She was responding to the death and lynching threats she was getting.
Not only do I not believe they have a legitimate grievance, I also do not believe that THEY believe they have a legitimate grievance. Ordinary Republican supporters, poll-watchers, and even some of the Representatives believe they do, but not Trump, Giuliani, Ellis, or the rest of the driving personalities behind this effort.
Do you see a bipartian elite supporting Biden? Because I sure see the Republican side of the elite zealously, even slavishly support Trump even now he tries to subvert democracy in a desperate attempt to remain in office.
I don't think it can be done. The stats, including that Trump is the 1st POTUS to lose re-election in 150 years after gaining votes create a rebuttable presumption that the election was stolen. So, team Biden would then rebut the presumption... but they are not. They're not calling for hand count audits. PA signature envelopes being destroyed... so that the envelope signatures could be matched to the ballot signatures. https://www.inquirer.com/politics/e...lots-supreme-court-philadelphia-20200921.html . So now, before USSC is a lawsuit that is stating the issue isn't catching enough voter fraud to over-turn the election but to show the process itself fails to pass Constitutional muster.
USPS is a government labor force, like school teachers. Who tend to be Democrats.
But the thing about American politics is that its explicitly not about the number of votes a candidate gets. Its about the number of voters they get in specific locations. Getting a majority of millions in one place doesn't help you win the election if you lose two places by maybe a couple 100 of votes. You can have millions of more votes than your opponent only to lose the election because your rival has maybe 400 more votes in two small states. That's the whole reason Trump even became President to begin with. Clinton won the election handily as far as votes went but Trump just happen to perform better in some random locations. And Trump even getting a lot of those swing state had been by the skin of his teeth. It was always going to be a gamble whether he was going to win them again or not, a gamble that failed to pay off.
They don't. They don't take losing well at all. That's their whole problem. They took losing to Obama so extremely poorly that they spend eight years bitching, moaning, crying and stealing court judges just because they couldn't stomach losing to a Democrat. Or because they couldn't stomach losing to a black man.
But of course. No Republican would ever get elected in a system where people may pick a candidate that's not of the oligarchy. That's why they so passionately support the electoral college or dabble in voter suppression. They know that they simply do not have the numbers to win an election without artificial factors keeping them in the game. Trump himself would also reject a system that can't be rigged and that would open the floor to non oligarchy candidates because then he himself would not be able to win anymore.
Your first statement is the start of a conversation, not it's end. And my stat is only one of many improbabilities.
Riots, as they say are the language of the unheard. Republicans don't feel unheard by their government, believing (generally falsely) that the PotUS is on their side. They are, however, killing people all the time, in various ways, that's inherent (if sometimes something of an outlier) to the ideology.
I think the Republican party is currently the Conservative party. If you want to conserve, chances are, you already have something to conserve, while the Democratic party is the "liberal" party of change. Though, these terms and parties are in flux. So, those who want to conserve are not going to be the ones setting cities on fire for their own self interests.
The Black Live Matter protests and the riots that come with them aren't really inherently anti Republican. The cause is police murders that repeatedly go completely undressed. And while Trump so obviously siding with the police exacerbates the issue it should be noted that these riots also happened under Obama.
Why are you coming into other people's discussions if you have no intention of ever admitting that you could be wrong? Especially when all of your "evidence" is based on conjecture?
Nominally, in practice they tend to be more reactionary, wanting to conserve an idealised golden age that didn't actually happen.
Ah, but the Republican party was making a lot of noise about both those issues. Not so much the others you mentioned, and not so much actually doing anything about them (the first being a non-existent problem they have hallucinated into being), but they can make their supporters feels they've been heard on those issues. Trump went into the last election whipping up his supporters about his wall and Muslim ban. He walked both of those back, but he was definitely telling people he's heard them on that.
On that we are in agreement. Well, I might say that the US isn't in the empire building business they way I think you mean, but that's due to incompetence and short term thinking rather than lack of trying. Keep making the same mistakes over and over, only the people doing so don't suffer for them so they aren't exactly mistakes.
The topic is a bit more important than a lot of the stuff we talk about, though.
Though we have a similar level of impact on all of them (not that that should stop us chatting, otherwise we'd never say anything).
Yeah that is a major problem. Not that the GOP are better, but we need to make a max age for public service. I'm tired of these 70+ old fucks determining laws on internet privacy, revenge porn and social media when they still haven't adjusted to more than 3 TV channels.
Why would they be worried about a recount? There wasn't even a recount for the 2000 election that was won by hundreds of votes. Expanding your cheating plan only invites the chances of getting caught along with bringing more people in which one of them will probably talk. At least the voting machine conspiracy in theory can work with very few people being in on it, plus polling is done for you so you would know how much votes need to be flipped. All this other fraud stuff is pretty asinine.
I would point out they're only concerned with the presidential vote, not the down ballot votes. No one is in Pennsylvania calling for judges not to be appointed because the ballots cast were fraudulent. No one is in Georgia saying Amendment 2 for Sovereign Immunity didn't actually pass because 100,000 ballots were illegal.
Because they didn't find evidence of fraud for those votes. You'd know this is you had been watching the hearings.
