Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The New Democrat Party?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    increasingly "seedy" sources.
    Tell me who in your opinion would not be a seedy source?

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #32
      Originally posted by The Skeptic View Post

      Leering at his daughter is the best you can do? I didn't take his comments as anything other than a father's admiration for his child. I think his leering is more in "your" head than his.

      Please don't lump Hillary in the same boat as Trump as it just doesn't make any sense. Hillary has been politician for 30 years and has pretty smarmy past going back to the Watergate era. She was also an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Whitewater affair.

      In addition there is of course the email scandal and the sale of uranium to Russia scandal.

      Hell she makes Trump look like a choir boy.....
      Again, which is worse is a silly argument, they are BOTH morally and ethically repugnant, it's like engaging in an argument over who was worse, Hitler or Stalin...it's just plain stupid (and generally only engaged in by someone who harbors actual affirmative support or approval for the one they dismissive the comparison of. As I said, it was a pathetic choice, truly lesser of two evils territory.

      Trump personal business ethics indicate every bit as corrupt a character and willingness to abuse the system as Hillary. Had Trump been in politics for as long as Hillary, I have little doubt he would have as tarnished and checkered a political history as she. Again, I am not defending either, I am condemning both.

      Trump is as vile a human being as Hillary, does that mean I cannot be satisfied that in terms of the policies he has chosen to put in place over what she would most likely have done, not at all. You can approve of the positions someone takes on public policy without having to defend their personal (or even political) character and ethics.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #33
        Originally posted by radcentr View Post
        With that, I am in 100% agreement. One has to live in a fantasy to expect their political candidates will have a "minty fresh" moral reputation, but our choices seem to have been picked from increasingly "seedy" sources.
        Look, I am not one of these cynics that lumps ALL politicians together. I genuinely believe that the majority of politicians are genuinely well intentioned, and believe that the positions they take will do the most good for the most people (it is just that at any given time I think about half of them are just wrong in those believes). There are a small minority that are genuinely corrupt (rather than just out of touch), or are people of generally bad character and cynical in their approach to politics.

        Just in the last two decades, I think the Bush's (father and son), and Obama were basically decent, well intentioned politicians, who I just happen to disagree with insofar as some (or in Obama's case most) of their policy positions were concerned. It is far to much a part of the rot in our political discourse that partisans define the moral character and integrity of individuals by their policy positions. Teddy Kennedy, for example, was a disgusting human being, the fact that democrats ever, or continue to praise him is something they should be held account for.

        Also, when you look at the litany of things they accuse Trump of:
        - Mysogyny
        - Violating unwritten constitutional norms
        - Assualting the independence of the media
        - Attacking the independence of the judiciary
        - Using an attack to go to war with those who did not attack us
        - Treating the totalitarian leader of Russia as an ally
        - Rounding up people and putting them in internment camps.

        Well, every single one of those describes FDR (in most instances even more fairly) than Trump. And since the left has already established the appropriateness of holding long-dead individuals to modern standards vis-a-vis the acceptability of public monuments to them, shouldn't the left be supportive of getting rid of the FDR memorial? But they wouldn't support that (let alone initiate such a movement) because they adored the man's big government bona fides.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #34
          Originally posted by The Skeptic View Post

          Tell me who in your opinion would not be a seedy source?
          Clinton, for example, compromised her political position as a participant in the DLC, her personal position by (same old) dirty tricks inside the Dem primary process and too much support for Bill's mentally-ill level of skirt chasing. Trump, well, he's got a list of "issues", why should I try to outdo Marcus in that respect?

          As for choosing a better candidate, throw a dart at almost name on a board - of anyone else who has at least a tiny bit of political experience, along with substantial experience in business or community organizing. Then, list off comments from rivals and backers of that candidate. If the rivals don't mention things like "cheat", "steal", "scumbag", "sketchy" in every other sentence, while their allies are able to comment without using lame excuses like "that's the way things work" or the like in every paragraph. Did he pass that test? That's your man, or women.

          Would that man or woman have "no seeds" in their past? No. That would be a dream that won't come true. I'll be satisfied with someone who is less ..."distasteful" but more competent, to put it mildly.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #35
            Originally posted by radcentr View Post
            Clinton, for example, compromised her political position as a participant in the DLC, her personal position by (same old) dirty tricks inside the Dem primary process and too much support for Bill's mentally-ill level of skirt chasing. Trump, well, he's got a list of "issues", why should I try to outdo Marcus in that respect?

            As for choosing a better candidate, throw a dart at almost name on a board - of anyone else who has at least a tiny bit of political experience, along with substantial experience in business or community organizing. Then, list off comments from rivals and backers of that candidate. If the rivals don't mention things like "cheat", "steal", "scumbag", "sketchy" in every other sentence, while their allies are able to comment without using lame excuses like "that's the way things work" or the like in every paragraph. Did he pass that test? That's your man, or women.

            Would that man or woman have "no seeds" in their past? No. That would be a dream that won't come true. I'll be satisfied with someone who is less ..."distasteful" but more competent, to put it mildly.
            I will be interested to see what the Republicans are going to do about Chris Collins who was an early Trump backer who has recently be indicted for insider trading. https://buffalonews.com/2017/08/29/n...-stock-trades/

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #36
              Originally posted by redrover View Post

              I will be interested to see what the Republicans are going to do about Chris Collins who was an early Trump backer who has recently be indicted for insider trading. https://buffalonews.com/2017/08/29/n...-stock-trades/
              I said it before, I'll say it again. This is taking on the smell of the Grant administration.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #37
                Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                I said it before, I'll say it again. This is taking on the smell of the Grant administration.
                Meanwhile you've got Gates and Manafort locked in their dance of death. Just like Kremlin Don. US teamed up with some shady fellows.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #38
                  Originally posted by redrover View Post

                  Meanwhile you've got Gates and Manafort locked in their dance of death. Just like Kremlin Don. US teamed up with some shady fellows.
                  I understand the need to deal with sketchy people (fe, state dept. or CIA) overseas. I also understand the WH executive receives and deals with that information in the best interests of the US, even if it has an unpleasant stench on it.

                  It gets really creepy, however -when that executive puppy is happily rolling in the pile of dead fish, right alongside state dept. liaisons and CIA operatives. Then he claims the other dogs were rolling in illegitimate dead fish. That's an "extra special" addition to what is already doubtful behavior.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by msc View Post
                    So true. But I don't believe either party is being honestly or fairly represented. I see the majority of party leadership as a party in itself. The Deep State party if you will. A Party that represents Washington alone, and uses to the people for their votes. Voters as pawns to have some semblance of legitimacy. They in fact have deceived party voters. Though I do have to say that Republican voters have caught on in large that we are being played. Perhaps when the Democrat voters catch on, we can come together and take them down.
                    How ? That's the problem we were warned of by our founders of this two "party" system.

                    We have these R's and we have these D's - same garbage. Then we have some fringe fruit socialists and other oddities.

                    Originally posted by msc View Post
                    I have to say that Trump has shown the most sincerity in representing the will of the people. Not perfect. I'm not on board with everything he does, but keeping promises is a rarity and he's the closest we've gotten to getting away from the Deep State.
                    True & I agree.

                    He's (Trump) definitely not one of our mealy mouthed "politicians" that says things that sound good but never even INTENDS on doing them. These people have only managed to make a mockery of themselves. Talking mannequins, fake and plastic people.

                    But as I was pointing out above, what are we to do about it when there are only newer fake and plastic people versions forever parading out for us to "vote" in or out.... ???

                    The new crop coming up is made up of the same old garbage ! Except now we have some actual socialists running too !

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                      How ? That's the problem we were warned of by our founders of this two "party" system.

                      We have these R's and we have these D's - same garbage. Then we have some fringe fruit socialists and other oddities.



                      True & I agree.

                      He's (Trump) definitely not one of our mealy mouthed "politicians" that says things that sound good but never even INTENDS on doing them. These people have only managed to make a mockery of themselves. Talking mannequins, fake and plastic people.

                      But as I was pointing out above, what are we to do about it when there are only newer fake and plastic people versions forever parading out for us to "vote" in or out.... ???

                      The new crop coming up is made up of the same old garbage ! Except now we have some actual socialists running too !
                      I welcome anyone who isn't a supporter of Kremlin Donald.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by redrover View Post
                        I welcome anyone who isn't a supporter of Kremlin Donald.
                        You've referred to the president as Kremlin Donald before, so I don't find it any surprise that you would "welcome anyone who isn't a supporter of.." him.

                        Always entertaining, keep at it ; )

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by redrover View Post

                          I will be interested to see what the Republicans are going to do about Chris Collins who was an early Trump backer who has recently be indicted for insider trading. https://buffalonews.com/2017/08/29/n...-stock-trades/
                          I will not be ... "interested" that is.

                          I don't care.

                          Chris Collins made his choices... if, in fact, he DID make any choices. SO many of these indictments are political and have no basis in reality. The democraps perfected the unwinnable indictment but the republicans use it too. Invariably, these are settled out-of-court NOT because the charge has any merit, but because the defendant doesn't want to (or can't afford to) work it through the courts: AND the politicians who initiate it are quite aware that the charge nevertheless stains the defendant regardless of merit.

                          They seemingly can't get Trump, so they're trying to whittle away at his supporters.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #43
                            SOOOOOOO ... is this a "new" tactic from the "new" democrat party, or just a continuation akin to registering dead people? From USAToday:

                            COLUMBUS – The tight race between Democrat Danny O'Connor and Republican Troy Balderson just got tighter.

                            Election officials in Franklin County found 588 previously uncounted votes in a Columbus suburb. The result: O'Connor had a net gain of 190 votes, bringing the race's margin down to 1,564.

                            "The votes from a portion of one voting location had not been processed into the tabulation system," according to a Franklin County Board of Elections news release.

                            ...

                            If the final results show a margin of 0.5 percent or less, state election officials will hold an automatic recount.
                            "In the immortal words of Leroy Jethro Gibbs, 'I don't believe in coincidences'." -Anthony DiNozzo

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                              SOOOOOOO ... is this a "new" tactic from the "new" democrat party, or just a continuation akin to registering dead people? From USAToday:



                              "In the immortal words of Leroy Jethro Gibbs, 'I don't believe in coincidences'." -Anthony DiNozzo
                              Big deal, go for the recount. As you know, Ohio is under GOP control. In case you didn't know this, here's a link:
                              https://ballotpedia.org/Party_contro...ate_government

                              Unless you are claiming that the district in dispute is somehow under the control of Chicago-style Dems -in their level and agility to practice corruption- your point falls way short. However, it seems to me that you are making an extremely disturbing argument to erode proper electoral procedure. Ohio state is controlled by the GOP. Therefore they can (and definitely should) prosecute Dem operatives if/when it could be proven they faked ballots or otherwise violated laws to tip the special election in their favor. Not only would that be the correct thing to do in a law and order society, but it would add an extra "zing" for GOP candidates in the upcoming election. Should the Dems get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, the state's AG and sec.of state should merrily play that scandal -should be easy to flip at least a dozen statewide seats to their favor next November.

                              The other part of your post was a lot more disturbing. Are you insinuating that vote recounts in very tight races should be avoided? Vote recounts in similar circumstances are standard operating procedure in a legitimate republic. If you would please clarify, I prefer to believe you are a member of the loyal opposition, rather than one who opposes the concept of a Republic.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                                Big deal, go for the recount. As you know, Ohio is under GOP control. In case you didn't know this, here's a link:
                                https://ballotpedia.org/Party_contro...ate_government

                                Unless you are claiming that the district in dispute is somehow under the control of Chicago-style Dems -in their level and agility to practice corruption- your point falls way short. However, it seems to me that you are making an extremely disturbing argument to erode proper electoral procedure. Ohio state is controlled by the GOP. Therefore they can (and definitely should) prosecute Dem operatives if/when it could be proven they faked ballots or otherwise violated laws to tip the special election in their favor. Not only would that be the correct thing to do in a law and order society, but it would add an extra "zing" for GOP candidates in the upcoming election. Should the Dems get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, the state's AG and sec.of state should merrily play that scandal -should be easy to flip at least a dozen statewide seats to their favor next November.

                                The other part of your post was a lot more disturbing. Are you insinuating that vote recounts in very tight races should be avoided? Vote recounts in similar circumstances are standard operating procedure in a legitimate republic. If you would please clarify, I prefer to believe you are a member of the loyal opposition, rather than one who opposes the concept of a Republic.
                                For the past few days MSNBC has been playing a tape of Devon Nuances saying how it is to reelect Republicans to keep Trump from being impeached. It's our only hope because we know he's guilty as hell.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X