2020 Election Commentary

[VisionStorm]

So Republicans are divided, therefore Democrats can't be. Got it.

Rather, the disagreement within the Democratic party does not rise to the level of "fracturing", much as you want to misrepresent what I said and move the goalposts. Any healthy party will have differences of opinion among its members, and that they came together to elect Joe Biden indicates that they worked out a compromise. The Republican party has deep fractures between those who want to move on from Trump and those who don't; some, like Justin Amash, will be purged from the ranks.

Funny how someone failing to address some greater degree of nuance that wasn't present in your post when you dismissed them the first time around is somehow they moving the goalposts, as opposed to you doing it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/us/house-democrats-election-losses.html

But by Thursday, one of the incumbents Democrats had spent heavily to defend, Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, who was defeated Tuesday night as President Trump won a resounding victory in her Miami-area district, broke into tears as she spoke out to her soon-to-be former colleagues about internal divides in the party.

I was unable to find the part where some Democrat fears that her house will be bombed if she doesn't go along with other Democrats. Because you're stupid and dishonest, I will again provide the link about that happening to a Republican:

When The New York Times asked Kim Ward, the Republican leader in the Pennsylvania Senate, whether she would have signed a letter declaring there was fraud in the state's election, she replied, "If I would say to you, 'I don't want to do it,'" referring to signing the letter, "I'd get my house bombed tonight."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/republican-party-abandoning-democracy/617359/

Ah, more gotchas!

Yes, because it's usually Trump supporters bombing people's houses. Therefore a Republican Senator's unfounded fears that a Trump supporter would bomb her house* is a valid clapback to bring into this discussion.

*something that has never actually happened and the only alleged Trump supporter to ever be involved in a mail bombing scheme sent them only to Democrats, one CIA guy and CNN, and the devices didn't even have a trigger mechanism, so they never exploded. So there's zero precedent, as far as I know, to believe a Republican senator would be targeted by Trump supporters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2018_United_States_mail_bombing_attempts

All sixteen confirmed bombs sent were improvised explosive devices,[11] though none had a trigger mechanism.[12] None of the devices exploded outside a controlled setting.[13]

[Trond]

So Republicans are divided, therefore Democrats can't be. Got it.

Rather, the disagreement within the Democratic party does not rise to the level of "fracturing", much as you want to misrepresent what I said and move the goalposts. Any healthy party will have differences of opinion among its members, and that they came together to elect Joe Biden indicates that they worked out a compromise. The Republican party has deep fractures between those who want to move on from Trump and those who don't; some, like Justin Amash, will be purged from the ranks.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/us/house-democrats-election-losses.html

But by Thursday, one of the incumbents Democrats had spent heavily to defend, Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, who was defeated Tuesday night as President Trump won a resounding victory in her Miami-area district, broke into tears as she spoke out to her soon-to-be former colleagues about internal divides in the party.

I was unable to find the part where some Democrat fears that her house will be bombed if she doesn't go along with other Democrats. Because you're stupid and dishonest, I will again provide the link about that happening to a Republican:

When The New York Times asked Kim Ward, the Republican leader in the Pennsylvania Senate, whether she would have signed a letter declaring there was fraud in the state's election, she replied, "If I would say to you, 'I don't want to do it,'" referring to signing the letter, "I'd get my house bombed tonight."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/republican-party-abandoning-democracy/617359/

So we're both citing a source oriented to the left (NYT seems to be the original source). And I use it to find problems on the left and you use it to find problems on the right. Maaaybe we should expect the source to be a bit biased towards a more harsh view of the right here? As mentioned the divisions have been noted in foreign papers as well (and they tend to know which way the sources lean). Anyway, none of what you say actually goes counter to the notion that there is a pretty deep division on the left.

[Bren]

I would add the Comey announcement, which was judged sufficient to swing the election. it was so corrupt that Barr, willing to stoop to almost anything in service to Donald Trump, wouldn't do that with the Hunter Biden investigation (probably more out of keen awareness that nobody in the Trump administration had any credibility with anyone not already voting for Trump).

Yes, that too.

[Mistwell]

THE PARTY OF PEACE AND PROGRESS purposefully misspells words to deflect from the REAL AGENDA:
https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/1337860197461667840
https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1337750599769665538

THE ANSWER:
https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ/status/1337779444933558277
https://www.globalresearch.ca/rex-84-fema-s-blueprint-for-martial-law-in-america/3010
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/02/29/trump-and-jade-helm-ii-trainloads-of-shackles-shipped-in-as-20-million-hillbillies-to-enter-walmart-basement-death-camps/

Remember, I warned you all!

fnord.
===============================

You can see a real lack of maturity in many of those that continue to support Trump's idiotic post-election antics. These are the people that adamantly claim to see something of substance in the Emperor's New Claims when those in their right minds (which includes the heavily conservative Supreme Court) keep saying there's nothing there. For some reason, they just can't get enough of those orange circus peanuts dangling over their faces.

Did the Supreme Court say there's nothing there?  Do you have a quote from them saying that?

Yeah, saying your case is so weak it doesn't even rise to the level where they think it could conceivably be worth listening to it, that's a pretty clear declaration there is nothing there. Which is what 7 of the 9 justices said.

Wrong. The SCOTUS stated Texas did not have standing to a suit against other states in which Texas has no say in HOW those states conduct their election. Texas can STILL refile. They did NOT say what you claim. You are a liar and are acting AGAINST your own self interests here (see above). Listen to what a LAWYER states: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXgz0rjt7-g

=====================

Also, here is a breakdown of the FINAL DECISION on the Flynn Case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIaabsZ9H-8

=====================

Yeah, I am saying that YouTube lawyer is full of shit. Texas will not refile. The case is done. They were told only two members of the Court would even consider it. Anyone who has read a lot of Supreme Court cases knows that's what the members of the Court just signaled.

But yeah, you go ahead and call me a liar because my opinion (which is an educated one) differs from yours.

[Shasarak]

I would add the Comey announcement, which was judged sufficient to swing the election. it was so corrupt that Barr, willing to stoop to almost anything in service to Donald Trump, wouldn't do that with the Hunter Biden investigation (probably more out of keen awareness that nobody in the Trump administration had any credibility with anyone not already voting for Trump).

Yes, that too.

Has anyone mentioned Hilary Clinton yet?

Biggest factor in my mind.

[VisionStorm]

I would add the Comey announcement, which was judged sufficient to swing the election. it was so corrupt that Barr, willing to stoop to almost anything in service to Donald Trump, wouldn't do that with the Hunter Biden investigation (probably more out of keen awareness that nobody in the Trump administration had any credibility with anyone not already voting for Trump).

Yes, that too.

Has anyone mentioned Hilary Clinton yet?

Biggest factor in my mind.

Why mention one of the real reasons Trump actually got elected when you can bring up conspiracy theories, fever dreams and projections, and pretend they're the real reason?

PS: Did you know that Trump got the nomination in part cuz Hillary's campaign got the media to prop him up under the drastically mistaken believe she could beat him (which was one of the revelations in the Wikileaks that led to the Russia, Russia conspiracy nonsense, cuz apparently Wikileaks = RUSSIA!)?

the-more-you-know.mp4

[Shasarak]

I would add the Comey announcement, which was judged sufficient to swing the election. it was so corrupt that Barr, willing to stoop to almost anything in service to Donald Trump, wouldn't do that with the Hunter Biden investigation (probably more out of keen awareness that nobody in the Trump administration had any credibility with anyone not already voting for Trump).

Yes, that too.

Has anyone mentioned Hilary Clinton yet?

Biggest factor in my mind.

Why mention one of the real reasons Trump actually got elected when you can bring up conspiracy theories, fever dreams and projections, and pretend they're the real reason?

PS: Did you know that Trump got the nomination in part cuz Hillary's campaign got the media to prop him up under the drastically mistaken believe she could beat him (which was one of the revelations in the Wikileaks that led to the Russia, Russia conspiracy nonsense, cuz apparently Wikileaks = RUSSIA!)?

the-more-you-know.mp4

It was especially surprising considering that the Democrats already had the (apparently) most popular Presidential candidate in USian history ready to go.

[VisionStorm]

I would add the Comey announcement, which was judged sufficient to swing the election. it was so corrupt that Barr, willing to stoop to almost anything in service to Donald Trump, wouldn't do that with the Hunter Biden investigation (probably more out of keen awareness that nobody in the Trump administration had any credibility with anyone not already voting for Trump).

Yes, that too.

Has anyone mentioned Hilary Clinton yet?

Biggest factor in my mind.

Why mention one of the real reasons Trump actually got elected when you can bring up conspiracy theories, fever dreams and projections, and pretend they're the real reason?

PS: Did you know that Trump got the nomination in part cuz Hillary's campaign got the media to prop him up under the drastically mistaken believe she could beat him (which was one of the revelations in the Wikileaks that led to the Russia, Russia conspiracy nonsense, cuz apparently Wikileaks = RUSSIA!)?

the-more-you-know.mp4

It was especially surprising considering that the Democrats already had the (apparently) most popular Presidential candidate in USian history ready to go.

If only they would've dropped Biden onto the ticket from the onset he would've won on a landslide there and then, and this entire thread would be moot. The man would've been so charismatic and effective, he would've gotten his two terms and the public would be clamoring to expand presidential term limits. But $Hillary fucked up, so we got Trump instead.

[jeff37923]

Jesus, just one sentence and you still can not understand.

You dont have to play act being a moron all of the time.

You obviously fail to understand my understanding.

Or, as jeffy would say, dance monkey, dance.

Nah, you got the roles reversed, Shasarak is arguing in good faith while you are trolling him.

You are still the monkey, HappyDaze.

[Mistwell]

I would add the Comey announcement, which was judged sufficient to swing the election. it was so corrupt that Barr, willing to stoop to almost anything in service to Donald Trump, wouldn't do that with the Hunter Biden investigation (probably more out of keen awareness that nobody in the Trump administration had any credibility with anyone not already voting for Trump).

Yes, that too.

Has anyone mentioned Hilary Clinton yet?

Biggest factor in my mind.

Why mention one of the real reasons Trump actually got elected when you can bring up conspiracy theories, fever dreams and projections, and pretend they're the real reason?

PS: Did you know that Trump got the nomination in part cuz Hillary's campaign got the media to prop him up under the drastically mistaken believe she could beat him (which was one of the revelations in the Wikileaks that led to the Russia, Russia conspiracy nonsense, cuz apparently Wikileaks = RUSSIA!)?

the-more-you-know.mp4

It was especially surprising considering that the Democrats already had the (apparently) most popular Presidential candidate in USian history ready to go.

Biden didn't run because of the illness and then death of his son Beau. He said at the time he knew he could win the nomination if he had gone ahead with it, but he just couldn't do it while trying to first protect Beau's privacy that he was dying, and then run while grieving for the loss of his son. He had, prior to Beau's illness, planned to run. But he called it off before anything was ever announced.

And he's right, he would have beat Hillary in the primaries I think.

[VisionStorm]

And he's right, he would have beat Hillary in the primaries I think.

Same way he beat her in 2008? And beat Bernie too? Also, I'm sure that $Hillary and the DNC wouldn't have cheated against him, the same way they did Bernie, to ensure she got the nomination, because it was "Her Time!". #ImWithHer

[Shasarak]

Nah, you got the roles reversed, Shasarak is arguing in good faith while you are trolling him.

You are still the monkey, HappyDaze.

The scary thing here is that these guys on the forums are apparently the health professionals that everyone is supposed to trust with regard to things like the Chinese Wuhan virus and when they lie about something as easy to check as this, well it just destroys any of their credibility.

I mean now who is going to wear a mask if Happydaze says they should?  And why would they.

[Shasarak]

They have to make a full length film of this:

Make it so.

[HappyDaze]

Nah, you got the roles reversed, Shasarak is arguing in good faith while you are trolling him.

You are still the monkey, HappyDaze.

The scary thing here is that these guys on the forums are apparently the health professionals that everyone is supposed to trust with regard to things like the Chinese Wuhan virus and when they lie about something as easy to check as this, well it just destroys any of their credibility.

I mean now who is going to wear a mask if Happydaze says they should?  And why would they.

What precisely do you believe I have lied about, you dishonest little bitch?

See, we can all call each other dishonest and completely dismiss anything the other says. It's the way things work here.

[Mistwell]

And he's right, he would have beat Hillary in the primaries I think.

Same way he beat her in 2008? And beat Bernie too? Also, I'm sure that $Hillary and the DNC wouldn't have cheated against him, the same way they did Bernie, to ensure she got the nomination, because it was "Her Time!". #ImWithHer

No because he hadn't been a Vice President of the United States in 2008. Obviously. Biden had even more establishment support than Hillary did in 2016. And he had a far better background to run against Bernie than she did - he has a huge Union-backing resume she lacked. Biden would have cleaned up in the primaries that year. He just couldn't run.