ChiGoose

Even if you were correct, and you're not, the voter ID laws being crafted are not designed to close this loophole. They're designed to make it harder for certain people to vote. You have states that say a hunting license is good but a state-issued school ID is not. You have states that require an ID from the DMV and then close the DMVs in areas with large minority populations. The fraud and voter ID narrative being pushed has nothing to do with actually combating widespread fraud (because it doesn't exist).

And another question I have is, why would Ivanka want to be in such a relationship? It's creepy and according to Stormy Daniels, he's not working with much downstairs. But then I remembered that picture and maybe he's groomed her for it and she either doesn't realize it's wrong or she feels trapped at this point. Just asking questions, but it makes you think.

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud or any amount of voter fraud that would impact the outcome of an election. Kris Kobach has been a huge advocate of the position you're currently espousing and was put in charge of a taskforce by President Trump to find and prosecute voter fraud across the country. You should go look up how that went.

And why would Trump allow Ivanka to marry a (((globalist))) like Kushner? Was it because of his wealthy dad? Or was it because she agreed to keep their relationship going even after she got married?

Except there is no evidence for widespread fraud in any election. You also seem to be making the incorrect assumption that there is no verification system in place for elections. Unless you think the only way a person's identity can be verified is through photo ID, which is very wrong.

I see we're still playing the insanity game. Maybe I'll just join in the fun. Something is fishy about Trump's relationship with Ivanka. They seem a bit *too* close, if you get what I'm saying. Corporatist media isn't looking into it, but does this look normal?

Tell me again how all of Twitter’s problems are due to liberal boycotts campaigns:

Well, alternatively, we know how to run safe and effective elections without restricting the franchise unnecessarily, so we could just go that and try to make sure the voice of the people is truly heard. That is, unless (as you seem to imply), the real goal is that only the right people should vote.

No, you just don’t understand. The real problem is people voting! When the *wrong* people vote, it’s a problem!

*TV ad narrator voice* ”Ask your doctor if Copium is right for you”

Yeah, their specialty is mainly easily manipulated boomers and Gen Xers by appealing to nostalgia and a fear of “the other”.

Or the GOP could consider running on a platform that is appealing to wide swaths of Americans. But that’d just be crazy.

Umm.. you think people voting is a problem?

…wat

There are not enough facepalm emojis in the world for this inanity.

The problem with the assumption you’re making here is that there are House races that are uncompetitive or uncontested distort the national turnout numbers. The only time where the same competitive election is on the ballot of every American is in presidential election years.

Because of our FPTP system. If we get rid of it, third parties become viable.

Calling someone out for making bad arguments is fine . Saying or implying that anyone who doesn’t vote with your team is bad or the enemy is a problem.

When mail in votes support the GOP: yay! This is what democracy looks like When mail in votes don’t support the GOP: THIS IS FRAUD!

I mean it does, because what you're alleging isn't true. But I know you will never change your mind regardless of the evidence, or the fact that we have had states that voted primarily by mail for years without issue.

Have you ever just considered that maybe the GOP just isn't popular with most Americans?

Let's take a step back on this one. It's super close (even though it shouldn't be) and I don't think we can make a judgment on it one way or the other quite yet.

Something I've noticed when spending time here on PPP, as well as some other sites, is the tendency of people on the Right to make liberal Americans the enemy. Not just the Democratic Party, or the candidates, electeds, leaders, or pundits, etc, but the voters and people themselves. While I know that there are plenty of liberals who view Republican voters with disdain, I've never heard "Own the Cons" said unironically. It's mostly "what is wrong with these people?" I don't like that view point but it's certainly not as heated as what Albwan posted. It seems that, on the Right, viewing people who disagree with you as the enemy is not just accepted, it seems to be expected.

Yeah, that's why the best test of the national mood is the Presidential election since the same race is on every ballot in the country and is likely competitive.