OOTB's Political Thread . ..

[pooponduke]

Im not afraid trump will become a dictator, I just don’t think it’s any way possible. I am afraid he WANTS to be a dictator or dictator-like. With his ego He prob really thinks the more power he has the better and would do some colossally idiotic shyt to be so. I think he’s shown he’s capable of that.

I think this is not far off, but I also think it can be applied to many others in that role. Can you honestly say that you'd ever thought you see an administration who employed the intelligence community and resources of our government to spy on and target their political opponent both before and after an election? Did you think you'd ever see an administration employ their legal options to pursue their likely political opponent attempting to prevent him from being a viable opponent against you in a subsequent election?

I mean, this kind of stuff almost sounds dictator like!!!!! But it's the Donald we have to worry about.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Im not afraid trump will become a dictator, I just don’t think it’s any way possible. I am afraid he WANTS to be a dictator or dictator-like. With his ego He prob really thinks the more power he has the better and would do some colossally idiotic shyt to be so. I think he’s shown he’s capable of that. I think the Russian roulette analogy is pretty accurate. I would maybe say it works better with 3 bullets.

Even if he wants to become one (which I won’t agree to), if there’s no reasonable path, then who cares?

Wait, do you think Trump is the first politician to want more control? Lol

 

[Heels Noir]

I did read it. I wonder if you did as well. Or more pointedly, I wonder if you understand that my inquiry was limited to the notion of voting. It had nothing to do with the idea of helping immigrants, dealing with language barriers, etc. It's a simple thought and one I stand by: one of the privileges that come to us through our citizenship is the right to vote. Non-citizens should not be voting and having the ability to directly influence such issues. Period. If you allow non-citizens to vote, it is a form of disenfranchising actual citizens.

Ms. Wong may be a very, very fine individual. But, she came here for school to pursue graduate studies in 2019 - that's five years ago. Why hasn't she finished school and gone home? And she may have many qualities that could contribute to certain aspects of things in San Francisco, but she should serve on those committees, not the Election Board. Of course, you probably skipped right over the part that SF has previously already enacted law that allowed non-citizens to vote in certain circumstances. So, I guess since this makes "perfect sense" to you, exactly why do we even have citizenship anymore?

Of course I read it. Even the part about non-citizens in San Francisco being allowed to vote locally in school board elections if they have a child who attends a school in that particular district.

You're the one who always seems to have the knee-jerk presumption that something more sinister is lying just below the surface. But that's what you do best around here, seeing crimes in otherwise innocuous liberal matters.

 

[pooponduke]

innocuous liberal matters

Oxymoron much?

 

[gunslingerdick]

Of course I read it. Even the part about non-citizens in San Francisco being allowed to vote locally in school board elections if they have a child who attends a school in that particular district.

You're the one who always seems to have the knee-jerk presumption that something more sinister is lying just below the surface. But that's what you do best around here, seeing crimes in otherwise innocuous liberal matters.

Why on earth would an illegal alien have any voting rights whatsoever?

 

[pooponduke]

Of course I read it. Even the part about non-citizens in San Francisco being allowed to vote locally in school board elections if they have a child who attends a school in that particular district.

You're the one who always seems to have the knee-jerk presumption that something more sinister is lying just below the surface. But that's what you do best around here, seeing crimes in otherwise innocuous liberal matters.

So, brainiac, back to the original question, unless the goal is to allow a non-citizen to vote, why are non-citizen's serving on the election board?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

lol. This was my favorite part of that article:

One of Wong’s priorities is to ensure that voter materials are translated in a way that people can understand – she pointed out, for example, that there isn’t an equivalent term for the word “reparations” in Cantonese or Mandarin.

Hahaha. Yeah, no shit.

Fortunately they do have an equivalent term for reparations for the Japanese contingent: seppuku.

 

[pooponduke]

Why on earth would an illegal alien have any voting rights whatsoever?

Agreed. But I don't want that to besmirch Ms. Wong as she apparently legally came on a student visa. But why would she, as a non-citizen who shouldn't be voting either, be serving on the election board? Immigration Liason Office or something, sure, but election board?

Unless, it's about non-citizens voting???

 

[Heels Noir]

So, brainiac, back to the original question, unless the goal is to allow a non-citizen to vote, why are non-citizen's serving on the election board?

First of all, the article says nothing about "non-citizen's"[sic] serving, just one, and the obvious answer is because she is highly qualified.

A better question is why do you presume just because a woman of Asian descent in a city with a large Asian population, who is multilingual and who is essentially a volunteer, is going to somehow open the floodgates of noncitizens in that city voting illegally in national elections?

 

[Heels Noir]

But why would she, as a non-citizen who shouldn't be voting either, be serving on the election board?

Are you suggesting it is illegal for noncitizens to work on a city's election board?

Once more, the better question is how large is that bug up your ass that makes you sit and wonder about such irrelevant and inconsequential crap?

 

[pooponduke]

First of all, the article says nothing about "non-citizen's"[sic] serving, just one, and the obvious answer is because she is highly qualified.

A better question is why do you presume just because a woman of Asian descent in a city with a large Asian population, who is multilingual and who is essentially a volunteer, is going to somehow open the floodgates of noncitizens in that city voting illegally in national elections?

Really? What part of that article informed you that Ms. Wong is somehow an expert on elections or even has any experience whatsoever in the administration of elections? She's obviously "highly qualified"? How about laying that out for us and how the article sets forth her previous service as an election official or something? And while you're at it (and before you again demonstrate your lack of knowledge) you might want to look up what election boards do.

As to the rest of your deflection from actually answering the question, I made no reference to characteristics, immutable or otherwise, possessed by her or anyone else, except one. She is not a citizen. Period. I also made no reference to elections being "national" or local. One of the bedrock foundational principles that makes us the envy of the world (have you been paying attention to all those people literally doing anything they can to gain entry to our country?) are the things that come with our citizenship.

Things like the right to vote and the concept of one person, one vote. Yours is just as important as mine, as is the guy next door and so on. But if you are not a citizen, you don't have those same privileges. It's kind of an exclusive club. Do what you need to and become a citizen. Then you get to vote. Not that hard of a concept.

So, I'll ask again, if that's not gonna be a prerequisite to voting, what is the point of being a citizen? What would be the reason?

 

[bluetoe]

politician? I'd

Even if he wants to become one (which I won’t agree to), if there’s no reasonable path, then who cares?

Wait, do you think Trump is the first politician to want more control? Lol

politician? I'm no politician, but If there was a button you could push to become dictator I'd stab you in the face with a pitchfork to get to it before you or anyone else did. That's just little ol' me. If someone has the yearn for power and the chutzpah to run for president, of course they might have dictatorial desires. Given that opportunity, respect for the law of the land might be a deterrence to some, but a dire need might be an overriding impetus for others.

But the key word is opportunity. In spite of the idiotic leftist claims that our democracy was almost toppled by an insurrection (just typing that leaves me shaking my head at the absurdity), there is no chance that anyone could grab that kind of control here. We spend a good amount of time debating whether the president can even influence the economy, and we talking dictator?

To just suggest possible dictatorship or even throw the term around loosely shows the kind of sheep mentality we have to deal with. But I'm not naive enough to deny that there are a lot of others like me who would take the reigns away in a heartbeat. And I can't blame them...or me.

It's a whole nother topic, but a good argument can be made that a good dictator provides the best leadership.

 

[bluetoe]

Why on earth would an illegal alien have any voting rights whatsoever?

because they're multi-lingual, apparently. You can see that, can't you?

 

[pooponduke]

Are you suggesting it is illegal for noncitizens to work on a city's election board?

Once more, the better question is how large is that bug up your ass that makes you sit and wonder about such irrelevant and inconsequential crap?

This is the reason for calling you brainiac. The article you claim to have read specifically lays out that SF had a voter approved measure in 2020 that allows noncitizens to serve on their boards. So how would your mind pervert that to a suggestion that it is illegal? It's clear that you have no intention or are simply incapable of addressing the issue of noncitizens serving on the election board unless it is about ultimately paving the way for noncitizens to vote. There is a vast difference between something being legal to do versus it being advisable or appropriate.

Let's put it in terms you might be able to understand. Would it make sense to have a republican serve on the board of your local democrat committee or should those who are directing the efforts of the local democrat party and the positions being taken by their candidates be overseen and guided by actual democrats?

 

[bluetoe]

But that's what you do best around here, seeing crimes in otherwise innocuous liberal matters.

you mean as opposed to you and your ilk seeing crimes in otherwise innocuous conservative matters? You all have the 'seeing-crimes-in-otherwise-innocuous-matters' market cornered.

 

[Heels Noir]

How about laying that out for us and how the article sets forth her previous service as an election official or something?

So now previous service as an election official is a prerequisite. I see what you're doing.

What about a job. in a similar field, like working with the citizens in the Asian community? What about being appointed to the position by a unanimous vote by the Board of Supervisors? What about be praised for your commitment? I would say those things combined likely made her highly qualified for the job.

 

[pooponduke]

What about a job. in a similar field, like working with the citizens in the Asian community? What about being appointed to the position by a unanimous vote by the Board of Supervisors? What about be praised for your commitment? I would say those things combined likely made her highly qualified for the job.

None of which have anything whatsoever to do with the oversight and administration of elections. Thanks for playing. Be sure to keep your raffle ticket for the drawing later tonight,

 

[Heels Noir]

Let's put it in terms you might be able to understand. Would it make sense to have a republican serve on the board of your local democrat committee or should those who are directing the efforts of the local democrat party and the positions being taken by their candidates be overseen and guided by actual democrats?

You can be as condescending as you like. I know who the real fool is, and it isn't me.

What does political party have to do with this argument, anyway? You are obviously assuming that Ms. Wong is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, no? I would argue that she is most interested in advocating for her fellow Asians.

 

[pooponduke]

Even if he wants to become one (which I won’t agree to), if there’s no reasonable path, then who cares?

Wait, do you think Trump is the first politician to want more control? Lol

Apparently, the dictator "problem" is only problematic when it applies to He Who Must Not Be (Re)Elected.

 

[Heels Noir]

None of which have anything whatsoever to do with the oversight and administration of elections. Thanks for playing. Be sure to keep your raffle ticket for the drawing later tonight,

I guess you've never been privy to interviewing for a lateral move. Have you been working at Burger King your entire life?

 

[gunslingerdick]

I guess you've never been privy to interviewing for a lateral move. Have you been working at Burger King your entire life?

Oh good. Are you going to go into your vast experience in this area with your fake job?

 

[pooponduke]

You can be as condescending as you like. I know who the real fool is, and it isn't me.

What does political party have to do wioth this argument, anyway? You are obviously assuming that Ms. Wong is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, no? I would argue that she is most interested in advocating for her fellow Asians.

The fact that you don't follow the analogy and think that I am introducing political party into the scenario is only demonstrative of your own inabilities. It was an attempt to explain to you that those who are not part of any given process should not be given input into that particular process (e.g. - republicans have no business directing the activities or policies of the democrats just like those that aren't qualified to vote should not have input into elections). I said nothing about anyone's politics or political party at any point in this discussion (in fact, it's a total distraction on your part as it's probably safe to assume that everyone involved "is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal").

And you could argue that "she is most interested in advocating for her fellow Asians" and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you. But that's just the problem. Being Asian or not being Asian has nothing to do with the concept of being a citizen or noncitizen. Why do you have to always revert back to seeing everything through such a lens? She is now serving on the Board of Elections that oversees and governs the elections there, an act that she is not even capable of doing as a noncitizen. So, she can't do it herself, but she gets to oversee everyone else who has that privilege? And you think that's perfectly fine because she's Asian?

 

[pooponduke]

I guess you've never been privy to interviewing for a lateral move. Have you been working at Burger King your entire life?

Exactly what is she moving laterally from? And, I forgot to add from before re this gem:

I know who the real fool is, and it isn't me.

You had a 50/50 shot. Another one for the L column.

 

[pooponduke]

What about a job. in a similar field, like working with the citizens in the Asian community?

I guess you've never been privy to interviewing for a lateral move.

How does "working with citizens in the Asian community" amount to anything related to elections or constitute a lateral move?

She could be a hostess at a Chinese restaurant or a brilliant CEO of an Asian based multi-billion dollar company for all I know. Both of those are working with citizens in the Asian community. None of that qualifies her to oversee elections. Not saying she couldn't, just that you are baking in a ton of assumptions in your entire pitch that she is highly qualified.

Were there no highly qualified Asians who are actual citizens available to serve?

 

[Heels Noir]

So, she can't [vote] herself, but she gets to oversee everyone else who has that privilege?

Yep. That's not the only time you'll find people who can't do certain tasks while supervising those who can.

I'm finding it wildly entertaining that you have your panties in a wad all because a city some 2000+ miles away has appointed a noncitizen to their elections board. Is your own life so dull and mundane that this is what you choose to worry about?

 

[heelmanwilm]

Even if he wants to become one (which I won’t agree to), if there’s no reasonable path, then who cares?

Wait, do you think Trump is the first politician to want more control? Lol

Good point

 

[heelmanwilm]

Apparently, the dictator "problem" is only problematic when it applies to He Who Must Not Be (Re)Elected.

Well it becomes problematic when someone refuses to accept election results. Theow in his claim of immunity from prosecution and That’s where the dictator comparison thing comes in. You can’t deny he conspired to go against the constitutional process for transfer of power. His own Vice president even admitted as much. Pence said “trump tried to get me to do something that went against the constitution”. Fake electors, pressuring election officials, claiming he’s above the law, slandering people….That’s what a dictator would do. (Or i should say dictator wannabe) So he’s earned the criticism. No doubt other politicians have wanted more power and have probably cheated to try and get it. He took it to another level though.

 

[blazers]

Trump alone wouldn't be scary if other politicians had backbones and morals, but he's going to have a cabinet full of nutjobs like M Flynn and nutjob grifters like Bannon, along w some weak Congress if he wins.

But he degrades and threatens all media other than MAGA-aligned media, pushing them as the only true source of reality, denies election results, tried claiming immunity from laws even after leaving office, pardons for people like Roger Stone, mixing his business with the his job as pres, quid pro quo for political gain, admiration for foreign dictators, purging of independent inspector generals, scheming to overturn the results of elections.

If those don't lean toward autocratic dictator...

 

[heelmanwilm]

How does "working with citizens in the Asian community" amount to anything related to elections or constitute a lateral move?

She could be a hostess at a Chinese restaurant or a brilliant CEO of an Asian based multi-billion dollar company for all I know. Both of those are working with citizens in the Asian community. None of that qualifies her to oversee elections. Not saying she couldn't, just that you are baking in a ton of assumptions in your entire pitch that she is highly qualified.

Were there no highly qualified Asians who are actual citizens available to serve?

She’s Asian. So obviously she’s good at math and counting and such.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Trump alone wouldn't be scary if other politicians had backbones and morals, but he's going to have a cabinet full of nutjobs like M Flynn and nutjob grifters like Bannon, along w some weak Congress if he wins.

But he degrades and threatens all media other than MAGA-aligned media, pushing them as the only true source of reality, denies election results, tried claiming immunity from laws even after leaving office, pardons for people like Roger Stone, mixing his business with the his job as pres, quid pro quo for political gain, admiration for foreign dictators, purging of independent inspector generals, scheming to overturn the results of elections.

If those don't lean toward autocratic dictator...

All politicians crave the loyalty and popularity trump gets from his base. For dems there’s just none even close to achieving that. So they watch from a distance and seethe. With the repubs they at least have the option to try to stay on his good side and cash in and maybe get a little slice of the hero worship pie. That’s why none or very few stand up to him.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Stewart's job is to entertain people

No one thinks that's all he does.

Most of us think he clarifies things using humor. At least that's my sense.

From my point of view, there was plenty of humor in what he delivered on the topic of our elderly contenders for the presidency - and a good bit of clarity, as well. But he also muddled things a bit, which he is not known for doing - especially when it matters.

I don't really mind him leaning harder on Biden. But I sort of expected him to lean harder on Trump in the next round. Which he didn't.

I don't doubt for a minute that Stewart prefers Biden over Trump. I mean Stewart isn't an idiot, after all.

Which is to say that I'm a little puzzled that he left it favoring Trump.

If I had to guess, I'd guess that that's Jon Stewart's way of adding his voice to the call for Biden to step aside - without actually saying those words.

Just my guess.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

It was an attempt to explain to you that those who are not part of any given process should not be given input into that particular process

Non-voters are also subject to the laws created by the people voters elect. They can't wield the hammer; only get hit by it. Having an non-voter play a role in the election process helps to balance that bias.

 

[nctransplant]

Damn, some libs were getting their asses handed to them in here yesterday.

 

[nctransplant]

To the many who decide things just because they hate him, and are now holding E. Jean Carroll up as a proud fighter against all things Trump, perhaps you can explain to the rest of us who are a little bidenlike on understanding all of this, why is it that the trial judge didn't allow in her prior statements regarding the incident? Why wasn't orangeman allowed to use this in cross examination of his accuser?

View embedded media

Wanted to bump this since you libs avoided it yesterday like the plague.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Wanted to bump this since you libs avoided it yesterday like the plague.

you really want to know? Cause I do. Here’s a hint though. It’s one of these:

A. Post isn’t accurate
3. Post is accurate but there’s a solid legal argument explaining it
IV. Post is accurate and trump is being unfairly persecuted

Wanna guess?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Non-voters are also subject to the laws created by the people voters elect. They can't wield the hammer; only get hit by it. Having an non-voter play a role in the election process helps to balance that bias.

When I travel to Germany, I'm subject to the laws created by the people the German voters elect. I should have zero say on those laws, seeing as I'm not a German voter. If I don't like their laws, I don't have to travel to their country.

 

[Heels Noir]

Wanted to bump this since you libs avoided it yesterday like the plague.

Maybe it's because @pooponduke's question "why is it that the trial judge didn't allow in her prior statements regarding the incident" is incomplete and makes no freaking sense.

 

[Heels Noir]

When I travel to Germany, I'm subject to the laws created by the people the German voters elect. I should have zero say on those laws, seeing as I'm not a German voter. If I don't like their laws, I don't have to travel to their country.

If you decide to relocate to Germany and accept a job on Düsseldorf's board of elections, please don't let @pooponduke find out or we'll never hear the end of his bitching about it.

 

[blazers]

Conservative powerhouse wants to end recreational sex

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Conservative powerhouse wants to end recreational sex

View embedded media

This British feminist lady needs dick