ADVERTISEMENT

SCOTUS ruling VA

He's correct about this.

I shudder to think of the ramifications of data being recorded and saved of which voters voted for which candidates. I understand the benefits of having that. But, to me, they are easily outweighed by the risks.

Think of the "card check" process that unions have lusted over for decades. Rather than having a secret ballot vote, what they want is to just be able to go around and get people to openly declare their support (or opposition) for an organizing campaign. I can certainly see why they'd want that! They'd know who is and isn't on their side and could, er, assert some more robust forms of persuasion.

No. We do not want our elections systems to record who we vote for. That would almost certainly lead to some very bad things.
No, how convenient that there is nothing in place to stop it and then when found that something did happen that they know shouldn't have the process doesn't allow for correction.

I mean, in a time when they majority of people do not believe that elections are on the up and up, it is a great model of elections to have.

The dude who voted when he shouldn't should have been flown to his country of origin that day and he and his entire extended family should be on a no entry list.

Sounds like Rourke will play

If he is taking any snaps under center, his thumb will take a great impact.
No...it won't. The palms take most of the impact during a snap. If the thumb was broken,it would be painful,but from my understanding the damage was on the nail side,furthest away from the ball. It will be minimal. I broke 2 fingers from an early snap,I'm not guessing here.

Edit: Also...I would think that he would be testing that in practice,and with all the talk of him probably playing,I'm guessing it hasn't been an issue to this point.

SCOTUS ruling VA

Failing to mark a box did not strip anyone of their right to vote. We can’t discuss this if you don’t know how the Virginia statute works.
Let us also recall what Mark Milton mentioned, the governor issued an executive order to purge people "suspected" of being illegally in the country. You did not answer that part, is "suspected" good enough for you?

The article I posted said people had taken evidence of citizenship in and still lost their registration. That is exhibit 1 of why we don't do crap at the last minute.

Vance on Rogan


Whoa. And Echelon is generally considered a pretty good pollster, aren't they?

I'd be shocked if either candidate wins PA by 6 points. But that's obviously a pretty encouraging poll for him and his supporters. That's outside the MoE.

On the other side, it looks like Michigan is trending well for Harris. Wisconsin seems like a coin flip.

However, I bet there are at least one or two surprises too. CNN/SSRS has said that Harris has done very well with early voters in AZ...despite Rs holding an advantage in Party ID of people who have voted early. They chalk this up to women outpacing men in early voting there.

SCOTUS ruling VA

He's correct about this.

I shudder to think of the ramifications of data being recorded and saved of which voters voted for which candidates. I understand the benefits of having that. But, to me, they are easily outweighed by the risks.

Think of the "card check" process that unions have lusted over for decades. Rather than having a secret ballot vote, what they want is to just be able to go around and get people to openly declare their support (or opposition) for an organizing campaign. I can certainly see why they'd want that! They'd know who is and isn't on their side and could, er, assert some more robust forms of persuasion.

No. We do not want our elections systems to record who we vote for. That would almost certainly lead to some very bad things.

I am amazed that some of our more conspiratorial friends want the government to be able to see how they voted.

SCOTUS ruling VA

How convenient.
He's correct about this.

I shudder to think of the ramifications of data being recorded and saved of which voters voted for which candidates. I understand the benefits of having that. But, to me, they are easily outweighed by the risks.

Think of the "card check" process that unions have lusted over for decades. Rather than having a secret ballot vote, what they want is to just be able to go around and get people to openly declare their support (or opposition) for an organizing campaign. I can certainly see why they'd want that! They'd know who is and isn't on their side and could, er, assert some more robust forms of persuasion.

No. We do not want our elections systems to record who we vote for. That would almost certainly lead to some very bad things.

Battle of the Sexes

That should fall under medical malpractice.
A. The trigger law signed days earlier had not yet gone into effect. How The Guardian begins that article is the definition of Journalistic malpractice

B. Even if it had, the Doctor's would have had a duty to save that woman's life under existing Texas law

C. None of this context is of interest to the abortion banshees who are desperate to beat pro-lifers over the head with any pregnancy related tragedy they can find.

These are some sick puppies we're dealing with Mr Silence.
  • Like
Reactions: sweetsilence
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT