quote:

Originally posted by RAMIUS:
Well shit. I didn't know that you took over moderator duties!

Don't be an ass. You've been around here long enough to know just what Para thinks of such things, and you damn well know if he were active in this thread he'd chop you off at the knees for that post.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
I apologize for contributing to the thread drift.

It's not the thread drift. Threads drift. It's the content. You have to know Para would not approve of such outrageous, totally unsubstantiated, wild-eyed things.

Our host is taking a break for whatever reasons. I feel it behooves us, as his guests, not to trash the place in his absence, but instead be on our best behavior and look after the place to the best of our ability.

This includes not even skirting behavior for which he's shown a clear dislike in the past.

Would you not agree?

All done? Feel better now?

“I’m in control here!” Al Haig

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
“I’m in control here!” Al Haig

Nah, I'm not channeling Al Haig. I'm channeling bendable

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
“I’m in control here!” Al Haig

Nah, I'm not channeling Al Haig. I'm channeling bendable

Not buying that one for second. I could actually understand what you were trying to say.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Its up to the Republicans to devise a system that reduces cheating. Or they need to learn to cheat better than their opponents.

I don't think we gain anything if we endeavor to become darker and more devious than our opponents.

In the very next post you claim "massive fraud." In politics once the genie is out of the bottle it never goes back in. So, if you're not willing to cheat you are unilaterally disarming and consigning your side to defeat against a party that is willing to cheat. Republicans will never win another presidential election if what you say is true.

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
In politics once the genie is out of the bottle it never goes back in. So, if you're not willing to cheat you are unilaterally disarming and consigning your side to defeat ...

So you're suggesting the only way to win in the future is to cheat more effectively than the opposition. "May the best cheater win?"

I have no interest whatsoever in being any part of such an abomination.

It may be a difficult row to hoe, what with opposition from the Democrat party, the dominant media, and various and sundry other leftists, but what must be done is fix the broken process such that cheating can be reduced to a statistically insignificant percentage of the vote.

Otherwise our republic is done for.

If you go back to my first post you'll find I had three suggestions. 1. Learn to win past the margin of fraud. 2. Devise a system that reduces cheating. But, if the other side cheated as so many in this thread believe do you think the Democrats will say okay this far and no farther? Then what? Honestly, I'm glad I've encountered some not willing to cheat. That's good, but understand what that means if cheating really did occur.

If one team blatantly cheats, the other team chooses not to cheat to win, and the referees do nothing about it, then the fans may rush the field and take the game.

Being's as they bought tickets and pay for all of it.

-gamemonkey's rulebook.
Page1 Rule 2.



Page 1 Rule 1
The gamemonkey makes the rules.

That's all I'm suggesting. If the election was rigged by cheating keeping a republic just might have to get a little messy. If cheating really did occur perhaps we need to think about how to restore order. Or, cheating didn't occur and the feeling of having it stolen is not new and quite natural.

Anybody else here realize that, if election goes to the House and a president has not been selected by inauguration day, the vice president elect becomes acting president.

Can the House debate the selection process until a majority decides to allow the selection?

"Acting" being the key term. It it's temporary, then it has to end sometime. Since the state legislature's votes are cast by the Congress that is in office during the election, that would suggest pretty strongly that the election has to be resolved before the end of that Congressional session. And, of course, since it's a "ministerial" (in this case, rubber-stamp) function of the Congress there's no need for that Congress to take a vote to do anything.

The thing is, there's no reason for debate - the House members of each state get one vote for the entire delegation, and that vote is cast according to the majority vote of each state legislature.

Will Nancy try to pull a fast one? That depends on how many drinks she's had. Will Nancy's fast one come back and bite her on the ass? Well, according to Nancy the whole country (and certainly the Dem Party's constituents) are absolutely desperate for another bail out.

That’s been the plan, get Cameltoe in by hook or crook. Mostly crook!!

Long live President Trump!!

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Anybody else here realize that, if election goes to the House and a president has not been selected by inauguration day, the vice president elect becomes acting president.

Can the House debate the selection process until a majority decides to allow the selection?

I don't think so, but the House IS very good at taking recesses (or vacations) during times when something important like the stimulus needs to be voted on.....thus delaying things.

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
That’s been the plan, get Cameltoe in by hook or crook. Mostly crook!!

The Whore of Babylon.



.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
That’s been the plan, get Cameltoe in by hook or crook. Mostly crook!!

The Whore of Babylon.
.

Hey now. C'mon man... that is just not a fair comparison

Even the whore of Babylon had standards

quote:

Originally posted by btgoanna:
Hey now. C'mon man... that is just not a fair comparison

Even the whore of Babylon had standards

You're right. That was harsh.



.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
In politics once the genie is out of the bottle it never goes back in. So, if you're not willing to cheat you are unilaterally disarming and consigning your side to defeat ...

So you're suggesting the only way to win in the future is to cheat more effectively than the opposition. "May the best cheater win?"

I have no interest whatsoever in being any part of such an abomination.

It may be a difficult row to hoe, what with opposition from the Democrat party, the dominant media, and various and sundry other leftists, but what must be done is fix the broken process such that cheating can be reduced to a statistically insignificant percentage of the vote.

Otherwise our republic is done for.

ensigmatic: I agree. I'm not interested in a system that requires cheating to win.
I am interested in reducing the cheating to a statistically insignificant percentage of the vote. That's why for the last 20 years or so I get up at 3am every election day and work sometimes till midnight as an election official. I don't want to be a part of any system that requires me to become a better cheater. I would rather fight the next war. Soap Box, ballot box, ammo box. It the ballot box is corrupted it comes down to the ammo box.

It's not that hard to run a clean election. The Dems worked really hard to make sure this election was dirty. They fought photo ID at every step of the process. They flooded the system with mail-in ballots. They've fought signature verification.

1. State issued Photo ID required.
2. Election on election day, in person voting.

This may have been posted already but I did not see it
https://da.lacounty.gov/sites/...With-Voter-Fraud.pdf

quote:

Originally posted by 1Lowtrk:
This may have been posted already but I did not see it
https://da.lacounty.gov/sites/...With-Voter-Fraud.pdf

I doubt the penalty for their activities is as severe as I’d like, but I’m glad they’ve been arrested. Vote fraud should be a capital crime, IMO.