Republicans: continued

[pErvinalia]

Republicans don't really change their spots. Their 'go-to' is to point out Democrats' racism.

You know, it seems like there is a similar tactic in play going the other way...hmm...

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

No black person has ever said white people have certain "traits" that confer advantage. God you post some shit.

[Cunt]

BP, you should surely believe those wealthy corporations who are all censoring in the same direction. Heck, why even listen to that Chowderhead? He is insulting AND Canadian. Clearly not an expert.

[Hermit]

BP, you should surely believe those wealthy corporations who are all censoring in the same direction.

I believe the courts.

[Cunt]

BP, you should surely believe those wealthy corporations who are all censoring in the same direction.

I believe the courts.

Aw, that's cute. You 'believe the courts'. I wonder if you do...

Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us.

[Hermit]

BP, you should surely believe those wealthy corporations who are all censoring in the same direction.

I believe the courts.

Aw, that's cute. You 'believe the courts'. I wonder if you do...

Yes, I really, truly believe the courts when they decide that massive election/voter fraud has resulted in Trump's victory being stolen from him.

Any day now...

[Cunt]

I believe Thomas, in his dissenting opinion on this very subject.

Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us.

[Hermit]

I believe Thomas, in his dissenting opinion on this very subject.

Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us.

I have not heard what he has said about massive election/voter fraud, and whatever he may have said about it lacks the authority of any court of law.

[Cunt]

Any court of law?

Are you sure he doesn't provide a formal dissenting opinion as a member of the Supreme Court of the US?

[Joe]

I believe Thomas, in his dissenting opinion on this very subject.

Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us.

Interesting. We "deserve better and expect more" than what?

[Cunt]

Than leaving things unclear with regards to the election.

[Joe]

Than leaving things unclear with regards to the election.

What's unclear?

[Brian Peacock]

BP, you should surely believe those wealthy corporations who are all censoring in the same direction. Heck, why even listen to that Chowderhead? He is insulting AND Canadian. Clearly not an expert.

You don't seem to have figured out that I'm literally a communist. Calling out your errant rot does not place me on the side of the corporatists - nor is pointing out that Crowder is bought-and-paid-for by same. If you hadn't bought into the lie that the corporatists are on the side of the little guy you'd notice that you're being primed to avoid asking where your informations comes from and triggered to despise certain minorities and groups of people based on a bankrupt reading of their social, political, economic, religious, ethnic and/or gender identity. The post I responded to is a case in point. If you want to repeat the stories that opposing fascism makes you a fascists, or that BLM are the real racists and the literally millions of non-Black people who support them are traitors to their own race then go right ahead...

[Hermit]

Any court of law?

Any court of law where team Trump might bring their case regarding massive election/voter fraud.

Are you sure he doesn't provide a formal dissenting opinion as a member of the Supreme Court of the US?

Oops. My mistake. I confused him with someone else. That cleared up, Clarence Thomas wrote no opinion about massive election/voter fraud as such. He wrote that the Supreme Court ought to hear the appeal regarding the Pennsylvanian court's decision to allow mail-in votes Team Trump wanted disallowed. His opinion was among the minority 3 to 6. Reading down a bit, Thomas disagrees with the notion that Trump had his election victory stolen anyway. I Highlit the relevant sentence for you.

One wonders what the Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us. I respectfully dissent.

That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.

Link

[JimC]

The US system of states working out their own electoral arrangements for Federal elections is patently absurd (their own state elections could legitimately be different, as long as fair voting practices occur). The US has not allowed itself to become a modern, unified nation state; it clings nostalgically to historical practices which were predicated on primitive transport and communication systems. While such a lack of a modern, unified, streamlined process of Federal elections continues, there will be continuing turmoil and controversy, benefitting only the lawyers.

[Cunt]

Than leaving things unclear with regards to the election.

What's unclear?

Why not look up his dissenting opinion, rather than my opinion on it?

I would say he was understanding openly that a large chunk of the citizenry thinks there were questions worth examining publicly.