@AverageJoe1
Take a CLOSE look at the MOORE case now before SCOTUS. I have ZERO doubt they will go along with the anti democracy movement inherent in that case, which WHEN SCOTUS ok's it, will give repub states the ability to remove duly appointed electoral college officials who would count the true count, and go Biden wins a second term, but each repub state legislator would now have the power to throw the REAL electors out the door and install their own which will set up permanent wins for repubs and THAT will be the end of democracy in the US no matter HOW much you bitch about 'definitions' which is just another means for you to THINK you are winning the debate because you can diss whatever ANYONE says is the definition of democracy thereby distracting from the REAL issue which is the multi decade push by repubs to win permanent control of government.
I think when that happens you will be quite upset but unable to do anything about it.
Be VERY careful what you wish for.
If SCOTUS allows Moore to become law there will BE no democracy in the US.
You really want that?
Is that genuine enough?
@sonhouse saidWhat I 'want' is to find out what you mean when you say democracy. Here you are reveling in getting rid of the electoral college, which is voting by representatives. But you want mob rule,,,,the majority rule. I just dont follow your post.
@AverageJoe1
and install their own which will set up permanent wins for repubs and THAT will be the end of democracy in the US no matter HOW much you bitch about 'definitions' which is just another means for you to THINK you are winning the debate because you can diss whatever ANYONE says is the definition of democracy thereby distracting from the REAL issue which is the m ...[text shortened]... become law there will BE no democracy in the US.
You really want that?
Is that genuine enough?
Then you suggest you want the Joe Biden blue suit to run our country for 4 more years? Joe Biden? A president?
Then you say the Repubs have been pushing for decades to win permanent control of the government. Tell us, then, what is the aim of the democrats with regard to having any control of the government. Don't rail on about their other aims, social justice (never defined), fair share (never defined), such as that....rather, why do you say repubs want control, as if the dems do NOT want control.
I think this.is a very nice post! Deserves honest answers. No caps necessary, either.
@averagejoe1 said
What I 'want' is to find out what you mean when you say democracy. Here you are reveling in getting rid of the electoral college, which is voting by representatives. But you want mob rule,,,,the majority rule. I just dont follow your post.
Then you suggest you want the Joe Biden blue suit to run our country for 4 more years? Joe Biden? A president?
The ...[text shortened]... trol.
I think this.is a very nice post! Deserves honest answers. No caps necessary, either.
Then you say the Repubs have been pushing for decades to win permanent control of the government. Tell us, then, what is the aim of the democrats with regard to having any control of the government.
There were alternate slates of electors.
There was a clearly defined plan to declare state's federal elections illegitimate (which were certified accurate by each state) despite recounts, audits, legal challenges, and debunking numerous conspiracy theories.
The majority of Republicans in the house voted against certifying the election, despite all these checks and balances already having taken place before their votes.
They made the most serious attempt to side-step democracy that our country has ever seen. I don't think there's a comparison that shows that Democrats would do the same thing, because they haven't and they don't show any signs of wanting to do it.
@wildgrass saidYes, that happened, bad apples, indeed. There are bad apples in both parties, no question. We could compare the misdeeds and chicanery of each party, OR,,,,Or,,,Look to the future.Then you say the Repubs have been pushing for decades to win permanent control of the government. Tell us, then, what is the aim of the democrats with regard to having any control of the government.
There were alternate slates of electors.
There was a clearly defined plan to declare state's federal elections illegitimate (which were certified accurate by ...[text shortened]... ats would do the same thing, because they haven't and they don't show any signs of wanting to do it.
I could say that if Biden is found to be part of his son's crockery, he is the worst of all politicians, and have a field day with you fellers. It is easy for me, of course, to do whatabooutisms, the plagiarism, the lying, all that stuff, but it has all been haggled.
So, what is the answer to a better political world? Your Dem Stacey Abrams was just as egregious that she won the governor vote in Georgia. No, she did not. Everyone is mad at everyone. Fire every person, including the Repub Electorate villains, who get out of line. Disqualify the Abrams person from running again because of all the grief she has caused. I would be a hell of a taskmaster. I guess you could call me a dictator. ðŸ˜
@AverageJoe
Now, SURELY you don't want averagejoe to go into the malaise caused by the Mueller Hearings? The $80M of taxpayer money wasted? And now you are doing it again!?!?? That January 8th mess, or was it the 9th?
Like I said, losers on both sides.
@AverageJoe1
I can only assume you already know all about the Moore case before SCOTUS which is why you refuse to even DISCUSS it.
The ultrarightwingnuts on SCOTUS now are debating the END of democracy in the US and they WANT that because they think Christian nationalism is how our country should be run FOREVER. Christianity as the STATE religion and Moore case ending democracy in the US.
OF COURSE you will just say, another RANT from SH. And that would be because you don't have any desire to enter into THAT debate, and most likely because you TOTALLY agree with all of them.
@sonhouse saidContrare' I do consider this a serious argument, with points on both sides. As a lib, you only see the points on your side. Therein is our difference.
@AverageJoe1
I can only assume you already know all about the Moore case before SCOTUS which is why you refuse to even DISCUSS it.
The ultrarightwingnuts on SCOTUS now are debating the END of democracy in the US and they WANT that because they think Christian nationalism is how our country should be run FOREVER. Christianity as the STATE religion and Moore case ending dem ...[text shortened]... ve any desire to enter into THAT debate, and most likely because you TOTALLY agree with all of them.
Further, there is tremendous nuance and history regarding gerrymandering, and only those (judges) with innate knowledge can arrive at a studied decision. They will study so much that it will make our heads spin, and then write 100's of pages of opinion, and decisions.
Having said that, I AvJoe, cannot render an opinion without full knowledge and understanding of North Carolina, its legislature, the intents of the Framers, the impacts of gerrymandering, and many pages for myself to read (like the judges do) before I can render an opinion.
So, if you yourself don't do all that.....how can you render an opinion?
@averagejoe1 saidYeah you're saying both sides are bad. But only one side has taken the extraordinary and public step of attempting to prevent the transfer of power to the winner of an election after it was certified and all legal challenges had fallen flat.
Yes, that happened, bad apples, indeed. There are bad apples in both parties, no question. We could compare the misdeeds and chicanery of each party, OR,,,,Or,,,Look to the future.
I could say that if Biden is found to be part of his son's crockery, he is the worst of all politicians, and have a field day with you fellers. It is easy for me, of course, to do wha ...[text shortened]... e grief she has caused. I would be a hell of a taskmaster. I guess you could call me a dictator. ðŸ˜
The majority of house Republicans voted that the loser of a presidential election should actually be the winner. How childish and sad.
@wildgrass saidI would like to see a report on that. Is it exactly as you say it was, or are you embellishing? A loser should be a winner? Childish is if you are putting me on.
Yeah you're saying both sides are bad. But only one side has taken the extraordinary and public step of attempting to prevent the transfer of power to the winner of an election after it was certified and all legal challenges had fallen flat.
The majority of house Republicans voted that the loser of a presidential election should actually be the winner. How childish and sad.
@averagejoe1 saidA loser should be a winner.
I would like to see a report on that. Is it exactly as you say it was, or are you embellishing? A loser should be a winner? Childish is if you are putting me on.
States certified election results. That's the process. 147 Republican congressmen, the majority of Republican congressmen, decided the outcome of the election on the floor of Congress. Even worse, they wouldn't even say why they thought the election results should be reversed.
If you thought that's a one-off, heat of the moment, seduced by Trump, then maybe. But there are a lot of Republicans on the ticket now, 35 I think, who have said the election was illegitimate. All I want Republican voters to do is ask them why they think that. We need legitimate elections.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-splits-electoral-college-certification
https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-TRUMP/LAWMAKERS/xegpbedzdvq/
@wildgrass
I'll take your word for it, inasmuch as you took the time to soften it up a bit, made a little difference.
I dont get why you, like Sonhouse, spend your hours writing about Trump, who of course, is playing everyone . Boring. Would you believe that I know absolutely nothing about Jan 6. Nothing. Believe it or not.