Jump to content RIP Sheffield Admin Mort

Mr Trump - All discussion here

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, apelike said:

Allow me to help out.

 

The Washington Times is an unreliable rag. It has close links to the Moonies. I believe that it is still owned by an arm of the Unification Church. As such, I’d say it isn’t a credible source of info.

 

Unless you like US Cults, of course. In which case, read away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, apelike said:

# altus.

 

You seem to have missed out the bit in the video where he states that other places abroad and also in the USA have recently conducted personal voting successfully with social distancing in place, hand sanitiser being available and also disposable pens on hand despite coronavirus being around at the time and that was what I was mainly getting at.

 

I can't quote your last bit as your post was not set out right but... there are plenty of reports around confirming voter fraud has happened in the past and is not just a myth, it is also not confined to mail voting either.

 

Not sure how independent these two are but have a read.

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/no-voter-fraud-isnt-myth-10-cases-where-its-all-to/?utm_source=GOOGLE&utm_medium=cpc&utm_id=chacka&utm_campaign=TWT+-+DSA&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwdbr6Lil6wIVOYBQBh2cygclEAMYASAAEgINwfD_BwE

 

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

 

 

Somebodies got the Washington Times (rag) mixed up with either the Washington Post or the New York Times.

 

Heritage Foundation is a pro-Trump republican organisation that appears to think the USA is under attack from radical leftists.

 

But if you'd visisted those sites you linked to you'd have seen that they're not independent😎

Edited by Longcol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

34 minutes ago, apelike said:

# altus.

 

You seem to have missed out the bit in the video where he states that other places abroad and also in the USA have recently conducted personal voting successfully with social distancing in place, hand sanitiser being available and also disposable pens on hand despite coronavirus being around at the time and that was what I was mainly getting at.

 

I can't quote your last bit as your post was not set out right but... there are plenty of reports around confirming voter fraud has happened in the past and is not just a myth, it is also not confined to mail voting either.

 

Not sure how independent these two are but have a read.

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/no-voter-fraud-isnt-myth-10-cases-where-its-all-to/?utm_source=GOOGLE&utm_medium=cpc&utm_id=chacka&utm_campaign=TWT+-+DSA&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwdbr6Lil6wIVOYBQBh2cygclEAMYASAAEgINwfD_BwE

 

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

 

 

My point isn't that in person voting can't be completed successfully but that it won't be in the US. Can you imagine the reaction from Trump many voters if a state required voters to wear face masks to enter the polling stations? What about the impact of them not doing so on Democrat voters?

 

The forum software seems to have screwed up the quote, the last line wasn't inside the quote when I entered it and when I later tried to move it out of the quoted section it wouldn't let me.

 

Nobody is saying that there have been no instances of voter fraud ever. The issue is, has mail in voting fraud been a big enough issue to warrant preventing people using it this time? Remember, 25% of the US population usually vote by mail. If it is an issue why hasn't it been dealt with when those 25% vote using it? Trump's campaign is encouraging his supporters to vote by mail - they call it absentee ballots but it's the same thing. Election fraud can happen with in person voting too - look at the example I gave above of the Republican leadership in Texas removing voting sites from predominantly Democratic supporting areas.

 

As for your two links. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times]The Washington Times[/url]

Quote

Throughout its history, The Washington Times has been known for its conservative political stance.[6][7][8][9] It has published many columns which reject the scientific consensuses on climate change,[10][11][12] on ozone depletion,[13] and on the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.[14][15] It has drawn controversy for publishing racist content, including commentary and conspiracy theories about U.S. President Barack Obama,[16][17] supporting neo-Confederate historical revisionism,[18][19] and promoting Islamophobia.[20]

The Heritage Foundation is a US conservative think tank. Whilst not crazy like The Washington Times, it is very much a partisan organisation.

Quote

The Heritage Foundation has been described as a major influence on the presidential transition of Donald Trump and the Trump administration.[42][43][44] The foundation had a powerful say in the staffing of the administration, with CNN noting during the transition that "no other Washington institution has that kind of footprint in the transition."[42] One reason for the Heritage Foundation's disproportionate influence relative to other conservative think tanks is that other conservative think tanks had members who identified as "never-Trumpers" during the 2016 election whereas the Heritage Foundation signaled early on to Trump that it would be supportive of him.[42][43] At least 66 foundation employees and alumni were given positions in the administration.[43]

In 2014, the Heritage Foundation began building a database of approximately 3,000 conservatives who they trusted to serve in a hypothetical Republican administration for the upcoming 2016 election.[43] According to individuals involved in crafting the database, several hundred people from the Heritage database ultimately received jobs in government agencies, including Scott Pruitt, Betsy DeVos, Mick Mulvaney, Rick Perry, Jeff Sessions and others who became members of Trump's cabinet.[43] Jim DeMint, president of the Heritage Foundation from 2013 to 2017, personally intervened on behalf of Mulvaney who would go on to head the Office of Management and Budget, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and later become acting White House Chief of Staff.[43]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Heritage Foundation is funded by the Koch Brothers, ultra conservatives, forever pushing thier pet politicians to gut regulations and lower taxes.

Had a quick scan thru and some of those fraudulent votes go back to 2011 ,and typically are dealing with an individual vote .

I have seen it estimated it's of the region of 0.006 per cent of votes cast, so utterly insignificant but still wrong.

About half the States disbar released convicts from regaining the right to vote ,effecting multiple millions that's a bigger cause for concern. Does any other democracy do that?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Longcol said:

But if you'd visisted those sites you linked to you'd have seen that they're not independent😎

But I suppose it all hinges on what people think independent means then.  

 

Several people on here post links to Guardian articles with their obvious anti Tory, anti Brexit and anti Cummings stance so they obviously can't be independent either and nor can the posters, so do I have to trust posters replies who are not independent and biased also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, altus said:

Nobody is saying that there have been no instances of voter fraud ever. The issue is, has mail in voting fraud been a big enough issue to warrant preventing people using it this time?

But just who is trying to prevent people having postal votes this time as its the individual states that decide?

 

Disclaimer: This link is probably not independent..... :)

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/06/24/as-states-move-to-expand-the-practice-relatively-few-americans-have-voted-by-mail/

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny enough I was going to post something from Pew as it seemed plain common sense.

You got me bothered enough to go read up on it and sure enough it's a non partisan charity.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another quirk of US politics is having voting official s voted into office as party registered .

 

 

Edited by butlers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, apelike said:

But I suppose it all hinges on what people think independent means then.  

 

Several people on here post links to Guardian articles with their obvious anti Tory, anti Brexit and anti Cummings stance so they obviously can't be independent either and nor can the posters, so do I have to trust posters replies who are not independent and biased also?

But... The Moonies.

 

Give over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Kasich ex Republican Presidential candidate and Cindy McCain, wife of US Republican Presidental candidate againgst Obama in 2008 are both  appearing at the Democratic Conference in support of Joe Biden.

 

The 1000 page Senate report about Russian interference again implies Stone and Trump obstructed justice.

Considering they said they did nothing wrong, boy did they lie  a lot 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, apelike said:

But just who is trying to prevent people having postal votes this time as its the individual states that decide?

 

(...)

USPS' CEO, DeJoy, for reasons best known to him and his influence network. I'd have thought that was clear by now, regardless of any bias (real or imagined) in the links to date.

 

However that now seems to have changed in the last 24 hours. Well, talking the talk at least, we'll have to see what his walk is like, before Pelosi grills him before the Senate next Monday.

 

All a big series of coincidences I'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, apelike said:

But I suppose it all hinges on what people think independent means then.  

 

Several people on here post links to Guardian articles with their obvious anti Tory, anti Brexit and anti Cummings stance so they obviously can't be independent either and nor can the posters, so do I have to trust posters replies who are not independent and biased also?

Comparable but on the other side to The Guardian are The Times and The Telegraph. The sites/people you've been posting links to make the more extreme members of Momentum look reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.