Advertisement

by Kasdados » Mon Jun 08, 2026 7:49 am

by Myrensis » Mon Jun 08, 2026 8:01 am
MagestikTwelve wrote:Neu California wrote:Again, where is the evidence that this is happening? And why aren't you taking it to a court of law if it is happening?
Never mind that all the suits filed in the aftermath of the 2020 election except one found either a lack of evidence or a lack of standing. (That one, Mark Jefferson v. Dane County, Wisconsin, barely affected anything)
Photo voter ID is still going through the house I think with the Save America Act. Evidence in this regard is difficult due to the political nature of the crime. The threat exists clearly regarding how lax democrats are with border control so for that reason I think more security around elections is fine.
San Lumen wrote:MagestikTwelve wrote:
Photo voter ID is still going through the house I think with the Save America Act. Evidence in this regard is difficult due to the political nature of the crime. The threat exists clearly regarding how lax democrats are with border control so for that reason I think more security around elections is fine.
The bill failed in the Senate.
It's a solution in search of a problem. In person voter fraud is a fiction and it is already illegal for non citizens to vote. To make it so only a passport is a valid as a id and to ban online registration places an undue burden on people and it is the definition of a poll tax.
Plus if Democrats are so good at rigging elections would someone kindly explain to me how Trump won or how any Republican wins?

by Rusozak » Mon Jun 08, 2026 8:56 am
Myrensis wrote:MagestikTwelve wrote:
Photo voter ID is still going through the house I think with the Save America Act. Evidence in this regard is difficult due to the political nature of the crime. The threat exists clearly regarding how lax democrats are with border control so for that reason I think more security around elections is fine.
"No, there's no actual evidence of a problem, but the fact that my party doesn't win every election is proof that there's a threat and why we need to SeCuRe oUr ElEcTiOnS by making it harder for anyone who doesn't typically vote for my party to vote at all."

by The Black Forrest » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:01 am

by Chess Socialism » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:04 am
Rusozak wrote:Myrensis wrote:
"No, there's no actual evidence of a problem, but the fact that my party doesn't win every election is proof that there's a threat and why we need to SeCuRe oUr ElEcTiOnS by making it harder for anyone who doesn't typically vote for my party to vote at all."
I wish MAGA would stop beating around the bush and just admit it this is just about bringing back Jim Crow.

by The Black Forrest » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:07 am
MagestikTwelve wrote:Neu California wrote:Again, where is the evidence that this is happening? And why aren't you taking it to a court of law if it is happening?
Never mind that all the suits filed in the aftermath of the 2020 election except one found either a lack of evidence or a lack of standing. (That one, Mark Jefferson v. Dane County, Wisconsin, barely affected anything)
Photo voter ID is still going through the house I think with the Save America Act. Evidence in this regard is difficult due to the political nature of the crime. The threat exists clearly regarding how lax democrats are with border control so for that reason I think more security around elections is fine.

by Port Carverton » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:09 am

by Chess Socialism » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:12 am
MagestikTwelve wrote:The threat exists clearly regarding how lax democrats are with border control so for that reason I think more security around elections is fine.
18 U.S. Code § 592 wrote:Whoever, being an officer of the Army or Navy, or other person in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States, orders, brings, keeps, or has under his authority or control any troops or armed men at any place where a general or special election is held, unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both; and be disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit, or trust under the United States.

by Rusozak » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:13 am
Chess Socialism wrote:Rusozak wrote:
I wish MAGA would stop beating around the bush and just admit it this is just about bringing back Jim Crow.
"We need to make illegal the things that are already illegal and if it isn't pushed through NOW to destroy our reputation when it's already damaged e-fucking-nough we'll primary John Thune!" is what I hear coming from every Republican senator's mouth now, except for John Thune and the 4 senators who voted nay.

by The Black Forrest » Mon Jun 08, 2026 9:14 am

by Necroghastia » Mon Jun 08, 2026 12:06 pm
MagestikTwelve wrote: Democratic anti-border control policies

by GMS » Mon Jun 08, 2026 12:19 pm
by Nonconformity » Mon Jun 08, 2026 12:25 pm

by Fartsniffage » Mon Jun 08, 2026 12:40 pm
by Nonconformity » Mon Jun 08, 2026 12:47 pm

by Ifreann » Mon Jun 08, 2026 12:53 pm

by GMS » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:06 pm
by Nonconformity » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:08 pm
Ifreann wrote:Nonconformity wrote:Except that extremes do not exist in a vacuum, so explain Maga, and the Tea Party before them.
The US is too polarized today, was working up to it long before 2015, for either party to claim inoffensive centrism now.
Oh, that's easy. The radical extremism that the Democrats were engaged in that motivated the backlash of the Tea Party and MAGA was electing a Black man to be president.

by Rusozak » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:09 pm
Nonconformity wrote:Ifreann wrote:Oh, that's easy. The radical extremism that the Democrats were engaged in that motivated the backlash of the Tea Party and MAGA was electing a Black man to be president.
You really need to get over that identity politic hump.
Skin color and gender already have little enough to do with who you are as a person without trying to apply it to your political acumen.
There was more than enough bad policy to pick apart regardless of the policy wonk’s cosmetic features.

by Necroghastia » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:10 pm
Nonconformity wrote:Ifreann wrote:Oh, that's easy. The radical extremism that the Democrats were engaged in that motivated the backlash of the Tea Party and MAGA was electing a Black man to be president.
You really need to get over that identity politic hump.
Skin color and gender already have little enough to do with who you are as a person without trying to apply it to your political acumen.

by Pazill Ran » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:21 pm

by Ifreann » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:21 pm
Nonconformity wrote:Ifreann wrote:Oh, that's easy. The radical extremism that the Democrats were engaged in that motivated the backlash of the Tea Party and MAGA was electing a Black man to be president.
You really need to get over that identity politic hump.
Skin color and gender already have little enough to do with who you are as a person without trying to apply it to your political acumen.
There was more than enough bad policy to pick apart regardless of the policy wonk’s cosmetic features.

by Grenartia » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:24 pm
Pazill Ran wrote:It is clear much of the right-wing animus towards Obama is racial. There was the birther conspiracy theory which falsely claimed Obama was born in Kenya, even though he was actually born in Hawaii. Not to mention the other conspiracy theories about Obama

by DutchFormosa » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:28 pm
Grenartia wrote:Pazill Ran wrote:It is clear much of the right-wing animus towards Obama is racial. There was the birther conspiracy theory which falsely claimed Obama was born in Kenya, even though he was actually born in Hawaii. Not to mention the other conspiracy theories about Obama
As an ex-conservative, I personally saw it as a kid. The private school I went to was hella racist, and the year Obama was elected, I learned a lot of new racial slurs. To say nothing of the 'jokes', at least 2/3rds of which expressed desire (or at least, indifference to) his hypothetical assassination.

by Rusozak » Mon Jun 08, 2026 1:42 pm
Ifreann wrote:Nonconformity wrote:Except that extremes do not exist in a vacuum, so explain Maga, and the Tea Party before them.
The US is too polarized today, was working up to it long before 2015, for either party to claim inoffensive centrism now.
Oh, that's easy. The radical extremism that the Democrats were engaged in that motivated the backlash of the Tea Party and MAGA was electing a Black man to be president.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Anakona, DutchFormosa, Giustinia, Ineva, Kiret-Falnai, Natkr, New Gandinia, Nu Elysium, Orlavia, Pazill Ran, Plandistria, Serboslavonia, The Lone Alliance, Washington Resistance Army
Advertisement