God needs a Glock?

[Mikey 16,622]

9 hours ago, Leftfield said:

You're swell, Mikey

Thanks. Sorry you are too dense to get my point. Should I simplify, knowing that I'm dealing with an ideologue?

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

20 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Between now and the election it’d be interesting to have someone keep a tally of when a pro Trump post uses a substation link, what % is from actual news sources (including Fox) and how many are from Twitter/X authored by… a guy (ie  “Patriot Bob”.). 

Ah, yes.  The party of question everything just 6 or 7 years ago is now the party of question nothing everyone knows we are right.  Just yesterday Senator Schumer implied there was no need to have a trial in the impeachment of Mayorkas as they knew he was innocent of all charges.  Another exam of this administration being completely transparent.

There would be no need for *Patriot Bob* if the media were not so bias.

 

[homersapien 11,386]

22 hours ago, Mikey said:

Absolutely correct. What kind of nerd memorizes something like that or makes a note of sources?

Possibly the same kind of nerd that feels compelled to drop the make and model of his "carry" weapon in a forum.

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

Don’t you have a Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) for hunting?  I believe you mentioned that on this forum once.

[Leftfield 2,610]

23 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Thanks. Sorry you are too dense to get my point. Should I simplify, knowing that I'm dealing with an ideologue?

Lol...how can I get it? You didn't even have a point. You can't identify a single, legitimate claim to back up your position, and when asked for it you said you'd be a nerd if you knew. Is that somehow "checkmate" in your mind?

You've chosen what to believe, and that's fine, but don't be surprised when you get called out for wasting other people's time with substanceless arguments (by the way, that's what an ideologue does).

[aubiefifty 16,807]

4 hours ago, Mikey said:

Thanks. Sorry you are too dense to get my point. Should I simplify, knowing that I'm dealing with an ideologue?

i get chills when you use big words mikey

[Mikey 16,622]

13 hours ago, Leftfield said:

You can't identify a single, legitimate claim to back up your position, and when asked for it you said you'd be a nerd if you knew.

I said I got the information from watching Fox News and remarks of people in Alabama. Those are legitimate sources, you need nothing further for the purpose of this discussion. The last time one of you sufferers of TDD got me to chase around the internet finding old quotes was, indeed the last time.

Also I have a question: Why are Democrats so violently opposed to a system that would require verified voters?

[arein0 967]

10 hours ago, Mikey said:

Also I have a question: Why are Democrats so violently opposed to a system that would require verified voters?

It's likely the same reason why the right refuses to have a system where they are required to register their guns

[Mims44 1,872]

10 hours ago, Mikey said:

I said I got the information from watching Fox News and remarks of people in Alabama. Those are legitimate sources, you need nothing further for the purpose of this discussion. The last time one of you sufferers of TDD got me to chase around the internet finding old quotes was, indeed the last time.

Also I have a question: Why are Democrats so violently opposed to a system that would require verified voters?

I think you know, studies show those type of people, given the chance to vote... do so for a democrat.

But lets not act like it's a moral victory for republicans, if a study came out that showed they were more likely to vote republican the blues and reds would simply switch their current stances.

 

 

 

And that's backed by Fox news, ...and a couple dudes I talked to outside Mobile.

[Leftfield 2,610]

11 hours ago, Mikey said:

I said I got the information from watching Fox News and remarks of people in Alabama. Those are legitimate sources, you need nothing further for the purpose of this discussion.

Good point....Fox News has definitely proven themselves to be legitimate, especially when it comes to the 2020 election! 

As to shady things going on with voting in Alabama...sounds legit. After all, if you were a Democrat, don't you think it would make sense to get any edge you could in such a closely contested state?

 

11 hours ago, Mikey said:

The last time one of you sufferers of TDD got me to chase around the internet finding old quotes was, indeed the last time.

Why? Because you couldn't find anything? Or because it was immediately debunked?

 

11 hours ago, Mikey said:

Also I have a question: Why are Democrats so violently opposed to a system that would require verified voters?

Can't speak for Democrats. As for me, I'm not opposed to it, I'm just not convinced we don't have it already. Voter fraud is exceedingly rare, and it's done about the same amount on both sides.

The Heritage Foundation, hardly a liberal organization, keeps track of voter fraud. Check out their site: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/#choose-a-state. Even in swing states, the number of cases of voter fraud during the 2020 election can usually be counted on one hand.

 

[Mikey 16,622]

11 hours ago, Mims44 said:

But lets not act like it's a moral victory for republicans,

Who spoke of moral victory? Votes cast by legitimate voters and accurately counted should be every American's preference. Yet the liberals don't want it.

[Mikey 16,622]

9 hours ago, Leftfield said:

As to shady things going on with voting in Alabama...sounds legit.

Where did you pull that from? I haven't heard anyone complaining about shady election procedures in Alabama. We have a very good system in place. The complaints I heard were about situations in northern urban centers and to some extent, Atlanta.

[auburnatl1 4,957]

40 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Where did you pull that from? I haven't heard anyone complaining about shady election procedures in Alabama. We have a very good system in place. The complaints I heard were about situations in northern urban centers and to some extent, Atlanta.

Atlanta. Republican governor. Republican legislature. Republican AG.  Republican Secretary of State (runs election division).

Yep, ripe for anti Trump conspiracy.

[Leftfield 2,610]

58 minutes ago, Mikey said:

The complaints I heard were about situations in northern urban centers and to some extent, Atlanta.

O,,,,,k? Why the hell would I think your referencing the remarks of people in Alabama would have to do with voter fraud in other states that they couldn't possibly have witnessed?

Are you seriously saying that people in Alabama telling you about voter fraud in other states are "legitimate" sources? 

 

[auburnatl1 4,957]

20 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

 

Are you seriously saying that people in Alabama telling you about voter fraud in other states are "legitimate" sources? 

 

[Mims44 1,872]

21 hours ago, Leftfield said:

Can't speak for Democrats. As for me, I'm not opposed to it, I'm just not convinced we don't have it already. Voter fraud is exceedingly rare, and it's done about the same amount on both sides.

The Heritage Foundation, hardly a liberal organization, keeps track of voter fraud. Check out their site: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/#choose-a-state. Even in swing states, the number of cases of voter fraud during the 2020 election can usually be counted on one hand.

 

Gotta remember it's extremely hard to prove. Especially when forms of identification aren't required it is near impossible. Local elections have had this issue pop up more than national ones, where a "missing" ballot box pops up in a tightly contested race, but that one box is filled with 100% votes for one candidate... In an area where a few hundred votes can make the swing. 

Guy named Rodriguez (sp?) ran for a caucus in TX when I was in the army (which you have to hear about cause Army=Tons of Texans), lost due to some very shady ballots at the end all stuffed with his opponents name. He charged voter fraud but lost since it could not be definitively proven it was fraud. 

You would think Tammany Hall would be all the history we needed as a country to want to insure legitimacy of every vote.

[aubaseball 2,625]

10 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Atlanta. Republican governor. Republican legislature. Republican AG.  Republican Secretary of State (runs election division).

Yep, ripe for anti Trump conspiracy.

And you think all those people run the Fulton County election?  Who is the delusional one? 

[auburnatl1 4,957]

10 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

And you think all those people run the Fulton County election?  Who is the delusional one? 

The election has been analyzed 10,000 times with countless task forces. Nothing. Dear lord doesn’t this ever start feeling old and silly? Btw I live in Fulton co

[Mikey 16,622]

11 hours ago, Leftfield said:

Are you seriously saying that people in Alabama telling you about voter fraud in other states are "legitimate" sources? 

That's the source I referenced. Suspicion about the legitimacy of the election was and is common in Alabama. Do you always have this much trouble grasping a point?

Edited April 21 by Mikey

[Leftfield 2,610]

11 minutes ago, Mikey said:

That's the source I referenced. Suspicion about the legitimacy of the election was and is common in Alabama. Do you always have this much trouble grasping a point?

What I have trouble grasping is the mindlessness that contributes to the distrust of our institutions. What you're referencing has nothing close to facts to back it up, yet you happily parrot it as the system being corrupt and pat yourself on the back for not having the wool pulled over your eyes. If you were to read anyone else put up arguments like you have in this thread, you would be embarrassed for them, and rightfully so.

[Mikey 16,622]

43 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

What you're referencing has nothing close to facts to back it up,

Once again: (Please read slowly) Poor voter eligibility requirements/oversight of vote counting leads to suspicion. I'll stop there, as your ability to comprehend seems limited.

[auburnatl1 4,957]

51 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Once again: (Please read slowly) Poor voter eligibility requirements/oversight of vote counting leads to suspicion. I'll stop there, as your ability to comprehend seems limited.

Mikey, I think he gets it. If someone is wired not to trust or accept losing - there’s always suspicions and conspiracies. It’s why I stopped looking at game threads - refs, the sec, espn, who knows - same fans/personalities ever week. We didn’t simply lose, it was rigged. 

Trump introduced this “can’t trust anything/anyone” thinking from day 1 into a demographic that’s prone to it, and as a society we’ve been forced to deal with this dysfunction ever since.

https://www.npr.org/2016/10/20/498713509/donald-trump-says-hell-accept-the-results-of-the-election-if-he-wins

[Leftfield 2,610]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

Once again: (Please read slowly) Poor voter eligibility requirements/oversight of vote counting leads to suspicion. I'll stop there, as your ability to comprehend seems limited.

Mikey if the "poor voter eligibility leading to suspicion" had been your only argument, none of the rest of this conversation would have taken place, but then you went on about (and still are, based on the above) people not being allowed to observe, just throwing out what you "heard" and with nothing to back it up. I understand the voter ID thing causing suspicion. Your argument about oversight is complete BS, and that's what I was pointing out. I barely even addressed the voter ID part (and when I did I said I didn't oppose it, though it would depend on how it's implemented). What don't you get about that? 

 

[Mikey 16,622]

10 hours ago, Leftfield said:

Mikey if the "poor voter eligibility leading to suspicion" had been your only argument, none of the rest of this conversation would have taken place, but then you went on about (and still are, based on the above) people not being allowed to observe, just throwing out what you "heard" and with nothing to back it up. I understand the voter ID thing causing suspicion. Your argument about oversight is complete BS, and that's what I was pointing out. I barely even addressed the voter ID part (and when I did I said I didn't oppose it, though it would depend on how it's implemented). What don't you get about that? 

 

As I mentioned above, Fox News had segments about watchers not being allowed to watch. (Complete with videos) That's all the backup that's needed for this discussion. Maybe you should have watched more news back then.

[Leftfield 2,610]

6 minutes ago, Mikey said:

As I mentioned above, Fox News had segments about watchers not being allowed to watch. (Complete with videos) That's all the backup that's needed for this discussion. Maybe you should have watched more news back then.

And maybe you should watch a news service that isn't a proven liar. I already told you that reports of people not being allowed to observe were debunked, but you're so damn lazy that you couldn't even look up the very clip you were talking about to prove your point. Guessing it doesn't exist, or if it does you know it's garbage and easily proven wrong.

Your willful ignorance is really a sight to behold. Wasn't enough to be laughingstock on the sports boards - you have to prove it here, too.