(08-07-2023, 05:49 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (08-07-2023, 04:42 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]If there is one thing we can agree on - it is that ^ I suppose.
We are indeed screwed by the lack of choice and quality of candidate.
If there is one thing I DO believe the most powerful want to keep in place to control us, it is that particular aspect of our system.
I just think that our system (Constitution) does a much better job of protecting us with checks and balances than you do (once one of those candidates get elected.)
That's why (despite all of the bleating here) none of our actual lives have been radically changed because we went from Carter, to Reagan, to Bush, to Clinton, to Bush, to Obama, to Trump, to Biden. Folks like to pretend all hell broke loose each time one of these transitions happened, but it really didn't.
Very little changed in the grand scheme of American Freedom. Society around us changed with the times, but it didn't come from those in office at the time or we'd have seen wild swings in societal norms as these various administrations shifted in and out of power. We didn't. We were lucky under each of these Presidents to live more freely than the vast majority of humans. I'm still grateful for it.
Me too, which is why I don't want to see it circumvented. I will respond to most of this post later, but I don't think we live in the same America that you and I grew up in. Something changed under Obama (and that is not me attacking Obama, rather I think there was an opportunity shift in the corporate sector). I never voted for a President in my life, despite being a PoliSci major and working in government for a few years, because it never really mattered. I just saw it as the same song and dance and the elites fought for their ideal world. I also thought we were insulated from too much damage because of the Constitution and our judicial system. And, ultimately, the President just didn't really have that much power. I don't think that's the case anymore. The WEF is making a global government. That's not a conspiracy.
Now is the time for a 'great reset' of capitalism | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)
Don't do an instant reaction, see Great Reset and go into automaton "conspiracy mode." That is just a palatable blueprint of their goals for the foreseeable future. If you take all of that at face value, and assume these elites are just well-intentioned philanthropists, sure, it sounds great. They believe in stakeholder capitalism, which means only those who have a genuine stake in the future should be shaping it. That's them. Not us.
These people are expert marketers. They will sell you what you want to hear and convince you it's for your own good. Their lifestyle will never change. They will never lose their grasp on power. Did you vote for anyone at the WEF? You skim past my above post about GARM without even realizing or at least addressing my point. It's not about the rules and whether they are good or not. It's about our ability to regulate our elites. When you have an organization that can pull 90% of advertising revenue to any company that is not comply with THEIR values, without any way to retaliate, you don't have a free market.
NOTHING they are doing is giving us more say. It's taking it away. They are selling us an idea. You're buying it. I'm not. You need me to prove to you it's a bad idea. History is full of these grandiose ideas that fail because of human greed. You're the believer, not me. America ONLY worked because of checks and balances. You remove those, and you're just in an oligarchy that depends on the generosity of your overlords. Not a good idea, bro.
At least we're getting somewhere in this back and forth now, LOL. That's something.
When I have the time I'll follow the link and read up - give you a thoughtful response.
Quick notes on other points:
I get the concept of GARM and its regulators having a scary amount of control, but are they actually doing what you are asserting? Who have they bankrupted by taking their ad revenue, and were the ads pulled with just cause? Are you adopting a catastrophist outlook at their influence? Or is the reality less scary?
Furthermore, in general terms, I don't believe our checks and balances have been damaged to the degree you believe they have, but I see how slippery the slope is. Both of the past two administrations have taken actions to try to end around the system at times. I don't like that. But again, I don't see them as "taken from us" yet and I don't see their destruction as imminent. I do believe we have reached a point of needing to protect those checks and balances and the current trend of "gotcha" style politics between the Dems and Reps is putting that at risk, IMO.
(08-06-2023, 08:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (08-06-2023, 07:34 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Yourea inability to understand the appeal of a Trump is astounding. Posters that support him continue to tell you his short comings. They actually acknowledge them. They spell them out and you continue to ignore their grievances. You acknowledge there is corruption, but as long as a corrupt system supports you every thing is just fine.
I watched the movie Elysium today. It was a great metaphor as to where we are headed as a society. In that scenario you believe you will be living off world in the lap of luxury. Unless you realize you’ll be down here with the rest of us scum that you look down upon then that is exactly the world we are headed to.
Your inability to understand us is equally astounding.
Whatever reason you have foir saying the government elites don't represent you, there are tens of millions of Americans who could represent you, that specific part of you, whatever it is, better than Trump does. Who would actually work hard and achieve more than a tax cut with 4 years in power.
And he's not fighting corruption. He never has and he never will. He only fights for himself.
You misunderstood me Mike. I do not support Trump but I do understand his appeal. Our federal government is out of control. None of them represent the middle class and exploit us at every turn. Trump infuriates the establishment and they are scared to death of him. That is the appeal. Many former republicans see this and moved away from the party. Until democrats are fed up enough the status quo will continue and we will all continue to lose freedoms.
(08-07-2023, 09:04 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (08-06-2023, 08:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your inability to understand us is equally astounding.
Whatever reason you have foir saying the government elites don't represent you, there are tens of millions of Americans who could represent you, that specific part of you, whatever it is, better than Trump does. Who would actually work hard and achieve more than a tax cut with 4 years in power.
And he's not fighting corruption. He never has and he never will. He only fights for himself.
You misunderstood me Mike. I do not support Trump but I do understand his appeal. Our federal government is out of control. None of them represent the middle class and exploit us at every turn. Trump infuriates the establishment and they are scared to death of him. That is the appeal. Many former republicans see this and moved away from the party. Until democrats are fed up enough the status quo will continue and we will all continue to lose freedoms.
Until we have ranked choice or multiple choice or runoff elections, if you don't vote for one of the main two candidates, you are saying you don't care which of the two wins.
Unless you voted Biden in 2020, you effectively supported Trump. Unless you voted Trump in 2020, you effectively supported Biden.
Work to change the system, yes. Please. Join me.
Until the system is changed, though, admit you support who you support.
You might be right that Trump infuriates a small group of people who are protecting little bits of federal power they have made for themselves, that work against our interest.
But that's really missing the forest for the trees. The real bits of federal power are our votes. We should be zealously protecting the counting of votes as much as we protect our rights to free speech, gun ownership, and raising our families. That's the power Trump threatens now. His other threats are insignificant at this point. Don't think I don't get it. I do, I just assign a very low priority to it compared to free and fair elections.
Again, you go on about this, like this system would change money in politics. You have to cap income at a certain level. We are never ridding ourselves of this problem if people have billions and billions of dollars.
(08-07-2023, 09:13 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (08-07-2023, 09:04 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]You misunderstood me Mike. I do not support Trump but I do understand his appeal. Our federal government is out of control. None of them represent the middle class and exploit us at every turn. Trump infuriates the establishment and they are scared to death of him. That is the appeal. Many former republicans see this and moved away from the party. Until democrats are fed up enough the status quo will continue and we will all continue to lose freedoms.
Until we have ranked choice or multiple choice or runoff elections, if you don't vote for one of the main two candidates, you are saying you don't care which of the two wins.
Unless you voted Biden in 2020, you effectively supported Trump. Unless you voted Trump in 2020, you effectively supported Biden.
Work to change the system, yes. Please. Join me.
Until the system is changed, though, admit you support who you support.
You might be right that Trump infuriates a small group of people who are protecting little bits of federal power they have made for themselves, that work against our interest.
But that's really missing the forest for the trees. The real bits of federal power are our votes. We should be zealously protecting the counting of votes as much as we protect our rights to free speech, gun ownership, and raising our families. That's the power Trump threatens now. His other threats are insignificant at this point. Don't think I don't get it. I do, I just assign a very low priority to it compared to free and fair elections.
Lol, "zealously protecting" when it was stolen right in front of you? Lol. Votes don't matter, the counting of the votes is what matters.
(08-07-2023, 11:04 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Again, you go on about this, like this system would change money in politics. You have to cap income at a certain level. We are never ridding ourselves of this problem if people have billions and billions of dollars.
Even if I agreed with you that money in politics was the main problem, you're saying we shouldn't attempt the possible (voting reform) until we achieve the impossible (an income cap). That's nuts. Let's do the possible.
(08-08-2023, 09:41 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-07-2023, 09:13 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Until we have ranked choice or multiple choice or runoff elections, if you don't vote for one of the main two candidates, you are saying you don't care which of the two wins.
Unless you voted Biden in 2020, you effectively supported Trump. Unless you voted Trump in 2020, you effectively supported Biden.
Work to change the system, yes. Please. Join me.
Until the system is changed, though, admit you support who you support.
You might be right that Trump infuriates a small group of people who are protecting little bits of federal power they have made for themselves, that work against our interest.
But that's really missing the forest for the trees. The real bits of federal power are our votes. We should be zealously protecting the counting of votes as much as we protect our rights to free speech, gun ownership, and raising our families. That's the power Trump threatens now. His other threats are insignificant at this point. Don't think I don't get it. I do, I just assign a very low priority to it compared to free and fair elections.
Lol, "zealously protecting" when it was stolen right in front of you? Lol. Votes don't matter, the counting of the votes is what matters.
I said the counting of the votes is what matters.
I assume everyone who wanted to vote and was registered to vote got to vote and their vote was counted.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
I assume no one was able to stuff the boxes with fraudulent vote.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
(08-07-2023, 09:04 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (08-06-2023, 08:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your inability to understand us is equally astounding.
Whatever reason you have foir saying the government elites don't represent you, there are tens of millions of Americans who could represent you, that specific part of you, whatever it is, better than Trump does. Who would actually work hard and achieve more than a tax cut with 4 years in power.
And he's not fighting corruption. He never has and he never will. He only fights for himself.
You misunderstood me Mike. I do not support Trump but I do understand his appeal. Our federal government is out of control. None of them represent the middle class and exploit us at every turn. Trump infuriates the establishment and they are scared to death of him. That is the appeal. Many former republicans see this and moved away from the party. Until democrats are fed up enough the status quo will continue and we will all continue to lose freedoms.
How is your personal freedom different right this second than it was in 1996?
Genuinely curious about your definition of freedom. What does that look like to you? What does that mean?
(08-08-2023, 09:41 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (08-07-2023, 11:04 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Again, you go on about this, like this system would change money in politics. You have to cap income at a certain level. We are never ridding ourselves of this problem if people have billions and billions of dollars.
Even if I agreed with you that money in politics was the main problem, you're saying we shouldn't attempt the possible (voting reform) until we achieve the impossible (an income cap). That's nuts. Let's do the possible.
(08-08-2023, 09:41 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Lol, "zealously protecting" when it was stolen right in front of you? Lol. Votes don't matter, the counting of the votes is what matters.
I said the counting of the votes is what matters.
I assume everyone who wanted to vote and was registered to vote got to vote and their vote was counted.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
I assume no one was able to stuff the boxes with fraudulent vote.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Well...just a police report and affidavit.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08...sive-2020/
But we
KNOW the FBI took care of these concerns...wink, wink, nod, nod. I'm sure this was totally on the up and up and didn't happen anywhere else in the country!
(08-08-2023, 01:16 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Genuinely curious about your definition of freedom. What does that look like to you? What does that mean?
Doesn't really matter.
It's the same as it was under Reagan, and Bush, and Clinton, and Obama, and Trump, and Biden.
It hasn't changed - and that's my point.
Not trying to be a jerk at all - but a semantical debate about the definition of the word isn't going to change that.
Our freedom of speech has definitely changed.. Conservative voices were silenced and banned on social media for the longest time.
(08-08-2023, 01:22 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 09:41 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Even if I agreed with you that money in politics was the main problem, you're saying we shouldn't attempt the possible (voting reform) until we achieve the impossible (an income cap). That's nuts. Let's do the possible.
I said the counting of the votes is what matters.
I assume everyone who wanted to vote and was registered to vote got to vote and their vote was counted.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
I assume no one was able to stuff the boxes with fraudulent vote.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Well...just a police report and affidavit.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08...sive-2020/
But we KNOW the FBI took care of these concerns...wink, wink, nod, nod. I'm sure this was totally on the up and up and didn't happen anywhere else in the country!
Does that police report lay out how many of the 8K-10K registrations were Democrat and how many were Republican?
Does it site any actual legal wrongdoing by the GOTV drive this organization conducted?
Going out and getting ppl registered to vote isn't illegal and ppl can be legally paid to do so by meeting the required conditions. Are we going to pretend this doesn't happen in every state with both parties acting in similar fashion?
How many of the of the 8-10K votes did the police determine to be actually fraudulent before turning them over to the FBI? How many of them actually became registered voters and submitted a ballot?
Hard to find any actual evidence there. Lots of info about a particular registration drive, but I'm not seeing proof of fraud. Just speculation.
(08-08-2023, 01:36 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]Our freedom of speech has definitely changed.. Conservative voices were silenced and banned on social media for the longest time.
I guess NYC is technically correct. As a liberal
his rights haven't changed.
(08-08-2023, 01:37 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 01:22 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Well...just a police report and affidavit.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08...sive-2020/
But we KNOW the FBI took care of these concerns...wink, wink, nod, nod. I'm sure this was totally on the up and up and didn't happen anywhere else in the country!
Does that police report lay out how many of the 8K-10K registrations were Democrat and how many were Republican?
Does it site any actual legal wrongdoing by the GOTV drive this organization conducted?
Going out and getting ppl registered to vote isn't illegal and ppl can be legally paid to do so by meeting the required conditions. Are we going to pretend this doesn't happen in every state with both parties acting in similar fashion?
How many of the of the 8-10K votes did the police determine to be actually fraudulent before turning them over to the FBI? How many of them actually became registered voters and submitted a ballot?
Hard to find any actual evidence there. Lots of info about a particular registration drive, but I'm not seeing proof of fraud. Just speculation.
Of course, all evidence can be hand waved away. When thousands of voting documents are delivered by a Democrat voting outreach and those ballots are signed by the same person and filled with addresses and phone numbers that don't exist it's perfectly rational to assume no foul play occurred. Because of course it is.
(08-08-2023, 01:40 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 01:38 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I guess NYC is technically correct. As a liberal his rights haven't changed.
How did yours change?
You will admit that Winger is correct about online suppression, won't you?
(08-08-2023, 01:41 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 01:37 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Does that police report lay out how many of the 8K-10K registrations were Democrat and how many were Republican?
Does it site any actual legal wrongdoing by the GOTV drive this organization conducted?
Going out and getting ppl registered to vote isn't illegal and ppl can be legally paid to do so by meeting the required conditions. Are we going to pretend this doesn't happen in every state with both parties acting in similar fashion?
How many of the of the 8-10K votes did the police determine to be actually fraudulent before turning them over to the FBI? How many of them actually became registered voters and submitted a ballot?
Hard to find any actual evidence there. Lots of info about a particular registration drive, but I'm not seeing proof of fraud. Just speculation.
Of course, all evidence can be hand waved away. When thousands of voting documents are delivered by a Democrat voting outreach and those ballots are signed by the same person and filled with addresses and phone numbers that don't exist it's perfectly rational to assume no foul play occurred. Because of course it is.
That's not what the article you posted says. Not even close. Check again.
(08-08-2023, 01:40 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]How did yours change?
You will admit that Winger is correct about online suppression, won't you?
Nope!! He blathers on about wanting Democrats dead here as much as he wants. Was he suppressed?
Private entities acting against hate speech and propaganda under their legal authority to do so a'int got [BLEEP] to do with this discussion.
Is there a need for some unification in this new landscape of evolving social media to sort out what is and isn't free speech?
Yeah - sure.
But the laws of America didn't change under one of these recent administrations to take anyone's freedom in such a way. Private sector companies did what they did individually to pursue what best suited their business model.
For Twitter - it was about suppressing dis/misinformation. For FB it was allowing Russian bots to spout propaganda ad infinitum.
Take your pick - neither were perfect in their efforts and those are just two very disparate examples.
(08-08-2023, 01:52 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 01:41 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, all evidence can be hand waved away. When thousands of voting documents are delivered by a Democrat voting outreach and those ballots are signed by the same person and filled with addresses and phone numbers that don't exist it's perfectly rational to assume no foul play occurred. Because of course it is.
That's not what the article you posted says. Not even close. Check again.
You will admit that Winger is correct about online suppression, won't you?
Nope!! He blathers on about wanting Democrats dead here as much as he wants. Was he suppressed?
Private entities acting against hate speech and propaganda under their legal authority to do so a'int got [BLEEP] to do with this discussion.
Is their a need for some unification in this new landscape of evolving social media to sort out what is and isn't free speech?
Yeah - sure.
But the laws of America didn't change under one of these recent administrations to take anyone's freedom in such a way. Private sector companies did what they did individually to pursue what best suited their business model.
For Twitter - it was about suppressing dis/misinformation. For FB it was allowing Russian bots to spout propaganda ad infinitum.
Take your pick - neither were perfect in their efforts and those are just two very disparate examples.
And you're a [BLEEP] liar.. Par the course for being a piece of [BLEEP] liberal like yourself.. I've never once said that I wanted democrats dead.. So go back to being a pedophile supporter and leave my name out your mouth.
(08-08-2023, 02:25 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 01:52 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Nope!! He blathers on about wanting Democrats dead here as much as he wants. Was he suppressed?
Private entities acting against hate speech and propaganda under their legal authority to do so a'int got [BLEEP] to do with this discussion.
Is their a need for some unification in this new landscape of evolving social media to sort out what is and isn't free speech?
Yeah - sure.
But the laws of America didn't change under one of these recent administrations to take anyone's freedom in such a way. Private sector companies did what they did individually to pursue what best suited their business model.
For Twitter - it was about suppressing dis/misinformation. For FB it was allowing Russian bots to spout propaganda ad infinitum.
Take your pick - neither were perfect in their efforts and those are just two very disparate examples.
And you're a [BLEEP] liar.. Par the course for being a piece of [BLEEP] liberal like yourself.. I've never once said that I wanted democrats dead.. So go back to being a pedophile supporter and leave my name out your mouth.
Nah. You've said it here three times that I've noticed. Probably other times that I never saw.
It was reported by another member and discussed officially - so there's zero question as to whether it happened.
Lie all you want, I don't give a [BLEEP].
(08-08-2023, 01:22 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-08-2023, 09:41 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Even if I agreed with you that money in politics was the main problem, you're saying we shouldn't attempt the possible (voting reform) until we achieve the impossible (an income cap). That's nuts. Let's do the possible.
I said the counting of the votes is what matters.
I assume everyone who wanted to vote and was registered to vote got to vote and their vote was counted.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
I assume no one was able to stuff the boxes with fraudulent vote.
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Well...just a police report and affidavit.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08...sive-2020/
But we KNOW the FBI took care of these concerns...wink, wink, nod, nod. I'm sure this was totally on the up and up and didn't happen anywhere else in the country!
The article describes efforts to get fake voters registered.
The registrations were rejected.
No fake voters were registered and no fake votes were made.
In some states, turning in fake voter registration forms is a crime. In some it isnt.