Thomas Matthew Crooks searched for dates of the Democratic convention: https://politicalwire.com/2024/07/17/shooter-searched-for-dates-of-democratic-convention/
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
Thomas Matthew Crooks searched for dates of the Democratic convention: https://politicalwire.com/2024/07/17/shooter-searched-for-dates-of-democratic-convention/
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa: @Raiders22 in fair elections the Republicans would win in California as of now , its a 50/50 race This is an extremely clueless comment. The latest poll at 538 has Schiff up by 25 over Garvey. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/california/ Biden is up 19.9 in the Presidential race: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/california/ @DogbiteWilliams Good points, DBW. The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
obviously
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa: @Raiders22 in fair elections the Republicans would win in California as of now , its a 50/50 race This is an extremely clueless comment. The latest poll at 538 has Schiff up by 25 over Garvey. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/california/ Biden is up 19.9 in the Presidential race: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/california/ @DogbiteWilliams Good points, DBW. The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day...
majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing...
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day...
majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing...
No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day... majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing...
Half the population is below the average IQ and the dummies are usually easily manipulated and follow the herd. The herd is usually wrong, the majority is not always the smartest when it comes to a whole.
No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario- This statement started out as correct, before your next sentence. You were onto something and you could have followed up with Gerrymandering. Might have kept people interested in what you had to say. If we stopped giving people food (the smaller population in the US who should have an effect on voting since they do control most of the land in this Country and they control the food you eat), the majority would be in big, big trouble.
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare:
No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day... majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing...
Half the population is below the average IQ and the dummies are usually easily manipulated and follow the herd. The herd is usually wrong, the majority is not always the smartest when it comes to a whole.
No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario- This statement started out as correct, before your next sentence. You were onto something and you could have followed up with Gerrymandering. Might have kept people interested in what you had to say. If we stopped giving people food (the smaller population in the US who should have an effect on voting since they do control most of the land in this Country and they control the food you eat), the majority would be in big, big trouble.
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa: @Raiders22 in fair elections the Republicans would win in California as of now , its a 50/50 race This is an extremely clueless comment. The latest poll at 538 has Schiff up by 25 over Garvey. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/california/ Biden is up 19.9 in the Presidential race: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/california/ @DogbiteWilliams Good points, DBW. The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
obviously
Butt yet, as phuckingstupid as that is, they *WILL* persist!
HUFFPOST -
Republicans Lay Groundwork To Deny 2024 Election Results At GOP Convention
With Trump leading in the polls, GOP headliners and attendees are nevertheless preparing to challenge the next election before it even happens.
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964:
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa: @Raiders22 in fair elections the Republicans would win in California as of now , its a 50/50 race This is an extremely clueless comment. The latest poll at 538 has Schiff up by 25 over Garvey. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/california/ Biden is up 19.9 in the Presidential race: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/california/ @DogbiteWilliams Good points, DBW. The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
obviously
Butt yet, as phuckingstupid as that is, they *WILL* persist!
HUFFPOST -
Republicans Lay Groundwork To Deny 2024 Election Results At GOP Convention
With Trump leading in the polls, GOP headliners and attendees are nevertheless preparing to challenge the next election before it even happens.
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa: @Raiders22 in fair elections the Republicans would win in California as of now , its a 50/50 race This is an extremely clueless comment. The latest poll at 538 has Schiff up by 25 over Garvey. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/california/ Biden is up 19.9 in the Presidential race: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/california/ @DogbiteWilliams Good points, DBW. The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
obviously
Butt yet, as phuckingstupid as that is, they *WILL* persist!
HUFFPOST -
Republicans Lay Groundwork To Deny 2024 Election Results At GOP Convention
With Trump leading in the polls, GOP headliners and attendees are nevertheless preparing to challenge the next election before it even happens.
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964:
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: Quote Originally Posted by Barbarossa: @Raiders22 in fair elections the Republicans would win in California as of now , its a 50/50 race This is an extremely clueless comment. The latest poll at 538 has Schiff up by 25 over Garvey. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/california/ Biden is up 19.9 in the Presidential race: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/california/ @DogbiteWilliams Good points, DBW. The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
obviously
Butt yet, as phuckingstupid as that is, they *WILL* persist!
HUFFPOST -
Republicans Lay Groundwork To Deny 2024 Election Results At GOP Convention
With Trump leading in the polls, GOP headliners and attendees are nevertheless preparing to challenge the next election before it even happens.
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare: No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day... majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing...
Half the population is below the average IQ and the dummies are usually easily manipulated and follow the herd.The herd is usually wrong, the majority is not always the smartest when it comes to a whole. No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario- This statement started out as correct, before your next sentence. You were onto something and you could have followed up with Gerrymandering. Might have kept people interested in what you had to say. If we stopped giving people food (the smaller population in the US who should have an effect on voting since they do control most of the land in this Country and they control the food you eat), the majority would be in big, big trouble.
Forgot to bold, and make the letters bigger for those of you that can not read.
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90:
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare: No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day... majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing...
Half the population is below the average IQ and the dummies are usually easily manipulated and follow the herd.The herd is usually wrong, the majority is not always the smartest when it comes to a whole. No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario- This statement started out as correct, before your next sentence. You were onto something and you could have followed up with Gerrymandering. Might have kept people interested in what you had to say. If we stopped giving people food (the smaller population in the US who should have an effect on voting since they do control most of the land in this Country and they control the food you eat), the majority would be in big, big trouble.
Forgot to bold, and make the letters bigger for those of you that can not read.
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare: No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day... majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing... Half the population is below the average IQ and the dummies are usually easily manipulated and follow the herd. The herd is usually wrong, the majority is not always the smartest when it comes to a whole. No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario- This statement started out as correct, before your next sentence. You were onto something and you could have followed up with Gerrymandering. Might have kept people interested in what you had to say. If we stopped giving people food (the smaller population in the US who should have an effect on voting since they do control most of the land in this Country and they control the food you eat), the majority would be in big, big trouble.
The point was that the electoral system our founders put in place is not what it was intended for once America opened the voting up to all citizens....it was put in place back when only the rich men could vote....they were considered a representation of the population for their area or state and thus a consensus of the population...we are no where near that today...in fact, far from it...the system of electoral votes breaks down once you have the entire population voting because that is not why the founders sought this to be the case...voting fairly or nominating fairly nowadays, would always be majority rule.....it's like that with any situation from when we were kids up through our adult life...no one state because of population should have that much control over any said Federal election...it doesn't happen at the local or State level where majority wins so why should voting for the President be any different...
If we are going to talk about who should be able to vote, that is an entirely different topic altogether....There are many that should not be allowed to vote, but for a democracy that is for the people by the people, that is the system in place...if electoral is so great in this day and age, then why haven't the local/States adopted the same procedure...wouldn't they be able to do the same based on local jurisdiction? It just doesn't work, so why would anyone think it works Federally? It completely breaks down once you give out 54 or 40 electoral votes to any one person for one state....why should it boil down to swing States every election versus appealing to the masses...one seems fair and the other seems extremely outdated...
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
Quote Originally Posted by BigGame90:
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare: No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario...majority should always win...this isn't the 18th, 19th or even the 20th century any longer....the intent on who can vote now based on when the electoral system was put in place is no where near why this was created....remember, only rich men could vote when the electoral was established because it was thought that rich men had the understanding to vote in terms of the masses so the electoral system was developed to encompass with what would have been perceived of a majority vote....with everyone eligible to vote now (all men, all women, all people of different color background), the system is not now what it was set out as back in the day... majority should always win and get rid of swing states and any president wining all those electoral votes from California (54), Texas (40), Florida (30), New York (28), etc....it's completely asinine to continue this way when all citizens have the right to vote....this is so disturbing... Half the population is below the average IQ and the dummies are usually easily manipulated and follow the herd. The herd is usually wrong, the majority is not always the smartest when it comes to a whole. No election is run fairly if you are utilizing the electoral vote scenario- This statement started out as correct, before your next sentence. You were onto something and you could have followed up with Gerrymandering. Might have kept people interested in what you had to say. If we stopped giving people food (the smaller population in the US who should have an effect on voting since they do control most of the land in this Country and they control the food you eat), the majority would be in big, big trouble.
The point was that the electoral system our founders put in place is not what it was intended for once America opened the voting up to all citizens....it was put in place back when only the rich men could vote....they were considered a representation of the population for their area or state and thus a consensus of the population...we are no where near that today...in fact, far from it...the system of electoral votes breaks down once you have the entire population voting because that is not why the founders sought this to be the case...voting fairly or nominating fairly nowadays, would always be majority rule.....it's like that with any situation from when we were kids up through our adult life...no one state because of population should have that much control over any said Federal election...it doesn't happen at the local or State level where majority wins so why should voting for the President be any different...
If we are going to talk about who should be able to vote, that is an entirely different topic altogether....There are many that should not be allowed to vote, but for a democracy that is for the people by the people, that is the system in place...if electoral is so great in this day and age, then why haven't the local/States adopted the same procedure...wouldn't they be able to do the same based on local jurisdiction? It just doesn't work, so why would anyone think it works Federally? It completely breaks down once you give out 54 or 40 electoral votes to any one person for one state....why should it boil down to swing States every election versus appealing to the masses...one seems fair and the other seems extremely outdated...
I do not want to follow the majority and I don't want the majority making the decisions because majority is not always right.
If you want the popular vote to win, I'd argue that a competence test should be administered and only the top half of the highest results should be able to vote. We should take the majority of the smartest people we have and use their votes. Every go to a big city and see a lot of stupid people? You want them to decide your future?
@ABooksNightmare
I do not want to follow the majority and I don't want the majority making the decisions because majority is not always right.
If you want the popular vote to win, I'd argue that a competence test should be administered and only the top half of the highest results should be able to vote. We should take the majority of the smartest people we have and use their votes. Every go to a big city and see a lot of stupid people? You want them to decide your future?
Do something better with your life than post garbage on this site. You only have to click once by the way. You both are so upset that you have to blast the submit button.
@fubah2
@KellyM_1964
your posts are embarrassing to read
Do something better with your life than post garbage on this site. You only have to click once by the way. You both are so upset that you have to blast the submit button.
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: fascism @KellyM_1964 Yep, that's the MAGA GOP plan but that's not the topic of this particular thread, which is that the shooter has since been proven to be a REPUBLICAN (but not a MAGA-idiot)
I know you won't answer, because you literally never do. Please show proof (whatever that may be in this case) that the shooter was republican. Registration of a party DOES NOT MEAN YOU VOTED THAT WAY. Until you get his official voting ballot, you CAN NOT PROVE WHAT HE REPRESENTS.
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: fascism @KellyM_1964 Yep, that's the MAGA GOP plan but that's not the topic of this particular thread, which is that the shooter has since been proven to be a REPUBLICAN (but not a MAGA-idiot)
I know you won't answer, because you literally never do. Please show proof (whatever that may be in this case) that the shooter was republican. Registration of a party DOES NOT MEAN YOU VOTED THAT WAY. Until you get his official voting ballot, you CAN NOT PROVE WHAT HE REPRESENTS.
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: fascism @KellyM_1964 Yep, that's the MAGA GOP plan but that's not the topic of this particular thread, which is that the shooter has since been proven to be a REPUBLICAN (but not a MAGA-idiot)
Actually a CONSERVATIVE, was the statement per the op's title......but the overlap would seem obvious in this case
@fubah2
ya that's right too the term r different
dbw used the term conservative which is probably true also
but he was definitely a republican
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: fascism @KellyM_1964 Yep, that's the MAGA GOP plan but that's not the topic of this particular thread, which is that the shooter has since been proven to be a REPUBLICAN (but not a MAGA-idiot)
Actually a CONSERVATIVE, was the statement per the op's title......but the overlap would seem obvious in this case
@fubah2
ya that's right too the term r different
dbw used the term conservative which is probably true also
You are correct, we agree 100% on this EC scam. To me Vance is an EC scheme completely, the guy does nothing from an experience perspective he is not going to net you the Christian vote like Pence attempted to do. No way will the EC get dismantled, the RNC would have to actually work on turning the Calif vote instead of scheming EC totals.
@ABooksNightmare
You are correct, we agree 100% on this EC scam. To me Vance is an EC scheme completely, the guy does nothing from an experience perspective he is not going to net you the Christian vote like Pence attempted to do. No way will the EC get dismantled, the RNC would have to actually work on turning the Calif vote instead of scheming EC totals.
You making these petty stupid comments and belittling others as a means to retort wont get ANY response or action. Why not just stop posting to them instead of insulting and being combative like a child?
@BigGame90
You making these petty stupid comments and belittling others as a means to retort wont get ANY response or action. Why not just stop posting to them instead of insulting and being combative like a child?
@ABooksNightmare You are correct, we agree 100% on this EC scam. To me Vance is an EC scheme completely, the guy does nothing from an experience perspective he is not going to net you the Christian vote like Pence attempted to do. No way will the EC get dismantled, the RNC would have to actually work on turning the Calif vote instead of scheming EC totals.
analysts say he is prolly the worst vp candidate
at best he can only appeal to the rabid base no other group like him
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@ABooksNightmare You are correct, we agree 100% on this EC scam. To me Vance is an EC scheme completely, the guy does nothing from an experience perspective he is not going to net you the Christian vote like Pence attempted to do. No way will the EC get dismantled, the RNC would have to actually work on turning the Calif vote instead of scheming EC totals.
analysts say he is prolly the worst vp candidate
at best he can only appeal to the rabid base no other group like him
The insuation by some in the social media stratosphere and MSM (which includes FOX!) that the elections aren't or won't be run fairly is asinine.
Hot Forum Topics
