2024 Presidential Race

#58,551
#58,551
RockyTop85 said:
I’m honestly not sure. It seems like something that would get kicked for lack of standing and/or laches (unreasonable delay). But I have absolutely zero knowledge of that substantive area of law.
Click to expand...
Well, on this much he's wrong: Delaware only has 3 electoral college votes, which is the minimum any state can have. So even if there were an over count in Delaware it wouldn't make a difference for the EC. Tells me he's just spinning yarns for the dumbdumbs.
 
#58,554
#58,554
appears dems are not turning out to vote in droves...



Latinx Adjacent Doctor PhD
@TonerousHyus
·
33m
Look man, there's gonna be 100k missing voters in Cleveland alone from 2020

I dunno wtf you think's going on but that's 35k missing net harris voters.

==========================

Christian Heiens 🏛
@ChristianHeiens

The data is incomplete to say the least, but Black turnout in Virginia is looking like it’s going to be lower than it was in 2020.

It seems like there’s already one major polling miss this cycle.Florida is heading for a landslide victory for Trump. Double digits are on the table.Marist and Morning Consult are shattered yet again.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Buddy’s Bandit
#58,556
#58,556
evillawyer said:
Major copium addiction in the GOP
Click to expand...

You are the saddest troll I’ve seen in awhile. Copium? You’re posting nothing but liberal coping in every post. I guess the republicans that are seeing big turnouts are full of shi*, but the dems claiming they are seeing big turnouts aren’t?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, BreatheUT, rekinhavoc and 3 others
#58,557
#58,557
RockyTop85 said:
I’m honestly not sure. It seems like something that would get kicked for lack of standing and/or laches (unreasonable delay). But I have absolutely zero knowledge of that substantive area of law.
Click to expand...
Seems like addressing issues with the 2020 census earlier (if it is in fact a problem) would be reasonable. Certainly feels suspicious that the Repubs would sit on this just to use to contend unfavorable election results.
 
#58,559
#58,559
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, BigOrangeGoose and Vol737
#58,562
#58,562
Lol.

View attachment 694386

Lolol. Also see below.

I don’t know what any of this is supposed to mean. As best I can tell, it seems completely irrelevant due to your forgetting about the start of the discussion. If you want to coherently rewrite it, I don’t mind to address it then.


Then: has to stand up in court.
Now: lawyerly semantics to ask for something more statutorily precise than collusion.


Then: Witch hunt.
Now: they looked into it and let it go because “what difference does it make”

Then: Russian nonsense, full of lies. Totally made up long enough for everybody to buy the BS.
Now: “But they hired a foreign guy to do oped!!!!!!!1!!!(one)!!!111

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”

Then: bad to punish people for crimes they didn’t commit.
Now: we should punish people for crimes that don’t exist.

Then: important to draw distinctions.
Now: distinctions are lawyerly semantics.

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”

Then: bad to punish people for crimes they didn’t commit.
Now: we should punish people for crimes that don’t exist.

Poor baby Trump and his double standard.

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”


Then: stuff has to rise to a high enough level to bring a case.
Now: “but they hired a foreign guy to do oppo research!”

Then: if our laws are too broad we should ignore them.
Now: foreign agent means whatever I want it to mean.

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”

Then: important to question the line between questionable and legal.
Now: lawyerly semantics.

Pretty sure that’s just from one relatively short thread about the Mueller report, didn’t event bother to find the Trumputingate thread or to look up what you said about the multiple cases that have been brought, including the one where he was convicted by a jury.

I especially like the one about an overbroad definition of obstruction “murdering any version of America I want to live in” juxtaposed with your current crying about me trying to get you to rely on a fixed definition of foreign agent.
[/QUOTE]
so I only dug up a couple of those, and wasn't surprised to find you were taking things out of context/changing subject matter to try to fit your narrative. I am not really sure what conversation you think we are having here in this thread because you are digging up posts from as old as 6 years ago, on various subject matters (election, mueller, calling out LG/luther) as if they are what I said in this thread.

has to stand up in court, was talking about charging Trump.
the statutory semantics quote was talking about the investigations into the Steele Dossier itself, not the investigations into Trump that came from the Steele Dossiers. and in that quote I said "IF" it stands up in court, which falls in line with the first bit. you are cherry picking, taking out of context, and applying conversations from 6 years ago as if its a continuation.

witch hunt was commenting on LG/Luther finding Trump guilty (worth impeached) based purely on the Mueller report NOT being released. if LG & Luther are not evidence enough for boy who cries wolf with Trump, I don't know what to say with you.
the comment about "what point does it matter" was again a completely different subject matter.

try having one conversation at a time. or at the very least if you want to have out of context conversations misquoting me there is a thread in Endzone for that.
 
#58,566
#58,566
BruiserVol said:
You are the saddest troll I’ve seen in awhile. Copium? You’re posting nothing but liberal coping in every post. I guess the republicans that are seeing big turnouts are full of shi*, but the dems claiming they are seeing big turnouts aren’t?
Click to expand...
These GOP salty tears of loss have me salivating already.
 
#58,569
#58,569
LouderVol said:
Lol.

View attachment 694386

Lolol. Also see below.

I don’t know what any of this is supposed to mean. As best I can tell, it seems completely irrelevant due to your forgetting about the start of the discussion. If you want to coherently rewrite it, I don’t mind to address it then.


Then: has to stand up in court.
Now: lawyerly semantics to ask for something more statutorily precise than collusion.


Then: Witch hunt.
Now: they looked into it and let it go because “what difference does it make”

Then: Russian nonsense, full of lies. Totally made up long enough for everybody to buy the BS.
Now: “But they hired a foreign guy to do oped!!!!!!!1!!!(one)!!!111

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”

Then: bad to punish people for crimes they didn’t commit.
Now: we should punish people for crimes that don’t exist.

Then: important to draw distinctions.
Now: distinctions are lawyerly semantics.

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”

Then: bad to punish people for crimes they didn’t commit.
Now: we should punish people for crimes that don’t exist.

Poor baby Trump and his double standard.

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”


Then: stuff has to rise to a high enough level to bring a case.
Now: “but they hired a foreign guy to do oppo research!”

Then: if our laws are too broad we should ignore them.
Now: foreign agent means whatever I want it to mean.

“I cAn’t reMemBeR eveR whiNinG bEforE…”

Then: important to question the line between questionable and legal.
Now: lawyerly semantics.

Pretty sure that’s just from one relatively short thread about the Mueller report, didn’t event bother to find the Trumputingate thread or to look up what you said about the multiple cases that have been brought, including the one where he was convicted by a jury.

I especially like the one about an overbroad definition of obstruction “murdering any version of America I want to live in” juxtaposed with your current crying about me trying to get you to rely on a fixed definition of foreign agent.
Click to expand...
so I only dug up a couple of those, and wasn't surprised to find you were taking things out of context/changing subject matter to try to fit your narrative. I am not really sure what conversation you think we are having here in this thread because you are digging up posts from as old as 6 years ago, on various subject matters (election, mueller, calling out LG/luther) as if they are what I said in this thread.

has to stand up in court, was talking about charging Trump.
the statutory semantics quote was talking about the investigations into the Steele Dossier itself, not the investigations into Trump that came from the Steele Dossiers. and in that quote I said "IF" it stands up in court, which falls in line with the first bit. you are cherry picking, taking out of context, and applying conversations from 6 years ago as if its a continuation.

witch hunt was commenting on LG/Luther finding Trump guilty (worth impeached) based purely on the Mueller report NOT being released. if LG & Luther are not evidence enough for boy who cries wolf with Trump, I don't know what to say with you.
the comment about "what point does it matter" was again a completely different subject matter.

try having one conversation at a time. or at the very least if you want to have out of context conversations misquoting me there is a thread in Endzone for that.
[/QUOTE]

1730841353634.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: YankeeVol, CobbVol, Orangeburst and 1 other person
#58,570
#58,570


Joe Sweeney
@JoeSweeneyNH
2h
Turnout in Republican towns throughout New Hampshire is absolutely off the charts - many are on trendlines to surpass 90% turnout today.

IF YOU ARE IN LINE, STAY IN LINE UNTIL YOU VOTE! #NHPolitics

===========================

Mike Crispi
@MikeCrispi
16m
BREAKING AS IT STANDS NOW, REPUBLICANS ARE BEATING DEMS IN ELECTION DAY VOTING IN NEW JERSEY. We told you this was coming. And it’s happened while many in the state GOP establishment have attempted to sabotage our efforts at
@AmericaFirstNJ

==========================


.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeGoose
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top