Does anyone else feel under attack in the upcoming election?

  • Thread starter Thread starter losh14
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yup! They seem to be heading into “one of yours for one of mine” territory, if that attitude isn’t kicked into touch quickly then it’s a potential powder keg.
Magdalene said:
They are all extremely liberal, they seem like caricatures of what conservatives make fun of liberals for being on YouTube comedy sketches.
Click to expand...
Wow! Conservatives do comedy? How? Conservatives are famously unfunny.

Source. Rightwing comedians not funny enough for BBC shows, says insider | BBC | The Guardian

I just looked up the average price for premium in California and it is cheap. If I’ve done my maths right, then I paid US$5.95 per US gallon for premium yesterday. (122.9 [price in GBP pence] per litre), I will concede though that it has a higher octane rating than US premium, which is much closer to our regular.
 
Last edited:
Really? I think of liberals and the PC/cancel culture as very unfunny. I was talking about channels like Awaken with JP, Ryan Long, and others on YouTube making fun of leftist thinking. (I don’t really recommend these for Catholics FYI, especially Ryan Long! Some of his stuff is R rated. His political stuff is pretty funny though.)

My point was that sometimes their videos seem overly exaggerated. You think to yourself, surely nobody really thinks that way! But I know those people in real life.
 
Let’s review:

An apparent printing error that was caught and corrected does not constitute voter fraud.

Arson of a drop box does not constitute voter fraud. Possibly an attempt at voter suppression, but since the breakdown of early voters is primarily Democrat, who is being suppressed?

100 ballots tossed out by a (fired) postal worker does not constitute voter fraud and is nowhere near “historic levels”.

“Potentially dead” voters. Source sketchy at best.

You need to do much better than that to convince most people.
 
JoeFreedom said:
Do you need me to provide you evidence of Google, Twitter, YouTube and Facebook censoring information
Click to expand...
Yes. And keep in mind that Facebook, for example, removing a post that has been proven to be false over and over is editing, not censorship.
 
Interesting… I love Australia, I was in Sydney for a week and had a great time, wish I could have stayed longer.

Honestly I haven’t seen much coercion, but I do think politics is getting increasingly nasty here.

I was dating someone recently, and after I told her I would probably vote for one candidate (she asked) then she said “that may be a dealbreaker”. I’m not sure if that was it but we aren’t dating any more. That set be back I’ll be honest.

I think we need to do a better job of respecting each other.
 
losh14 said:
there is no morally acceptable choice in the presidential election,
Click to expand...
I endorsed (officially) Donald Trump yesterday. For two reasons, 1) No new war, and 2), he appointed pro-life justices to The Supreme Court. Now, I don’t agree with everything about him (I am against the death penalty, for instance, but I can vote for someone that supports capital punishment, I cannot vote for someone that supports abortion). Now, that said, I can’t tell you who to vote for. But, as for me, I am sick of war, I am sick of these governors up north and out west telling the news that their rioters are “peaceful protests”. I am sick of the LIE that Trump is somehow a White supremacist (other than being Catholic, Joe Biden certainly fits that mold better, what with praising segregation and everything). Twitter’s censorship of the NY Post story about Hunter Biden, actually pushed me over to being more open about my support.
 
whatistrue said:
Yes. And keep in mind that Facebook, for example, removing a post that has been proven to be false over and over is editing, not censorship.
Click to expand...
Facebook is currently censoring posts in support of the Kyle Rittenhouse defense fund, despite the fact that he has not been convicted of any crimes. Is your position that it is okay for Facebook to censor this because their fact checkers have concluded that he is guilty of some crime, despite not yet having stood trial?
 
Naga said:
Is your position that it is okay for Facebook to censor this because their fact checkers have concluded that he is guilty of some crime
Click to expand...
This is actually the first I have heard of this particular situation. I did a quick search and the most I can find is that some crowdfunding sites decided to pull or refused to host the fundraiser, but others have filled in the gap. I saw nothing about Facebook censoring supporting posts. In other words, I looked but couldn’t find any corroboration of the assertion made. If you have some, please let me know. From what I have read (in general, not about this specific situation), I would surmise that any posts removed were removed for specific violation of the Facebook terms of service, but if you have evidence to the contrary I will look at it. But in any case, I was speaking of the specific assertion of Facebook censoring reports of widespread voter fraud that turned out to be false., not about Facebook’s removing posts in general.

Edit: I did a new search with different terms and did find reports in corroboration. Some of these sources I consider of marginal reliability, but some appear to be more reliable. I was not able to read the entire WSJ editorial because of the paper’s paywall, but the summarized comments from others, if accurate, are in fact very troubling (to say the least) with respect to Facebook’s actions in this specific case. Further than that I cannot comment yet.
 
Last edited:
If you don’t mind me answering (I’m Australian) I’ll jump in.
It’s compulsory to vote here otherwise you get fined. Not a huge amount, but still.
You can vote by mail or in person, your names crossed off and it doesn’t really matter what you’ve put down as they have no way of knowing it was you. You could draw a picture of a goat if you really wanted too. It’s a wasted vote and affectionately referred too as a “donkey vote”, but people sometimes feel it’s better than voting for a particular party.
Any voting form that isn’t filled out correctly is classified as an invalid vote and not counted but can’t be destroyed.
 
I can say that I feel more under attack than I think I ever have before.
 
whatistrue said:
“Potentially dead” voters. Source sketchy at best.
Click to expand...
How many people, when settling the affairs of their deceased loved one, remembers to call the appropriate State office to remove Uncle John’s name from the voter rolls?

How many people when they move states remember to call their prior state of residence and do the same thing?

Absentee or “mail in” ballots have security measures in place. First, the signature on the ballot must match the one on the voter registration rolls. If someone is going to learn to forge Uncle John’s signature, this is someone who would commit other types of fraud and they are the criminal.
 
Absolutely. I was just doing a quick summary of the different claims and didn’t really want to get into the fact that there is and has essentially always been a certain level of “staleness” for lack of a better term to voter registration rolls. In some jurisdictions, it is difficult to remove a name from the rolls when there is a death even if the heirs think of doing it, and next to impossible for names to “age out”. And none of that is even close to evidence of fraud, much less widespread fraud. I also couldn’t resist a little dig at the wording of “presumably dead”. A failing of mine.
 
All states keep a registry of deaths. It would not be hard to create a cross-checking data base to see whose name should be taken off the voter rolls.
 
Perhaps volunteer to do this database design and management for your State, or work to get its funding on a ballot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top