Republicans want more than a c**p: Trump's loyalty test exposes their hatred for democracy:...

49south Loc: Bux-Mont, Pa

https://www.salon.com/2020/12/11/republicans-want-more-than-a-c**p-trumps-loyalty-test-exposes-their-hatred-for-democracy/

incognito

If you believe that crap you got to be having an affair with Nancy Pelosi.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

incognito wrote:

If you believe that crap you got to be having an affair with Nancy Pelosi.

Adam West has advocated for Texas to secede from the Union. Trump has turned people stupid.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

49south wrote:

https://www.salon.com/2020/12/11/republicans-want-more-than-a-c**p-trumps-loyalty-test-exposes-their-hatred-for-democracy/

incognito

Kmgw9v wrote:

Adam West has advocated for Texas to secede from the Union. Trump has turned people stupid.

Ya mean Batman moved to Texas? Maybe he was afraid of DeBlasio and Cuomo were trying to k**l him. Afterall he is old enough to go into a nursing home like 5000 of his fans had done. By Cuomo's actions he literally k**led 5000 Gramps and Grannies But we should forgive and forget that part. That will not be hard for you to do seeing as you are senile already,

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

incognito wrote:

Ya mean Batman moved to Texas? Maybe he was afraid of DeBlasio and Cuomo were trying to k**l him. Afterall he is old enough to go into a nursing home like 5000 of his fans had done. By Cuomo's actions he literally k**led 5000 Gramps and Grannies But we should forgive and forget that part. That will not be hard for you to do seeing as you are senile already,

“Incoming Texas GOP Chairman Allen West is fairly new to Texas, but he is not new to national politics.

West, a one-term former member of Congress from Florida, found his path to a political comeback early Monday when he was declared winner of a tough fight for the state party chairmanship, unseating the current chair, James Dickey. Some Texas political insiders have yet to meet him personally. But if prior phases of his career are any guide, he is likely to bring strong fundraising — and controversy — to the state GOP. West has made a career out of pushing aggressive, no-holds-barred politics.”

"I think that Texas really gained something," said Chris LaCivita, a political consultant who worked with West in Florida. "We need a warrior at the top of the helm of the Texas GOP going into this e******n cycle and to help lead Republicans."

Rose42

Hatred for democracy?

Trump has turned people stupid all right.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

49south wrote:

https://www.salon.com/2020/12/11/republicans-want-more-than-a-c**p-trumps-loyalty-test-exposes-their-hatred-for-democracy/

Nobody likes a sore loser. But a sore winner is very much worse.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

boberic wrote:

Nobody likes a sore loser. But a sore winner is very much worse.

Sure is, we had to listen to them for the last four years.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

incognito wrote:

Ya mean Batman moved to Texas? Maybe he was afraid of DeBlasio and Cuomo were trying to k**l him. Afterall he is old enough to go into a nursing home like 5000 of his fans had done. By Cuomo's actions he literally k**led 5000 Gramps and Grannies But we should forgive and forget that part. That will not be hard for you to do seeing as you are senile already,

Wrong Adam West. Your Adam West died in 2017. Do try to keep up.

btbg

49south wrote:

https://www.salon.com/2020/12/11/republicans-want-more-than-a-c**p-trumps-loyalty-test-exposes-their-hatred-for-democracy/

Paxson says something significant that is quoted in your article.

"The constitutional issue is not whether v**ers committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for b****t integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable," Paxton writes in his suit.

Do you deny that a lot of states made rule changes this year? Do you deny that many of those changes were made by governors, secretaries of state and judges rather than by state legislatures? Because if those things occurred, and they did, then Paxson's statement is correct.

The issue is and always has been illegal e******n rules changes. Fraud or no fraud, the rule changes altered the outcome of the e******n and many of those rule changes were unconstitutional either at the state or federal level, and in some cases at both levels.

Asking people to follow the Constitution is not s******n. And, the right will accept that Biden is president. We just will believe that the e******n was s****n and will pray that Biden and Harris do not do irreparable harm to the nation in the next two years.

Once they screw up it is quite likely that Republicans will regain control of the house in two years, but who knows how much damage Biden et al can do between now and then with executive orders and things like rejoining the Paris Accords and the Iran nuclear deal. Bad policy decisions to say the least.

Texas lost in court, but that does not make Paxson's point untrue. It just means that the Supreme Court views this as a states rights issue and as such Texas has no legal standing to interfere in other states e******n process.

The Constitutionality of most of the e******n rules changes has never been adjudicated. The courts threw out most of the cases without deciding on the legality of the e******n rules changes, instead the filings were primarily thrown out because of lack of legal standing, as with the Texas case, or because the filings were moot because results were already certified. No one has bothered to ever look at most of the rule changes as to whether or not they are constitutional and unfortunately they probably never will now.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

btbg wrote:

Paxson says something significant that is quoted in your article.

"The constitutional issue is not whether v**ers committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for b****t integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable," Paxton writes in his suit.

Do you deny that a lot of states made rule changes this year? Do you deny that many of those changes were made by governors, secretaries of state and judges rather than by state legislatures? Because if those things occurred, and they did, then Paxson's statement is correct.

The issue is and always has been illegal e******n rules changes. Fraud or no fraud, the rule changes altered the outcome of the e******n and many of those rule changes were unconstitutional either at the state or federal level, and in some cases at both levels.

Asking people to follow the Constitution is not s******n. And, the right will accept that Biden is president. We just will believe that the e******n was s****n and will pray that Biden and Harris do not do irreparable harm to the nation in the next two years.

Once they screw up it is quite likely that Republicans will regain control of the house in two years, but who knows how much damage Biden et al can do between now and then with executive orders and things like rejoining the Paris Accords and the Iran nuclear deal. Bad policy decisions to say the least.

Texas lost in court, but that does not make Paxson's point untrue. It just means that the Supreme Court views this as a states rights issue and as such Texas has no legal standing to interfere in other states e******n process.

The Constitutionality of most of the e******n rules changes has never been adjudicated. The courts threw out most of the cases without deciding on the legality of the e******n rules changes, instead the filings were primarily thrown out because of lack of legal standing, as with the Texas case, or because the filings were moot because results were already certified. No one has bothered to ever look at most of the rule changes as to whether or not they are constitutional and unfortunately they probably never will now.

Paxson says something significant that is quoted i... (show quote)

Yes it has - at the state level over and over .

You love democracy but only when your guy wins !

BlackRipleyDog

incognito wrote:

If you believe that crap you got to be having an affair with Nancy Pelosi.

Just the opposite. 49South would be doing "fluid exchange" with Swalwell.

incognito

thom w wrote:

Wrong Adam West. Your Adam West died in 2017. Do try to keep up.

Too bad you can't tell a joke from reality maybe a big BE will infuse some humór into you

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

btbg wrote:

Paxson says something significant that is quoted in your article.

"The constitutional issue is not whether v**ers committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for b****t integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable," Paxton writes in his suit.

Do you deny that a lot of states made rule changes this year? Do you deny that many of those changes were made by governors, secretaries of state and judges rather than by state legislatures? Because if those things occurred, and they did, then Paxson's statement is correct.

The issue is and always has been illegal e******n rules changes. Fraud or no fraud, the rule changes altered the outcome of the e******n and many of those rule changes were unconstitutional either at the state or federal level, and in some cases at both levels.

Asking people to follow the Constitution is not s******n. And, the right will accept that Biden is president. We just will believe that the e******n was s****n and will pray that Biden and Harris do not do irreparable harm to the nation in the next two years.

Once they screw up it is quite likely that Republicans will regain control of the house in two years, but who knows how much damage Biden et al can do between now and then with executive orders and things like rejoining the Paris Accords and the Iran nuclear deal. Bad policy decisions to say the least.

Texas lost in court, but that does not make Paxson's point untrue. It just means that the Supreme Court views this as a states rights issue and as such Texas has no legal standing to interfere in other states e******n process.

The Constitutionality of most of the e******n rules changes has never been adjudicated. The courts threw out most of the cases without deciding on the legality of the e******n rules changes, instead the filings were primarily thrown out because of lack of legal standing, as with the Texas case, or because the filings were moot because results were already certified. No one has bothered to ever look at most of the rule changes as to whether or not they are constitutional and unfortunately they probably never will now.

Paxson says something significant that is quoted i... (show quote)

What he said