AOC squad will be dismantled and America's taxpaying legal citizens will help President Trump drain a little more of the D.C. Swamp. Trump-Pence 2016-2024 Leftist Democrats and illegals still Suck. Thank God Weiner's emails and Hunter's emails are exposed. Hillary will get her just dessert...The Teflon Clinton s are getting some real dirt stuck to them in some hard to reach places.
User avatar
By Wulfschilde
#15131189
As of the morning of the 29th, Democrat's lead in Florida has dropped down to 157k. This is below the theoretical 190k margin and we still have 5 days left to go.

If Trump gets Florida, and I'm now certain that he will, he will have won re-election. Those of you who really hate that idea might want to start mentally preparing yourselves because we crossed that threshold faster than even I had thought we would.

Biden is out in Georgia pretending like the polls are real even though publicly available numbers suggest he's already lost Florida. He can litigate it all he wants but a conservative SCOTUS is not going to give it to him.
User avatar
By Chad
#15131200
Yea for America's taxpaying legal citizens. The exposed Weiner and Hunter emails are like unto Manna.
Wulfschilde wrote:As of the morning of the 29th, Democrat's lead in Florida has dropped down to 157k. This is below the theoretical 190k margin and we still have 5 days left to go.

If Trump gets Florida, and I'm now certain that he will, he will have won re-election. Those of you who really hate that idea might want to start mentally preparing yourselves because we crossed that threshold faster than even I had thought we would.

Biden is out in Georgia pretending like the polls are real even though publicly available numbers suggest he's already lost Florida. He can litigate it all he wants but a conservative SCOTUS is not going to give it to him.

Never vote for any career politician. Especially the crooked corrupt China Joe Biden kind. Leftist Democrats and illegals Suck.
By Doug64
#15131201
Rancid wrote:Indeed, "It's always something" is the phrase that comes to mind with conservatives and their baseless obsessions with fraud. It's a baseless social engineering tactic by conservatives.

This year, the most likely voter fraud will be attempts to force states to count invalid mail-in ballots. It’s what we’ve already seen, after all.
#15131208


Pretty cool how the president sees voting as an existential threat to his administration. It's almost like making voting easier and more accessible is bad for the GOP.
By Doug64
#15131224
And the latest Rasmussen White House Watch is out, with Biden back in the lead, at this point they’re flipping places each day:

  • Donald Trump 47%
  • Joe Biden 48%
  • Some other candidate 3%
  • Not sure 2%
By Istanbuller
#15131228
SpecialOlympian wrote:Istanbuller just admitted that the enshrining of owning human beings into a nation's founding documents is more closely related to libertarian principles.

You can freely express your opinions under conservative/libertarian governments. However, conservative and libertarian people are being discriminated under Democrats governments.

Free speech and civil liberties are under threat in an America which is being governed by Democrats. Latest shift toward the far left is even more creepier. Democratic Party is severely authoritarian.
User avatar
By Random American
#15131230
Istanbuller wrote:You can freely express your opinions under conservative/libertarian governments. However, conservative and libertarian people are being discriminated under Democrats governments.

Free speech and civil liberties are under threat in an America which is being governed by Democrats. Latest shift toward the far left is even more creepier. Democratic Party is severely authoritarian.

Trump wants to ban some forms of COVID-19 coverage, wants to sue people for "fake news" which really just means holding him accountable via the press, etc. While there are Democrats who don't like free speech, the Republican party is hardly in favor of protecting it either, except when it is convenient.
By Istanbuller
#15131234
Random American wrote:Trump wants to ban some forms of COVID-19 coverage, wants to sue people for "fake news" which really just means holding him accountable via the press, etc. While there are Democrats who don't like free speech, the Republican party is hardly in favor of protecting it either, except when it is convenient.

I disagree with you. Trump opposed many mandatory things like wearing mask outside for a very long time since epidemic appeared. Bu he realized that leftist media uses it against him and he felt in need to change. It is leftist populist media, CNN, ABC, NBC and others, damage America's civil liberties. But they are still allowed to broadcast. You see the point here, don't you?

Free speech is a libertarian concept and it is widely accepted into conservative ideology either.
  • 1
  • 263
  • 264
  • 265
  • 266
  • 267
  • 434

Actually, in this case being hyper-intelligent ca[…]

https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/[…]

ckaihatsu wrote: For the sake of clarification w[…]

Life has become so abundant and easy that the her[…]