PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: bflynn on January 07, 2021, 01:17:25 PM
-
Observation - the problems with the election were at a state level and it is within the power of the state to fix them.
I have already asked my state representatives to order an external audit of election procedures to probe for weaknesses and non-compliance. I've also asked them to set a formal standard for certification of an election so that if rules are not followed, an election cannot be certified. Obviously they're not going to do it just because I ask, but it's what I can do.
North Carolina only avoided the spotlight because the Trump victory was so large here. Otherwise, there was one House race that they refused to certify, the NC-9th district has no representation right now. The new redo election will be conducted soon.
If you want things fixed, fix them in your states. If it really bothers you, move to Michigan, Pennsylvania or Georgia and work to fix them there. Elections are a state activity, Congress really gets no say in the matter.
If you don't want to try to fix things, IMO you have no real leg to stand on for complaining about them.
-
Why fix them? Weren't you just saying there was no proof anything was wrong, or perhaps it was just a little sloppy?
Kinda hard to argue for a fix when the perception is nothing was done wrong.
-
Observation - the problems with the election were at a state level and it is within the power of the state to fix them.
I have already asked my state representatives to order an external audit of election procedures to probe for weaknesses and non-compliance. I've also asked them to set a formal standard for certification of an election so that if rules are not followed, an election cannot be certified. Obviously they're not going to do it just because I ask, but it's what I can do.
North Carolina only avoided the spotlight because the Trump victory was so large here. Otherwise, there was one House race that they refused to certify, the NC-9th district has no representation right now. The new redo election will be conducted soon.
If you want things fixed, fix them in your states. If it really bothers you, move to Michigan, Pennsylvania or Georgia and work to fix them there. Elections are a state activity, Congress really gets no say in the matter.
If you don't want to try to fix things, IMO you have no real leg to stand on for complaining about them.
Good for you... [seriously, not being snarky]
-
Why fix them? Weren't you just saying there was no proof anything was wrong, or perhaps it was just a little sloppy?
Kinda hard to argue for a fix when the perception is nothing was done wrong.
I never said there were not irregularities. I said there was no proof of fraud. You still don't understand that difference?
You see, this is what I meant by correcting you, you can't seem to keep it straight and then you start telling people things that aren't true.
There were plenty of accusations of procedures not being followed. But there's no teeth to the laws for not following them.
-
I never said there were not irregularities. I said there was no proof of fraud. You still don't understand that difference?
So what were the irregularities? Obviously not enough to amount to anything, right?
You see, this is what I meant by correcting you, you can't seem to keep it straight and then you start telling people things that aren't true.
Keep dreamin' tough guy, you don't correct anyone.
There were plenty of accusations of procedures not being followed. But there's no teeth to the laws for not following them.
So what was the result of the procedures not being followed?
-
So what were the irregularities? Obviously not enough to amount to anything, right?
Legally, no. What happened because of any of the accusations cannot be proven one way or another. You can claim 100,000 extra ballots were run, but IF it happened (and that hasn't been conclusively proven either), you cannot prove who it benefited.
One of the general problems I see is that there's no standard for when an election can be certified. It usually just says that the some official (usually governor or sec of state) will certify the election, like it's a duty and there's no judgement to be made. So you wind up with irregularities, but officials unwilling to investigate them, unwilling to hold anyone accountable for them, and unwilling to lose their state's representation. Cowardly state officials.
Yes, there's nothing provably illegal being done. That's where it's broken most. You can say "it's wrong to have more votes than voters", but who is responsible for that? Where does the law say the governor cannot certify that as a legitimate election?
My biggest concern is not who gets elected - we will survive Biden, even with a Democrat Senate, I am concerned about how they're going to try to screw us. My concern is how to restore confidence in elections because if Republicans all check out because the system is "rigged", we get Democrat governments everywhere and we already know by looking at the places they've been in power what that brings us.
-
conversely, nothing proves the election was completely legitimate
-
Legally, no. What happened because of any of the accusations cannot be proven one way or another. You can claim 100,000 extra ballots were run, but IF it happened (and that hasn't been conclusively proven either), you cannot prove who it benefited.
One of the general problems I see is that there's no standard for when an election can be certified. It usually just says that the some official (usually governor or sec of state) will certify the election, like it's a duty and there's no judgement to be made. So you wind up with irregularities, but officials unwilling to investigate them, unwilling to hold anyone accountable for them, and unwilling to lose their state's representation. Cowardly state officials.
Yes, there's nothing provably illegal being done. That's where it's broken most. You can say "it's wrong to have more votes than voters", but who is responsible for that? Where does the law say the governor cannot certify that as a legitimate election?
My biggest concern is not who gets elected - we will survive Biden, even with a Democrat Senate, I am concerned about how they're going to try to screw us. My concern is how to restore confidence in elections because if Republicans all check out because the system is "rigged", we get Democrat governments everywhere and we already know by looking at the places they've been in power what that brings us.
But all of those swing states that had allege problems told everyone there were no concerns. Their governors and secretaries of state said it was a clean election with no issues. They have even said they followed the laws, and were backed up by the courts and state LE.
Even Georgia just ran an election Tuesday and have stated it was run with absolutely no problems.
As long as state legislatures, Governors and SoS's say "nothing to see here" and their state courts back them up, I see little to no chance to see any changes.
-
conversely, nothing proves the election was completely legitimate
Actually, the Governor's/SoS certifications prove the election was legitimate. It's not a conspiracy (unless you can prove it) to get rid of Trump. The States said their certifications were good and if you want to claim otherwise, you need to bring hard proof. We've been through this before.
-
But all of those swing states that had allege problems told everyone there were no concerns. Their governors and secretaries of state said it was a clean election with no issues. They have even said they followed the laws, and were backed up by the courts and state LE.
So they were gaslighting you. Shame on them.
-
Actually, the Governor's/SoS certifications prove the election was legitimate.
So if the election was legitimate, nothing needs to be fixed. Legitimate= run according to laws and procedures.
-
Actually, the Governor's/SoS certifications prove the election was legitimate. It's not a conspiracy (unless you can prove it) to get rid of Trump. The States said their certifications were good and if you want to claim otherwise, you need to bring hard proof. We've been through this before.
so, all they have to do is certify the result, any result, and you'd bliindly accept that as "legitimate"
yee HAW!
-
So they were gaslighting you. Shame on them.
But you just said they were legitimate. You seem to be all over the map on this.
-
so, all they have to do is certify the result, any result, and you'd bliindly accept that as "legitimate"
yee HAW!
Stupid people rush to accept stupid answers.
How else do you explain barry soetoro?
-
But you just said they were legitimate. You seem to be all over the map on this.
You seem to have an extreme problem with comprehension. I think willful because nobody could that stupid by accident.
Do you really expect that nobody cannot comprehend how something can be lawful, but wrong? You can't seem to grasp it, but like I said, I think you're willfully misunderstanding...because you're being a jerk.
-
You seem to have an extreme problem with comprehension. I think willful because nobody could that stupid by accident.
Do you really expect that nobody cannot comprehend how something can be lawful, but wrong? You can't seem to grasp it, but like I said, I think you're willfully misunderstanding...because you're being a jerk.
You are all over the place, one inane diatribe after the next.
So what was wrong with the election? We were just told it was done in accordance with all laws and regulations, and certified as so. That's what a certification proclaims. A state can't certify an election unless it complies with all of it's laws and applicable regulations.
-
You are all over the place, one inane diatribe after the next.
So what was wrong with the election? We were just told it was done in accordance with all laws and regulations, and certified as so. That's what a certification proclaims. A state can't certify an election unless it complies with all of it's laws and applicable regulations.
So you're too slow to keep up?
Writing off the cuff, so I might miss something: There is distrust of the process. Poll workers did not follow procedures and in some cases did not follow laws. There are questions about the legitimacy of ballots that cannot be answered one way or another. There are no standards for certifying an election, leaving it to the personal biases of the certifying official. There are no laws that state the certifying official must ensure procedures were followed.
But ultimately the law prevails...we are nation run by laws. The officials responsible to do so certified the elections as they are authorized to do by law.
It was done in a very sloppy manner. There's no penalties for workers who are sloppy and no standards for officials to decide not to certify an election. There is distrust of multiple aspects of the election and those things can be changed to tighten things up.
Was there intent to slant the election? I don't know, but some people believe there was. However, the intent cannot be proven. So we cannot include intent because it can't be determined. I'm sure you THINK you know intent, but you can't even identify an individual, how can you determine intent?
Or you can can continue to bitch about the past like Republicans always do and in two years, you'll be right back here still outraged that they stole the election again.
-
So you're too slow to keep up?
Just having to deal with a guy that is bipolar in his rantings and diatribes. Constant moving target and incoherent babbling that you're known for.
Writing off the cuff, so I might miss something: There is distrust of the process. Poll workers did not follow procedures and in some cases did not follow laws.
So how was a vote certified if laws weren't followed?
There are questions about the legitimacy of ballots that cannot be answered one way or another.
Yet, the results were certified, again, against the present laws. Before Jan 6th you kept rejecting the premise anything was wrong. Several lawsuits were filed on that very issue, and you claimed ceaselessly there was no evidence.
There are no standards for certifying an election, leaving it to the personal biases of the certifying official. There are no laws that state the certifying official must ensure procedures were followed.
No that's laughable on it's face, and quite dishonest. You simply can't be as ignorant as you continue to act.
But ultimately the law prevails...we are nation run by laws. The officials responsible to do so certified the elections as they are authorized to do by law.
OK Mr. BiPolar, here you go again ping ponging the other way. Can you not keep a coherent train of thought going?
It was done in a very sloppy manner. There's no penalties for workers who are sloppy and no standards for officials to decide not to certify an election.
Yes there are. Apparently you've never bothered to even look at the facts. Another laughable assertion.
There is distrust of multiple aspects of the election and those things can be changed to tighten things up.
But yet before Jan 6th you couldn't see an issue.
Let's cut to the chase. You got the result you desired with this sham election. Now that your guy is getting in the WH, you want to "fix" the election problems. But you simply can't realize that the people who perpetrated this crap on the American people are about in no way going to give up the keys on something that worked so brilliantly. Why should they? This firmly solidifies a one party rule they have been aspiring to for the past 50 years. And now they have precedence by having the courts back them up.
This was not a one election issue, and this was not about Trump. Pandora's box has been opened.
Was there intent to slant the election? I don't know, but some people believe there was. However, the intent cannot be proven. So we cannot include intent because it can't be determined. I'm sure you THINK you know intent, but you can't even identify an individual, how can you determine intent?
With our judicial system refusing to look at it, and our investigative agencies refusing to investigate, it's left to the citizens. And those who seek answers are demonized and smeared by the DCP and their media propaganda machine. The DCP are now in complete control of the judicial and the intelligence community and the investigative arm of our government. Do you really believe they want any transparency? C'mon.
Or you can can continue to bitch about the past like Republicans always do and in two years, you'll be right back here still outraged that they stole the election again.
Go back to 2016 and read the threads were I firmly asserted I am not a member of the republican party.
Finally, the DCP needs their useful idiots, and you and them handed them a dream come true. Be careful what you wish for, and that short term gain you wanted (get Trump out) has essentially destroyed our republic and trashed our constitution.
Useful idiot indeed.
-
Just having to deal with a guy that is bipolar in his rantings and diatribes. Constant moving target and incoherent babbling that you're known for.
You simply can't be as ignorant as you continue to act.
OK Mr. BiPolar, here you go again ping ponging the other way. Can you not keep a coherent train of thought going?
Another laughable assertion.
Finally, the DCP needs their useful idiots, and you and them handed them a dream come true. Be careful what you wish for, and that short term gain you wanted (get Trump out) has essentially destroyed our republic and trashed our constitution.
Useful idiot indeed.
I'll tell you what - for the future, I'll just refrain from responding to you when you insist on being insulting. It will probably go better for everyone.
-
I'll tell you what - for the future, I'll just refrain from responding to you when you insist on being insulting. It will probably go better for everyone.
You are too unhinged to hold an adult conversation. But thanks for once again proving you make make an argument for your ridiculous and inane positions.
And this is a free forum, so anyone can write what they wish, when they wish and to whom they wish.
-
And this is a free forum, so anyone can write what they wish, when they wish and to whom they wish.
And not write.
Signing off for a while.
-
And not write.
Signing off for a while.
Good idea. Get back on your meds. ;)
-
And not write.
Signing off for a while.
As the great one once said, "well... bu-bye."
-
I have already asked my state representatives to order an external audit of election procedures to probe for weaknesses and non-compliance. I've also asked them to set a formal standard for certification of an election so that if rules are not followed, an election cannot be certified. Obviously they're not going to do it just because I ask, but it's what I can do.
I 100% support states looking into any weaknesses and non-compliance. But that wouldn't have changed the chaos we've had.
The underlying issue is, if a state offers two methods of voting - A and B, and one candidate goes on record telling all of his supporters to vote by method A only, then claim all votes cased with method B is fraudulent, it will lead to this every time.
-
I 100% support states looking into any weaknesses and non-compliance. But that wouldn't have changed the chaos we've had.
The underlying issue is, if a state offers two methods of voting - A and B, and one candidate goes on record telling all of his supporters to vote by method A only, then claim all votes cased with method B is fraudulent, it will lead to this every time.
That's moronic.
-
That's moronic.
I agree, but if your supports are morons, it works.
-
I agree, but if your supports are morons, it works.
You have absolutely no clue as to what it going on. Your endless trolling (and that's all it is) gets tiring.