We live in the Upside Down

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Sep 29, 2011
1,555
353
713
60
Breckenridge, CO
#21
1) Are people being shot by police because of the color of their skin?
2) When has anyone advocated that police is above the law and beyond reproach?
3) Toxic masculinity??? LOL
4) A property owner is responsible for the debt of his renters??
I really like the science gag. They don't want to call a man a woman because the man feels like a woman. There ain't no science to that
Does the man actually feel like a woman, or does he want to feel like a woman, or does the man just not want to be a man, or does the man just not want to feel like a man? Meh, take your pick. That seems to be the protocol anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

TheMonkey

Sheriff
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
3,599
1,909
1,743
46
DFW
#22
1) Are people being shot by police because of the color of their skin?
2) When has anyone advocated that police is above the law and beyond reproach?
3) Toxic masculinity??? LOL
4) A property owner is responsible for the debt of his renters??
I never said I agreed with all of these statements. Just flipping the bias.
 

wrenhal

Banned
Banned
Aug 11, 2011
9,789
4,062
743
#24
All are wrong or overblown. Only a gullible fool believes you get in touch with what is really happening in the real world by listening to radicals that far right wing web sites all too often promote as mainstream thinking.
It's probably just a copy paste of something circulating on Facebook but it could be open to debate as to why many probably feel this way about certain things.

For example:

Wanting to protect the integrity of our voting process is suppressing others.

I think we can all agree that the integrity of our voting process is very important. The President has said absentee voting is fine by him but mail in voting isn't. This is semantics as they are basically the same thing. So people who have concerns with this need to realize that it's something that has been a common practice for a while now and provides an opportunity for the elderly (who are more likely to vote with the party that has concerns) a way to safely have their say in this election.

Maybe when you see things like this, think of it less as an affront and more of an opportunity for discussion.
Many municipalities have systems in place to help elderly people get to polling locations when no pandemic. I'm sure encouraging absentee ballots for them is fine. When you start to think about just randomly mailing out a ballot to every registered voter in the country, you bring in logistics that can bring this crashing. First of all, Democrats fight the clearing of voter rolls all the time, thus there are dead people on rolls in many states. You also have the problem of someone that has moved since the last time they voted. They could be registered in 2 different cities in a single state, or in 2 or 3 different states depending on how often they've moved. You're talking about potentially mailing out millions of ballots made fraudulent simply because they are tied to addresses where these people no longer live. How do you deal with this on the scale of potentially 100's of millions of ballots?
Whether it be from Democrats, Independents, or Republicans, to do this opens up potential fraud all across the nation.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Jun 18, 2010
17,116
1,877
1,743
Where else but Stillwater
#26
Many municipalities have systems in place to help elderly people get to polling locations when no pandemic. I'm sure encouraging absentee ballots for them is fine. When you start to think about just randomly mailing out a ballot to every registered voter in the country, you bring in logistics that can bring this crashing. First of all, Democrats fight the clearing of voter rolls all the time, thus there are dead people on rolls in many states. You also have the problem of someone that has moved since the last time they voted. They could be registered in 2 different cities in a single state, or in 2 or 3 different states depending on how often they've moved. You're talking about potentially mailing out millions of ballots made fraudulent simply because they are tied to addresses where these people no longer live. How do you deal with this on the scale of potentially 100's of millions of ballots?
Whether it be from Democrats, Independents, or Republicans, to do this opens up potential fraud all across the nation.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Why worry about it? Only five states currently conduct all elections entirely by mail: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah. Except for Utah, Trump doesn't have a good chance of winning any of them.
 

TheMonkey

Sheriff
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
3,599
1,909
1,743
46
DFW
#27
Many municipalities have systems in place to help elderly people get to polling locations when no pandemic. I'm sure encouraging absentee ballots for them is fine. When you start to think about just randomly mailing out a ballot to every registered voter in the country, you bring in logistics that can bring this crashing. First of all, Democrats fight the clearing of voter rolls all the time, thus there are dead people on rolls in many states. You also have the problem of someone that has moved since the last time they voted. They could be registered in 2 different cities in a single state, or in 2 or 3 different states depending on how often they've moved. You're talking about potentially mailing out millions of ballots made fraudulent simply because they are tied to addresses where these people no longer live. How do you deal with this on the scale of potentially 100's of millions of ballots?
Whether it be from Democrats, Independents, or Republicans, to do this opens up potential fraud all across the nation.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
The voter fraud talking points might be backfiring.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...attacks-on-mail-in-vote-will-sabotage-turnout
 

wrenhal

Banned
Banned
Aug 11, 2011
9,789
4,062
743
#28
Many municipalities have systems in place to help elderly people get to polling locations when no pandemic. I'm sure encouraging absentee ballots for them is fine. When you start to think about just randomly mailing out a ballot to every registered voter in the country, you bring in logistics that can bring this crashing. First of all, Democrats fight the clearing of voter rolls all the time, thus there are dead people on rolls in many states. You also have the problem of someone that has moved since the last time they voted. They could be registered in 2 different cities in a single state, or in 2 or 3 different states depending on how often they've moved. You're talking about potentially mailing out millions of ballots made fraudulent simply because they are tied to addresses where these people no longer live. How do you deal with this on the scale of potentially 100's of millions of ballots?
Whether it be from Democrats, Independents, or Republicans, to do this opens up potential fraud all across the nation.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Why worry about it? Only five states currently conduct all elections entirely by mail: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah. Except for Utah, Trump doesn't have a good chance of winning any of them.
You aren't paying attention. The Democrats are wanting to make the presidential election mail in ballots for the entire u.s.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
May 4, 2011
2,001
1,002
743
Charleston, SC
#30
Colorado elections are not done entirely by mail. I think everyone just has the option.
Same in Nebraska actually and it's apparently been the case for several decades, which honestly makes a ton of sense given how rural parts of Nebraska are. Some folks in western, rural nebraska would have to drive an hour just to get to a polling station. Our republican governor had to defend the practice during the primaries. By all indications, participation was up and there weren't issues with fraud. The biggest issue was just late ballots. Obviously the general is a different animal, though.
 

olderschool

Banned
Banned
Apr 14, 2009
497
85
1,578
#31
Historically 4% of mail in or absentee balance are kicked out because of mistakes. In this particular election it favors the Republicans because the lion share of Mail in or absentee are probably going to be Majority Democrats.
 
Last edited:

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
22,122
9,676
1,743
Earth
#34
Fair enough. You are right. That is not new and is an outlier to the other items that are more recent shifts.
The only problem I have with his argument is the statement “restricting her body,” that drives me absolutely crazy because the other body in question in abortion is being killed, sniffed out, not allowed and not give a right that the “mother” has to his/her body. I’m happy that abortions have been reduced. But that doesn’t mean I’m happy with the fact we have more abortions annually worldwide than covid will kill.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,822
16,873
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#35
Historically 4% of mail in or absentee balance are kicked out because of mistakes. In this particular election it favors the Republicans because the lion share of Mail in or absentee are probably going to be Majority Democrats.
Well we know that the lion share of deceased mail in ballots will be majority Democrat. That demographic is pretty loyal.
 
Sep 29, 2011
1,555
353
713
60
Breckenridge, CO
#36
Historically 4% of mail in or absentee balance are kicked out because of mistakes. In this particular election it favors the Republicans because the lion share of Mail in or absentee are probably going to be Majority Democrats.
So, less than 4% of voters that otherwise wouldn’t vote will mail in ballets?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

wrenhal

Banned
Banned
Aug 11, 2011
9,789
4,062
743
#38
I've heard these things before. So, what kind of an effect could this have on an election that is all mail in ballots? Imagine the ads being the mail in ballots. He just didn't want to deliver the mass mailings, so decent equivalent. The possibilities are endless of this getting messed up in so many ways that don't even include fraud.
Edit: I just realized I forgot the link to the article.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...rginia-storage-unit-mail-he-couldn-t-n1126586
 
Last edited:

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
28,977
31,536
1,743
oklahoma city
#39
The only problem I have with his argument is the statement “restricting her body,” that drives me absolutely crazy because the other body in question in abortion is being killed, sniffed out, not allowed and not give a right that the “mother” has to his/her body. I’m happy that abortions have been reduced. But that doesn’t mean I’m happy with the fact we have more abortions annually worldwide than covid will kill.
You ignored the fact that I wrote “despite not” on front of restricting. You ignored the fact that the rate is as low as it was when restricting did occur. Whether the abortion is legal or illegal, the result is the same for the fetus. What your post, and nearly every post that you make on this subject, shows is where your focus actually is.
 
Oct 30, 2007
4,149
3,538
1,743
#40
Historically 4% of mail in or absentee balance are kicked out because of mistakes. In this particular election it favors the Republicans because the lion share of Mail in or absentee are probably going to be Majority Democrats.
Roughly 20% of New York's mail-in ballots were invalidated from their primary election back in June. The presidential election in November could end up being decided by which side of the aisle is better at properly filling out & mailing in their ballots.

Mail-in voting is probably a necessary evil during a pandemic, but I expect this to be a complete disaster.