ADVERTISEMENT

Trump sides with Putin....once again proving to be Russian puppet

Dude, you're not using your head. If they don't have the correct information, they're not legally registered.

It's so cut-and-dried and you keep making excuses - it's entertaining.
Congrats you've fallen (and continue to argue) for a debunked conspiracy theory originating on Facebook. I don't ever discuss politics on Facebook, but if I did I would be very hesitant to accept anything posted from someone less intelligent than me as any degree of factual. You can usually tell how educated or ignorant someone is by the style of their communication. I naturally assume that a large percentage of the people posting here are college grads, but my assumptions regrading people on Facebook are basically the exact opposite...

Politifact debunked this as it relates to Wisconsin back in January, and that was after the same claims had been made in other states, including PA, AZ, OH,NC etc...Again this info was reported in Jan, before this phony claim was made in this new release from this week... The initial claim came from a video posted on FB by a (since fired) local Fox news personality, who basically used it as clickbait to drive traffic to her (undoubtedly monetized) you tube channel...

  • "Wisconsin municipalities kept their own registration records — and the smallest municipalities weren’t required to keep records at all — until a 2002 federal law required a statewide database and a standard format.
  • When a municipality’s system didn’t track a voter’s date of birth or initial date of registration, a default date was entered into the statewide system: 1/1/1900 for date of birth and 1/1/1918 for date of registration. Such placeholders for missing information have been used by other states as well.
  • As of the fall of 2021 in Wisconsin, there were still about 3,700 active voter records that contain default information for date of birth and about 120,000 records exist in the system with a default date of voter registration."
Again, this is inline with the changes that occurred following the 2002 Federal law (Help America Vote Act) which required a statewide database and STANDARDIZED format. As I mentioned previously, there was no such thing as a photo voter ID until around 2008 when Indiana passed a law requiring it.

The whole thing is a huge pile of nothing since there is no maximum age limit as to how old someone can be and still vote. Obviously if the transfer of records occurred after passage of the 2002 law, none of the people affected would be less than 18 yrs ol, and they would all have voted at some point previously. These are not new voters, and it's telling that the person who is making these claims is a retired judge, not someone of either party who has experience in the field and would be aware of how the process works...

The Wisconsin Elections Commission (made up of equal Dem and GOP members) addressed the issue in 2020...

"Default dates of birth and voter registration dates in the WisVote database is not a newly discovered issue or an indication of voter fraud," the state wrote in 2020. The older dates are a result of the state migrating over hundreds of municipal records into a state system."

 
Unbelievable. And for those who think this is a bogus investigation:



It's bogus because the courts and the bi-partisan WI Elections Commission have already debunked the claims Gableman made, prior to this latest publicity stunt...I'll link to the full fact check debunking, but I know the Zuckerberg allocated funds is a major whine point...But it has already been dismissed by both a Republican judge and an appeals court...

"THE FACTS: Three lawsuits arguing that the grant funding was illegal under state law have been rejected and a law firm hired by the state elections commission also determined there was no wrongdoing.

U.S. District Judge William Griesbach, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, refused to block the grant money in October 2020 under a lawsuit filed by Kaardal on behalf of the Wisconsin Voters Alliance, in conjunction with the conservative Thomas More Society.
The judge said then that there was nothing in state law “that can be fairly construed as prohibiting the defendant Cities from accepting funds from CTCL.”

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on an appeal of that case that those who brought the lawsuit failed to identify any laws that would prohibit the grants."

 
Hey, being idiots is better than sexual assaulter and traitor trump.
Unless you have proof of Trump being charged and convicted or proof of him paying someone off, you’re proving unworthy of being taken seriously. I’m order to get our country back on track, we need to deal in factual realities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Congrats you've fallen (and continue to argue) for a debunked conspiracy theory originating on Facebook. I don't ever discuss politics on Facebook, but if I did I would be very hesitant to accept anything posted from someone less intelligent than me as any degree of factual. You can usually tell how educated or ignorant someone is by the style of their communication. I naturally assume that a large percentage of the people posting here are college grads, but my assumptions regrading people on Facebook are basically the exact opposite...

Politifact debunked this as it relates to Wisconsin back in January, and that was after the same claims had been made in other states, including PA, AZ, OH,NC etc...Again this info was reported in Jan, before this phony claim was made in this new release from this week... The initial claim came from a video posted on FB by a (since fired) local Fox news personality, who basically used it as clickbait to drive traffic to her (undoubtedly monetized) you tube channel...

  • "Wisconsin municipalities kept their own registration records — and the smallest municipalities weren’t required to keep records at all — until a 2002 federal law required a statewide database and a standard format.
  • When a municipality’s system didn’t track a voter’s date of birth or initial date of registration, a default date was entered into the statewide system: 1/1/1900 for date of birth and 1/1/1918 for date of registration. Such placeholders for missing information have been used by other states as well.
  • As of the fall of 2021 in Wisconsin, there were still about 3,700 active voter records that contain default information for date of birth and about 120,000 records exist in the system with a default date of voter registration."
Again, this is inline with the changes that occurred following the 2002 Federal law (Help America Vote Act) which required a statewide database and STANDARDIZED format. As I mentioned previously, there was no such thing as a photo voter ID until around 2008 when Indiana passed a law requiring it.

The whole thing is a huge pile of nothing since there is no maximum age limit as to how old someone can be and still vote. Obviously if the transfer of records occurred after passage of the 2002 law, none of the people affected would be less than 18 yrs ol, and they would all have voted at some point previously. These are not new voters, and it's telling that the person who is making these claims is a retired judge, not someone of either party who has experience in the field and would be aware of how the process works...

The Wisconsin Elections Commission (made up of equal Dem and GOP members) addressed the issue in 2020...

"Default dates of birth and voter registration dates in the WisVote database is not a newly discovered issue or an indication of voter fraud," the state wrote in 2020. The older dates are a result of the state migrating over hundreds of municipal records into a state system."

Politifact? Oooooh why didn’t you say so?!? I’m sure the group or person that funds Politifact is right in the middle politically. Or you can check and you’ll find out who owns them and who runs the company that owns them and you’ll find your answer. SO what does this mean? It means you are either so intellectually dishonest and know better, you shouldn’t be allowed in this discussion OR you’re a complete imbecile.
 
Politifact? Oooooh why didn’t you say so?!? I’m sure the group or person that funds Politifact is right in the middle politically. Or you can check and you’ll find out who owns them and who runs the company that owns them and you’ll find your answer. SO what does this mean? It means you are either so intellectually dishonest and know better, you shouldn’t be allowed in this discussion OR you’re a complete imbecile.
What rock did you crawl out from under? Are you Lucy's alter ego?
 
Unless you have proof of Trump being charged and convicted or proof of him paying someone off, you’re proving unworthy of being taken seriously. I’m order to get our country back on track, we need to deal in factual realities.

It was already proven that Trump paid off prostitutes before the election or do you think stormy daniels was paid for other work?

Lol people that ignore facts so they don't feel dirty in supporting Trump shouldn't be taken seriously
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC and mcmurtry66
Politifact? Oooooh why didn’t you say so?!? I’m sure the group or person that funds Politifact is right in the middle politically. Or you can check and you’ll find out who owns them and who runs the company that owns them and you’ll find your answer. SO what does this mean? It means you are either so intellectually dishonest and know better, you shouldn’t be allowed in this discussion OR you’re a complete imbecile.
Saw that coming. In your alternate fact Trumpster world you must dismiss all facts and fact checkers because they disturb your alternate reality. Arguing about funding (probably irroneously, but certainly irrelevantly than lookin at the sources is a dumb way to argue.

I recommend/request you stow the keyboard commander tone and the name calling too. It doesn’t impress anyone and it embarrasses the actual Republicans here.
 
Saw that coming. In your alternate fact Trumpster world you must dismiss all facts and fact checkers because they disturb your alternate reality. Arguing about funding (probably irroneously, but certainly irrelevantly than lookin at the sources is a dumb way to argue.

I recommend/request you stow the keyboard commander tone and the name calling too. It doesn’t impress anyone and it embarrasses the actual Republicans here.
I assume you think you speak for 'actual Republicans here'.

You don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
It was already proven that Trump paid off prostitutes before the election or do you think stormy daniels was paid for other work?

Lol people that ignore facts so they don't feel dirty in supporting Trump shouldn't be taken seriously
Again, I don't really give a shit about consenting adults before he was in office. I bet you have velcro shoes don't you?
 
Again, I don't really give a shit about consenting adults before he was in office.
It's relevant when one consenting adult pays off the other consenting adult with campaign finance money. Or it would be relevant to you if it were someone on "the other team" doing it.
 
Again, I don't really give a shit about consenting adults before he was in office. I bet you have velcro shoes don't you?
You cared about it when Clinton was the consenting adult I am sure
 
Politifact? Oooooh why didn’t you say so?!? I’m sure the group or person that funds Politifact is right in the middle politically. Or you can check and you’ll find out who owns them and who runs the company that owns them and you’ll find your answer. SO what does this mean? It means you are either so intellectually dishonest and know better, you shouldn’t be allowed in this discussion OR you’re a complete imbecile.
What fact checking sources do you trust then?
 
I assume you think you speak for 'actual Republicans here'.

You don't.
I know the Trumpsters don't. If you're a blind follower of Trump and turn on solid Republicans at the drop of hat because Trump decides he doesn't like them, you're not a Republican. I supported Trump for things he did that a Republican would do, and I didn't support him for doing things a Republican wouldn't do. That's because I'm a Republican and not a Trumpster. Trumpsters have abandoned many Republican principles because Trump has abandoned them. Trumpsters support Trump no matter what he says or does and for turning on other Republicans. Reagan said “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.” Reagan was a Republican. In fact, he's the primary reason I started my transition from Democrat to the Republican I am now (Reagan also transitioned - we're Trans, I guess ;) ). Trump has no boundaries in that regard, he speaks ill of Republicans constantly. You either show total loyalty and deference to everything he says or does or you're immediately Republican Non Grata. There's nothing truly Republican about Trump and Trumpism must be purged from the party.
 
I know the Trumpsters don't. If you're a blind follower of Trump and turn on solid Republicans at the drop of hat because Trump decides he doesn't like them, you're not a Republican. I supported Trump for things he did that a Republican would do, and I didn't support him for doing things a Republican wouldn't do. That's because I'm a Republican and not a Trumpster. Trumpsters have abandoned many Republican principles because Trump has abandoned them. Trumpsters support Trump no matter what he says or does and for turning on other Republicans. Reagan said “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.” Reagan was a Republican. In fact, he's the primary reason I started my transition from Democrat to the Republican I am now (Reagan also transitioned - we're Trans, I guess ;) ). Trump has no boundaries in that regard, he speaks ill of Republicans constantly. You either show total loyalty and deference to everything he says or does or you're immediately Republican Non Grata. There's nothing truly Republican about Trump and Trumpism must be purged from the party.
You really spent this much time composing a tome to a pissing match?
 
Got any of biden cleaning his diaper or running around the White hose naked with his dog? You are too stupid to have a drivers license let alone vote for the POS they let you vote for.
Plenty of evidence of Donny in his diaper and actually attacking women. I think two are still in court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Yeah. You confirmed what I thought you would - you're a science-denying political propaganda receptacle.

Shame on you. Use your own brain occasionally. You know what they say - "Use it or lose it."

Covid spread because its an airborne virus. Duh. Trump couldn't have stopped it with a wall.

And he did nothing to slow down vaccinations or deny them to anyone - everybody got to make to make their own choices, until a few governors and mayors and then Biden decided they like gavel-whacking mandating, and doubled down on stupid and claimed vaccinations would stop the spread, until science whacked them up-side their gavel-whacking heads. And now we're back to people getting to make their own choices. And we circle the mandolin and do-si-do.)
You don’t think Trump lying to the American people about the severity of Covid, which he admitted to doing, has anything to do with the number of people who, to this day call it fake?
 
Smoked? It was 43k votes in 3 states. There was massive fraud. I assure you Biden didn't win. That's why no one has been allowed to check the signatures.

That said let's just assume he did get 81M legitimate votes. It was all COVID. According to Richard Baris, the most accurate pollster there is, the only issue Biden ever had a lead on in any swing state was COVID. Trump led on every other major issue. And it was all blind faith. Joe never had a plan for COVID. It was a top secret plan "I can't tell you what I would do to shut down the virus you just have to be dumb enough to vote for me and you'll find out when I'm elected. " He hid in his basement for 9 months, the Marxist media covered for him and buried all legitimate stories like Hunter's laptop, etc. It was all a giant sham.
You assure us Biden didn’t win? Again, we are so screwed. I cannot believe that people who actually function in real life, hold down a job, etc. can believe this type of conspiracy theory.
 
You assure us Biden didn’t win? Again, we are so screwed. I cannot believe that people who actually function in real life, hold down a job, etc. can believe this type of conspiracy theory.
Get lost Debbie!
 
I could care less at this point what you think. The writing is on the wall. Everyone is furious over how far we have sunk and the current administration. Your welcome to act like a dumbass and defend it...
Just curious, how many people have to correct your and you’re for you to understand it? And always while calling someone else dumb. I’ll try again: Your is possessive . You’re is a contraction. Or are we all just brainwashed into the wrong usage by mainstream grammar?
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
It's "armed forces." I know you're a lib pretending to be a cartoon version of a conservative. ;)
I'd say there are others who do a better job of being "cartoon versions of a conservative" on the board. But unlike Lucy, they aren't playing a role, and their characterization isn't just (intentionally) trolling... We have a true believer or two...
 
I'd say there are others who do a better job of being "cartoon versions of a conservative" on the board. But unlike Lucy, they aren't playing a role, and their characterization isn't just (intentionally) trolling... We have a true believer or two...
Lucy is trying to be the most ridiculous caricature he can be, and he looks downright reasonable compared to some of the more recent arrivals.
 
He's right about politifact. They're owned by a journalism school in Fla. Left bias. I'd be surprised if they could define "fact."
Actually they're owned by the Poynter Institute named for it's founder (Sullivan IN native and IU alum) Nelson Poynter. He died in the 70s,and I don't think he was regarded as a leftist, just a well respected journalist...

Regardless it's a little strange to suggest that an examination of election laws can have a "bias". On one hand it's strange that you'd feel the need to defend a ridiculous assertion from a "new" poster named Iufbfan50, which did not dispute ANY of the FACTS I detailed, but rather just implied that the factcheck was "biased"- based on nothing resembling evidence. But on the other hand, it's not so surprising...

Regardless, unlike the poster you jumped to defend, the Pollitifact article provides a bibliography of the sources they used in their research...

 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Actually they're owned by the Poynter Institute named for it's founder (Sullivan IN native and IU alum) Nelson Poynter. He died in the 70s,and I don't think he was regarded as a leftist, just a well respected journalist...

Regardless it's a little strange to suggest that an examination of election laws can have a "bias". On one hand it's strange that you'd feel the need to defend a ridiculous assertion from a "new" poster named Iufbfan50, which did not dispute ANY of the FACTS I detailed, but rather just implied that the factcheck was "biased"- based on nothing resembling evidence. But on the other hand, it's not so surprising...

Regardless, unlike the poster you jumped to defend, the Pollitifact article provides a bibliography of the sources they used in their research...

Actually it's a journalism school. The lion's share of journalists and journalism schools are left biased. They used to own the Saint Pete Times and now own Tampa Bay Times - current incarnation. You don't read ANYTHING that doesn't have a left bias. That the new poster is new makes me have 100 % more faith in him than ANYTHING you post with your hyper partisan bullshit. What's the latest readings from Republicans R Evil? Left wing journalists co-opted your brain.

As for the "content" of your post re some bibliography I don't care. I was commenting on politfact having a bias. I don't think you read anything that doesn't have a bias.


 
Last edited:
I'd say there are others who do a better job of being "cartoon versions of a conservative" on the board. But unlike Lucy, they aren't playing a role, and their characterization isn't just (intentionally) trolling... We have a true believer or two...
You‘ve cornered the one-dimensional bot role, however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and mcmurtry66
I'd say there are others who do a better job of being "cartoon versions of a conservative" on the board. But unlike Lucy, they aren't playing a role, and their characterization isn't just (intentionally) trolling... We have a true believer or two...
I think we have several true Trumpsters here, but I've thought Lucy was a lib playing a cartoon version of a conservative from the start. He/she has slipped up occasionally to convince me. I have no idea which liberal he is though. I don't have the time to do the detective work. ;)
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT