agip wrote:
1101 wrote:
Good job turning toward irrelevant nonsense.
I'd give you 100-1 odds that the EC will still be in place 20 years from now (I won't be alive much longer than that, otherwise I'd be happy to talk about 50 years from now).
just making conversation, amigo
Cool dude. My bad.
So, to post a more civil reply - I would argue that this country was founded, thereby reducing the power of the British monarchy, by force; slave owners did not give up their slave ownership willingly; civil rights were granted as a last resort under the threat of force (lethal and economic); and women won the right to vote (thereby diluting men's power) also by force (of a different sort).
People and states do not simply give up power because it's the right thing to do. And they will not do so wrt the EC.
1101 wrote:
agip wrote:
just making conversation, amigo
Cool dude. My bad.
So, to post a more civil reply - I would argue that this country was founded, thereby reducing the power of the British monarchy, by force; slave owners did not give up their slave ownership willingly; civil rights were granted as a last resort under the threat of force (lethal and economic); and women won the right to vote (thereby diluting men's power) also by force (of a different sort).
People and states do not simply give up power because it's the right thing to do. And they will not do so wrt the EC.
I suspect we'll disagree on the definition of power, but:
Examples of giving up power voluntarily, because it is the right thing to do:
George Washington stepping down from power
Cincinnatus
Affirmative action
Australian land return
the idea of heavily graduated income taxes. In the US circa 40% of households pay zero federal income tax and there is no real push to change that by the 60% who pay them all.
The very basic idea of a ruling party in a democracy, in control of the military, handing over the reins of power after losing an election.
Well, the 17th Amendment did happen.
I think the biggest obstacle to the National Popular Vote Pact is the gerrymandered state legislature. And in order to change that, you have to win the gerrymandered state legislature.
agip wrote:
1101 wrote:
Cool dude. My bad.
So, to post a more civil reply - I would argue that this country was founded, thereby reducing the power of the British monarchy, by force; slave owners did not give up their slave ownership willingly; civil rights were granted as a last resort under the threat of force (lethal and economic); and women won the right to vote (thereby diluting men's power) also by force (of a different sort).
People and states do not simply give up power because it's the right thing to do. And they will not do so wrt the EC.
I suspect we'll disagree on the definition of power, but:
Examples of giving up power voluntarily, because it is the right thing to do:
George Washington stepping down from power
Cincinnatus
Affirmative action
Australian land return
the idea of heavily graduated income taxes. In the US circa 40% of households pay zero federal income tax and there is no real push to change that by the 60% who pay them all.
The very basic idea of a ruling party in a democracy, in control of the military, handing over the reins of power after losing an election.
maybe the biggest example was giving women the right to vote.
L L wrote:
Are you still here disputing the election results?
I mean, I did say you would do this.
Whatever Trump says, you say. And him calling this rigged was known in advance.
How do you make any decisions in your life without being told what to do by him?
What a loser Rigged is. I mean, seriously, absolutely no integrity at all. So stupid.
this really shows the injustice of the electoral college
how empty space outweighs actual Americans.
And for those conspiracy champs who keep claiming that the courts are ignoring evidence of fraud, here is a good article from the conservative National Review by a Trump-supporting former Federal prosecutor. He points out that despite all the inflated claims of fraud, when time to actually litigate they don't present any evidence and even stipulate to facts that don't involve fraud. He also points out that in several of the cases the decisions weren't based on "technicalities" such as standing (which is a very important technicality), but on the merits such as the Trump attorneys were willing to pursue.
Well, thanks, but apparently I'm "out of free articles" (didn't know I was in them, actually).
Any chance for a copy-and-paste?
SeattleSilver wrote:
And for those conspiracy champs who keep claiming that the courts are ignoring evidence of fraud, here is a good article from the conservative National Review by a Trump-supporting former Federal prosecutor. He points out that despite all the inflated claims of fraud, when time to actually litigate they don't present any evidence and even stipulate to facts that don't involve fraud. He also points out that in several of the cases the decisions weren't based on "technicalities" such as standing (which is a very important technicality), but on the merits such as the Trump attorneys were willing to pursue.
Trump needs to appeal all these cases, based on ineffective assistance of counsel. It wouldn't surprise me if Giuliani was drunk during most of this. What kind of goofball lawyer stipulates to facts? You may as well throw your whole case in the haymow, if you're going to stipulate. And the Kraken Powell person may have been preoccupied with things of a personal nature. Trump got hog mawed by his own bench. That is not supposed to happen to innocent victims of fraud in America, where freedom and justice reign over everyone irregardless of stature and merit.
Flybang mosher wrote:
SeattleSilver wrote:
And for those conspiracy champs who keep claiming that the courts are ignoring evidence of fraud, here is a good article from the conservative National Review by a Trump-supporting former Federal prosecutor. He points out that despite all the inflated claims of fraud, when time to actually litigate they don't present any evidence and even stipulate to facts that don't involve fraud. He also points out that in several of the cases the decisions weren't based on "technicalities" such as standing (which is a very important technicality), but on the merits such as the Trump attorneys were willing to pursue.
Trump needs to appeal all these cases, based on ineffective assistance of counsel. It wouldn't surprise me if Giuliani was drunk during most of this. What kind of goofball lawyer stipulates to facts? You may as well throw your whole case in the haymow, if you're going to stipulate. And the Kraken Powell person may have been preoccupied with things of a personal nature. Trump got hog mawed by his own bench. That is not supposed to happen to innocent victims of fraud in America, where freedom and justice reign over everyone irregardless of stature and merit.
You speak of one truth:
"Giuliani was drunk during most of this."
TTH wrote:
Flybang mosher wrote:
Trump needs to appeal all these cases, based on ineffective assistance of counsel. It wouldn't surprise me if Giuliani was drunk during most of this. What kind of goofball lawyer stipulates to facts? You may as well throw your whole case in the haymow, if you're going to stipulate. And the Kraken Powell person may have been preoccupied with things of a personal nature. Trump got hog mawed by his own bench. That is not supposed to happen to innocent victims of fraud in America, where freedom and justice reign over everyone irregardless of stature and merit.
You speak of one truth:
"Giuliani was drunk during most of this."
Quality lawyers don't take frivolous lawsuits.
Reality will be very difficult for those of you who still trust in the conman. Accept the truth about trump, move on, and put your energy into someone who is worth it.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Another form of “direct payments” could hurt the Democrats??:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-letter-chinese-cefc-chairman-wire-request
President Hunter is going to be haunting you for a long time. Take your meds, ice often, and focus on breathing.
Flagpole wrote:
L L wrote:
Are you still here disputing the election results?
I mean, I did say you would do this.
Whatever Trump says, you say. And him calling this rigged was known in advance.
How do you make any decisions in your life without being told what to do by him?
What a loser Rigged is. I mean, seriously, absolutely no integrity at all. So stupid.
Deranged sore losers. Biff sally and Igy will soon realized they are lost puppies, fully exposed to the dangerous commies out to get them. Enjoy your loss!
Trollminator wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Another form of “direct payments” could hurt the Democrats??:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-letter-chinese-cefc-chairman-wire-requestPresident Hunter is going to be haunting you for a long time. Take your meds, ice often, and focus on breathing.
Are you in favor of Trump giving pardon's to his friends and family?
If needed, would you be in favor of Joe giving Hunter a pardon?
Trollminator wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
What a loser Rigged is. I mean, seriously, absolutely no integrity at all. So stupid.
Deranged sore losers. Biff sally and Igy will soon realized they are lost puppies, fully exposed to the dangerous commies out to get them. Enjoy your loss!
Pardon my ignorance. I know who sally and igy are. But who is Biff?
Turning the Table wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
Deranged sore losers. Biff sally and Igy will soon realized they are lost puppies, fully exposed to the dangerous commies out to get them. Enjoy your loss!
Pardon my ignorance. I know who sally and igy are. But who is Biff?
I'm proud of the Biff reference...it's a double literary reference, with a nod to American politics.
One of the best things that has come up on LRC.
Turning the Table wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
Deranged sore losers. Biff sally and Igy will soon realized they are lost puppies, fully exposed to the dangerous commies out to get them. Enjoy your loss!
Pardon my ignorance. I know who sally and igy are. But who is Biff?
I am not a sore loser. I think there was election fraud but I have accepted Biden as president elect. I am not one to whine about stuff out of my control. I am looking forward to the Biden presidency. One question for you Libs/Dems though ...how can you support a liar? Biden said in last debate that Hunter never received anything from China. That is an outright lie - Biden, Inc. got $5 million. Trump lies and Biden lies. Can you admit that?
Sally Vix wrote:
Turning the Table wrote:
Pardon my ignorance. I know who sally and igy are. But who is Biff?
I am not a sore loser. I think there was election fraud but I have accepted Biden as president elect. I am not one to whine about stuff out of my control. I am looking forward to the Biden presidency. One question for you Libs/Dems though ...how can you support a liar? Biden said in last debate that Hunter never received anything from China. That is an outright lie - Biden, Inc. got $5 million. Trump lies and Biden lies. Can you admit that?
link?