LogFAQs > #912088520

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 206: Acostin' Fragile Don's Pathetic Press Conference
Corrik 11/09/18 12:35:55 AM #382:	Inviso posted... Corrik posted... Inviso posted... If Republicans and conservative ideals are so awesome and so much better than those of Democrats and liberals, why the fuck do they need to constantly pull illegal shit to push forth those ideals? That argument goes both ways. It really doesn't, and you know that. It does and you know that. Jesus. Scenario 1. Scott sues because they are not being transparent with amounts of votes left and counted so far in a couple of Democratic areas. By law, he is correct. However, in Democratic view, he is trying to prevent ballots from being counted that could go against him. Republican view, without transparency you cannot trust the process and if you say how many votes you have from the beginning and as they are counted the number goes down, you can trust those results. With a possible never ending supply of votes due to no disclosure, naturally there will be distrust of the results. Scenario 2. Democratic lawyers are going to sue that the ballots with no Senate vote were meant to vote for Nelson and should be counted or were marked for Nelson and not counted. By law, a vote is what a vote is. There is no I meant to. Democratic view, if someone intended to vote for someone it should count and this is voter supression. Republican view, the rules exist for a reason regarding this and if you could allow vote changes based on intent then you have to allow it for everyone which would destroy the process. Then whoever didn't vote should be given votes because they intended to vote and so on. A never ending cycle. There is very rarely a clear cut correct side. It generally comes down to which side you think is correct. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:912088520] in Politics C... [t:77181966]...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote>If Republicans and conservative ideals are so awesome and so much better than those of Democrats and liberals, why the fuck do they need to constantly pull illegal shit to push forth those ideals?</quote> That argument goes both ways.</quote> It really doesn't, and you know that.</quote> It does and you know that. Jesus. Scenario 1. Scott sues because they are not being transparent with amounts of votes left and counted so far in a couple of Democratic areas. By law, he is correct. However, in Democratic view, he is trying to prevent ballots from being counted that could go against him. Republican view, without transparency you cannot trust the process and if you say how many votes you have from the beginning and as they are counted the number goes down, you can trust those results. With a possible never ending supply of votes due to no disclosure, naturally there will be distrust of the results. Scenario 2. Democratic lawyers are going to sue that the ballots with no Senate vote were meant to vote for Nelson and should be counted or were marked for Nelson and not counted. By law, a vote is what a vote is. There is no I meant to. Democratic view, if someone intended to vote for someone it should count and this is voter supression. Republican view, the rules exist for a reason regarding this and if you could allow vote changes based on intent then you have to allow it for everyone which would destroy the process. Then whoever didn't vote should be given votes because they intended to vote and so on. A never ending cycle. There is very rarely a clear cut correct side. It generally comes down to which side you think is correct. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1