Buffarukus

im not convincing anyone of anything. im talking to you directly. and yet again a trump reference.

as stated in my first response. every reply so far contains a trump reference. every one. at some point your going have to look at the present. look at what's going on today. i could research all the "kitchen sink" facts and links but i think we both know you don't care. its alot of work only to get a trump meme as a response. like i said. people are coming around and seeing what's going on. if you ever become one of them maybe we can have a actual discussion.

there is so much hindsight to go my friend kids in cages turned into: kids in cages. sleeping under bridges being sexually assualted crammed side by side in covid camps forcing biden to....build the wall defund the police has ended up in anarchy killing innocent people, most are disadvantaged minorities. liberal governments that are in no better position covid wise have been found to murder their most vulnerable. crippled their economies making them come up with new ways to tax their people. again hurting poor people. good thing poppa biden floated them a loan or it would be far worse. still coming as they have made no changes to their budgets. instead of the "attacking journalism" we now get " ignoring journalism" i could go on. that's the thing about false narratives. you can't hold up the lie forever. too much data being accumulated. people are waking up. its ok to join them. step onto this side. all is forgiven. i have so much more to show you.

you referenced him again!? what did you think the funniest line was in the video? mine was. "the same people who laughed at trump for suggesting digesting bleach are the ones who used cleaners to wash their fruit for over a year" 🤣😃😄 common thats funny! thats not you is it? what percentage bleach do you use? 50/50? be careful out there.

there you go 5 word sentance that still referenced trump. keep up the good work, they will need it.

better get your memes and emojis ready. the information on how well he has done in the pandemic compared to the democrats is getting to the point even devout liberals see it. 😂🤣😅 the narrative is falling apart. they are going to need your "whatabout trumps" like never before lol

people seem to not understand its not particularly about the actions that are taken. its the unbalanced actions.

sorry you may have caught me in a edit. what was the context for that quote you want a link for. speaking of which. edit: so i see what i wrote. you want a link to what is expected of websites when it comes to its operation as a platform? heres the first article i found. https://www.city-journal.org/html/platform-or-publisher-15888.html offensive is a pretty loose term. if you think a company should ban people for this then its free reign to do as they please. that can defined as anything really. as for the rest read my previous response. more input and conversations are a good thing even if we don't agree.

i am mad they are a monopoly which is why I'm speaking out about it. ill try to leave that part out. you seem to be overlooking my point. terms of service are made as a agreement to the users. you saying the largest platforms in the world can arbitrarily pick and choose what people can or cannot speak about even when they are ABIDING to that agreement is not a good stance to take imo. not only this but you also think its ok to administer the rules everyone agrees to unfairly? when the buisness is information that is incredably dangerous stance. your giving companies that have special protections by the government zero standards or ethics to abide by and seem to be offering corporations complete autonomy. under your line of thinking you are perfectly fine with companies discriminating for any reason really, as long as it is not strictly covered by the law. so if a black man walks into a restaurant that has agreed sneakers are ok. a owner can kick him out because he doesnt allow "nike" sneekers. the black guy says hey there are five guys wearing nikes right there. sorry as a buisness i can do want. id like you to know you are not being kicked out for your race..its our new nike policy i decided on. whats that? you are talking about abortion at a table. please leave your no longer welcome here. shall i go on? these are pretty extreme examples but so is blocking a story by a established publication to prevent the information from reaching the public during a democratic election. so is making death threats to children for being "racist" by standing in front of a indian. so is allowing advertising for get togethers that repeatedly result in courthouses being attacked and attempting to burn people alive in the building. so is comparing people you simply disagree with the worst murdous scumbags from germany. all things twitter allow that goes against there very own tos and leads to actual broken laws. but...free market.

if you think twitter has clear cut terms of service, are transparent in applying them then you are only looking at the surface. if you have a few hours to kill watch this episode with Twitter CEO jack dorsey. its long but very informative. also note it was years ago. nothing has changed, only intensified. watch it or just believe me lol. its right out of the horses mouth which is why i find it credible party affiliation is a protected group. its called freedom of speech and its a foundation of this country. there are no terms of service that state if you are conservative we can delete you even though many seem to want to go down that path and have no issue when it happens. lastly you are missing the point i made. if i want a cake and there is one giant cake store that denies me that also has power to prevent me to get cake elsewhere while also lobbying my credit card to cancel me if i order one while also hiding info on any competition that WOULD be willing to make a cake. i think its a problem. i dont think you understand how much power these tech companies have and how they are using it as a collective.

well whatever monopoly laws should be enforced and these guys should be broken up first of all. second they dont have any clear terms of service or are not transparent in how they are applied. it seems to be at will. when you deal in the assumption you are a platform then you are just the host. anything not illegal is protected. if you are a publisher you can pick and choose what you want...like they are doing but also responsable for whats published. they get both. claim platform but act like a publisher. its pretty sick its been allowed to get this far especially when the parler takedown was found to be false. people still dont care 🤷‍♂️

because those private companies are juggernauts and everyone knows it i see the baker example used. if bakers owned multi billion/trillion dollar companies and used there power and influence IN TADEM to crush or absorb up and coming bakers with a clear agenda to stop anyone from baking a gay cake. with the bonus of having special governmental provisions no one else has. then we can compare the two. way to many monopolies in this country. our leadership keeps conviently forgetting capitalism's history and why anti monopoly laws exist. too big to fail is the new excuse to rape the treasury and american worker.

right wasn't pointing at you directly man. it seemed like there was a dog pile for the narrative that i was speaking about. intertwine all that with peoples need to rush to judgment the moment a story is out and having to much ego to rethink there original ideas as being wrong when more facts emerge. its a powder keg. its not looking good for the critical thinkers.

you also cannot just look at one set of datapoints and say case closed. not saying you personally. i dont know. but many are. disparity. a higher percentage of blacks are killed by police. case closed. racism. but when the same percentages are used to show a certain race is at a higher percentage to commit violent crimes, the disparity is given a excuse. even though that leads directly to a higher percentage of interactions between the two groups in the first place. so blacks are at a higher percentage of being killed by cops but also at a higher percentage of killing cops themselves https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2019/tables/table-42.xls this is a important point! as it leads to both sides interacting with each other knowing it can be a more dangerous encounter because statistically it is. bias unconcious whatever the factor when your life is on the line it will not be ignored.saying stop thinking that way to only one side is not a solution. my issue is the second half of the story and percentage ive shown is VERY hard to find and labeled racist if you do! the media is saturating the public with the first half only and burying the second so people don't even concider it or even worse know very well but excuse it. there isn't any honesty about the facts or anger towards the manipulation we all are being overloaded with noone cares about honesty. that's not how problems get fixed and unfortunatly society seem to be on a unstoppable path in the wrong direction. has anyone in here actually sat down and watched videos of police doing everyday stops being very professional and in a split second getting gunned down? same families left without loved ones as any other, regardless of race. thats part of this story as well!!

ok fair enough just curious how many black groups have you been in? have you ever been a minority? i grew up on the eastside and can assure you racism is in every group. it teaches you to judge others as individuals. so then youll talk about power structure and police having it. yet SEVERAL of the incidents have black police chiefs and captains..i guess they are all for white supremacy as they instruct people where to go and what crime to fight. not to mention they attained this position to begin with. but they were fired...progress. we are going in the weeds. sorry the hockey team you play with is racist and im also sorry you believe a narrative that is highly exaggerated. i could go further but we are 4 years removed from a black man holding the highest office in this country, twice, and 0 from the second (woman). black people cannot achieve there goals and not be arrested do to racism, seems to be the overarching argument. many of my black friends and family must be outliers then. that's my experience at least. as for the cops doing the same to whites. yes im against police brutality in general...who isnt? asians lives matter, black lives, trans lives matter ,we are going towards all lives..just give it time.

this isnt about police. its about psychology. because you dont see, hear about police interactions with whites you think it doesn't exist. because you constantly see "white man attacks", even in the headline without even reading you gain a perception. like i said statistics facts show otherwise. there are plenty of daniel shavers prob out there. yet not many given the same if any coverage...hmmmm

so race being used in headlines only when the perpetrators white isnt mental conditioning? go ahead google search "black man attacks" see what pops up for headlines. it must think i meant attacked? honest mistake as that headline is hard to find, if you can. now "white man attacks" gee now google knows perfectly well what i mean. look at those headlines. your being gaslit. facts and statistics are there to discount all this headline bs and simple proof they are skewing everyone perception. this isn't just one channel man.

that could be the case for many but you cant just write off the factors i stated. there are historic, never seen before numbers of illegal aliens pouring into this country and democrats dont seem to mind..period. certain states say yes please come we will protect you..promoting it further. regardless of trump i promise regular people want secure elections due to this..it has zero to do with trump or software. im glad your rational enough to not fall for the full on board propaganda "on steriods and such". but both sides have their zealots and that will never change. if you have a problem with the drop boxes #'s. thats perfectly fine. i heard you can vote absentee no questions asked. thats basically a solution to any dropbox issue but it requires standards to be secure. if you, the democrats or anyone in community think the standards are restrictive or too high there is NOTHING stopping anyone from having campaign drives, fundraisers or outreach programs to help those achieve the standards such as IDs. instead there are threats, corporate interventions and inflated toxic accusations. this is from the self proclaimed, great uniter. you can litterally start right now. why is the solution always lower expectations and lower standards. instead of lets raise up communities to achieve them. dont have a id lets get you one and now you can also use it from other things your "restricted" from. this would be different if the hurdles were completely unreasonable asks. you can't look at the bill honestly and say that's true. without any bias involved i want secure elections..and could care less if trump anywhere near them. i want a standard that cannot be argued over and litigated EVERY 4 years...and yes the democrats routinely declare voter fraud as well. 2016 russia anyone? so in order for this to end there has to be COMPROMISE. maybe the republicans need to sit back at the table to fine tune things, but that was not in any democrat response. just a overblown overreaction which is all we can ever expect from american politics and the loudest folks on any website.

do some of the "restrictions" have nothing to do with fraud or trump but a natural pullback from concessions made to promote voting during a pandemic? serious question as i don't know Georgia laws before or after in regard to covid. as for another element that goes beyond trump. you have a historic amount of illegals crossing into the US, a president who seems to have encouraged and promoted this crisis and states that have openly stated they disregard US law to provide "sanctuary". these are real factors that would lead a public to want tighter election security for ALL states by americans.

so you illegally drove. you are ray lewis accomplice and you want fraudulent elections. lol im just kidding. yes losing your id will make you SOL in alot of circumstances but what about the question i posed. is it really asking to much when democrats could simply help those who want to vote..and also give them a valid ID they previously did not have for anything else. seems like alot of hoopla and excuses for the simple act of securing elections without any republican excuse if they lose. win win win yet still is fought like its armageddon.

so getting a job took you for your word without needing a ID verification..for 7 years? cashed checks? rented housing? ect ect? thats a very trusting environment. also a environment ripe for fraud. you worked a valet service..without a licence? or this was later? if you lived there then i guess ill believe their social net is not that good. it doesnt really change the fact that democrat and community organizations can help people obtain them then. ill pose this question since it was unanswered before. democrats want everyone to have the right to vote. republicans want more secure elections. at least that's the glossy overcoat they give. democrats can help people obtain IDs. what do you want republicans to do to secure elections as a basic ask for ID is fought tooth in nail..and of coarse "racism" is called. is it really too much? do you not feel any concessions should be made to 1/2 the country that want this. side note, i hope you weren't valeting lewis that night. you may have just admitted to being a unknowing accomplice. 😁

do you live there? chef jim answered like he does and stated differently. as to how you feel things should be done.we all have opinions. the question is it unreasonable? im not hearing anything so far that leads me to believe that. cant put in alittle extra effort for security purposes then i guess its not that important. there are numerous things ID is required for in society and somehow this is the only one that has people up in arms about.

so your positive that there are no resources to help those that want a voter id obtain one? there's a number to call that says they will help in that instance. as for going in "day of" and expecting a voter id ready and waiting..lots of time in between elections. lots of money dumped into campaigns to offset any hardships for vets or others who truley want to vote but cannot. i grew up and live in the city. i know plenty of people down on their luck that need help including family. they seem to get what they need ID requirements and all. they get section 8, food stamps, phone, FREE bus passes. it might be your bias thinking they cannot accomplish these things or maybe georgia social net is drastically different? you continually seem to have low expectations that people cannot accomplish things if there is a condition that any effort on their end must be made. from everything I've seen, its not true.

first id like to thank you for your well thought out response. its what people need to do now adays instead of the typical deflections and insults. my basic point about your friend is that she had to identify herself many times to get to the level of which you speak. for each example you seem to suggest, well she had to identify herself..but in a different way, its not "restrictive" like GA. i could easily take your position on the general premise of your arguments. she needed parents or bills or other forms of id to get vaccinated. your link on how many people do not have a bank account could easily also be a link on how alot of people are not in touch with their parents. dont put utilities in thier name. dont have social security cards ect ect. all the things that got her to being able to go to school or work in the first place. so is the school, clinic ect ect being restrictive to people who do not have those things? how low are we going when it comes to the standard of identifying oneself? there are homeless people who have mental illness out there but also have the god given right to vote. there is a line that can go up and down and the question to ask is Georgia somehow unfairly high? you use CO as your standard for how high it should be. thats fine, each state is different and creates thier own standard. NY has higher guidlines for gun ownership and i can just as easily talk about how NY is restrictive of my RIGHT to bear arms and is unjustly excluding poor people that cannot afford extra classes, concealed carry permits ect ect. anything that requires more money or effort, court cases aside. not allowing residents to protect themselves is restricting my rights! its pretty easy to play that card and use other state laws in comparison. whichever is higher then becomes the one who is restrictive or as some say "racist". i think our sides have flipped yet i get no opportunity to own a gun if i am poor where georgians have other options, which you then say are too much. plain and simple. is GA asking for too much and purposefully excluding people of thier right to vote. i dont think so. the fact you have to find reasoning to exclude from the FREE ID offered while also bringing up the cost to the taxpayer is a pretty odd defense overall. at a time when the country is heavily divided and a election was a contentious as the last one, right or wrong. i will never be opposed to requiring more secure methods to prevent any accusations and anger as a concession as long as they ARE WITHIN REASON. nothing is stopping democrats from helping residents obtain a simple ID that the state is requesting for the next election. if thats to difficult a task for them I'm not sure what that means for them as a party seeing as multi millions are poured into campaigns every cycle. in return how do republicans help people with more secure elections? they have to create laws ahead of time. there is no action they can take like the democrats.

i wonder how they would feel if americans went to canada and mexico in mass around election time and were able to vote for the person who was most pro american. since eligibility is not a requirment we can even come right back when we got who we wanted no questions asked. good old american imperialism.