Republican VETS Against Trump

ciscopack said:

---

I think Vote By Mail in NC started today; never done it myself. I did hear that normally about 5% of the NC vote is by mail and this year it could be 40% because of CV-19.

https://www.ncvoter.org/absentee-ballots/

---

That's absolutely insane if 40% of voters vote by mail. Are that many people really that scared? Some people are straight up cowards.... I've already explained how safe the process is. The more mail ins the more you contribute to a chaotic election with potential legal and violent ramifications. Wake up and see what's really going on here.

A Guy Walks into a Bar..

A young man, fresh out of college, is sent on a trip to work on some company business for a client out of state.

One evening he decides to go to a local night club to relax and hopefully have a little fun. He goes straight in, goes straight up to the bar, orders a drink, which the bartender promptly serves him.
After a bit the young guy says to the bartender, "You know, I noticed that nobody asked for my ID at the door, and neither did you. That surprised me a little."

The bartender replies, "Well, you're old enough to drink aren't you?

Young man: "Well sure I know that, but back home they usually verify my age by checking my ID first.
Bartender: "We don't do that here, company policy.

Young man: "Really, why is that?

Bartender: The management doesn't want to be accused of ageism. If we asked for IDs, it would show that we don't trust people, and that might people think we were raging ageists."

Young man: But if you don't check IDs, how do you know if you are serving drinks to underaged patrons?"

Bartender: " We have a system of trust here. Nobody's underage drinking in this establishment."

Young man: "I dunno; I'm looking around the room and I'm seeing several kids with drinks in their hands that don't even look like they're out of high school yet."

Bartender: The management and I must request that you ignore all obvious signs and indicators that might appear that underage drinking is taking place here. We don't serve underage, and we never have not once."

Young man: "But how could you possibly know that if you never check for IDs?"

Bartender (visibly agitated): "Look, it's simple. Nobody would ever come here and drink underage because it's illegal and they could get in big trouble if they got caught."

Young man: "Okay, okay. I didn't mean to upset you it just looks like there is underage drinking going on even as we speak."

Bartender: "You want to make a thing out of this? Fine PROVE IT. Show me your evidence, smart guy."

Young man: "How could I prove it? I can't see their ID! Neither you nor I can confirm that these kids are who they say they are, much less if they are old enough to legally drink."

Bartender: "Nobody's ever proven that underage drinking goes on in here, and you haven't shown me any proof either!"

Young man: "But it's so obvious all you have to do is look around! But how could I prove it beyond a legal doubt? What could I do to show you that these kids are underage if I'm not allowed to verify their identity?"

Bartender: "That's your problem, pal, not mine."

Young man: "I think I need another drink!"

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

It's a big problem that's happens all over but you won't find evidence of it because there is no evidence? Hard to buy that argument.

The article you posted gave an interesting first hand account - that's fair enough. (Granted, it was in ... Florida! ). But it still didn't describe a recipe for widespread fraud. Trump's own commission, the one specifically tasked to look for evidence of voter fraud, was disbanded after finding nothing.

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

Because people are impulsive and imperfect and the more people that are complicit the greater the chances someone ****s up and gets caught.

It's why most conspiracy theories don't survive even minor scrutiny. Too many people would have to successfully work around the safeguards, not mess up, tell too many lies for too long, and not get caught to make it work.

Nah - it's a perfect analogy for explaining the evidentiary demands for pro-voting fraud advocates like yourself.

That you don't approve isn't my problem.

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

Because people are impulsive and imperfect and the more people that are complicit the greater the chances someone ****s up and gets caught.

It's why most conspiracy theories don't survive even minor scrutiny. Too many people would have to successfully work around the safeguards, not mess up, tell too many lies for too long, and not get caught to make it work.

---

Then how do you explain the RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA mother-of-all-conspiracy-theories lasted for so long?

dogplasma said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

It's a big problem that's happens all over but you won't find evidence of it because there is no evidence? Hard to buy that argument.

The article you posted gave an interesting first hand account - that's fair enough. (Granted, it was in ... Florida! ). But it still didn't describe a recipe for widespread fraud. Trump's own commission, the one specifically tasked to look for evidence of voter fraud, was disbanded after finding nothing.

---

Who said there wasn't evidence? There has been plenty - but again - you have to work hard to get caught at this cheating, but occasionally someone will slip up.

When it's a piece of cake to cheat without getting caught - you can bet that people will.

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

Because people are impulsive and imperfect and the more people that are complicit the greater the chances someone ****s up and gets caught.

It's why most conspiracy theories don't survive even minor scrutiny. Too many people would have to successfully work around the safeguards, not mess up, tell too many lies for too long, and not get caught to make it work.

---

Then how do you explain the RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA mother-of-all-conspiracy-theories lasted for so long?

---

What aspect of it is theory?

That Russia meddled?

That their meddling impacted the election process or election result?

That they actively colluded with Trump?

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Nah - it's a perfect analogy for explaining the evidentiary demands for pro-voting fraud advocates like yourself.

That you don't approve isn't my problem.

---

You don't need my approval, obviously.

But if the right is making the accusation, the burden of proof is on them.

Just like it was on Trump's team in court to either provide evidence of voter fraud or say they didn't have any.

They said they didn't have any evidence.

It's a huge problem in the minds of the right, with there being no evidence that's it's a problem.

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

Because people are impulsive and imperfect and the more people that are complicit the greater the chances someone ****s up and gets caught.

It's why most conspiracy theories don't survive even minor scrutiny. Too many people would have to successfully work around the safeguards, not mess up, tell too many lies for too long, and not get caught to make it work.

---

Then how do you explain the RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA mother-of-all-conspiracy-theories lasted for so long?

---

What aspect of it is theory?

That Russia meddled?

That their meddling impacted the election process or election result?

That they actively colluded with Trump?

---

Still a believer, huh? Interesting....

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

What aspect of it is theory?

That Russia meddled?

That their meddling impacted the election process or election result?

That they actively colluded with Trump?

---

Still a believer, huh? Interesting....

---

They are straightforward questions. Just answer them.

Watch out for that fraud, guys...

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

What aspect of it is theory?

That Russia meddled?

That their meddling impacted the election process or election result?

That they actively colluded with Trump?

---

Still a believer, huh? Interesting....

---

They are straightforward questions. Just answer them.

---

I understand. It's hard to accept that you wasted over two years of your life - peeing yourself everytime CNN announced another BOMBSHELL!!

So you've just decided to go with, "It's still real to me!".

It's just easier that way. I get it, man.

statefan91 said:

---

Watch out for that fraud, guys...

---

Pretty straight forward...

It's like someone who is against the concept of social security in principle. They believe it's a Ponzi scheme and that it will end up bankrupting the country because it is not sustainable.

However, in their long days of working very hard they have been forced in every single paycheck to pay into this Ponzi scheme. They had no choice. If they had somehow found a way to cheat paying their social security they would have been count and taken to jail.

Now, when this person retires, should they refuse to take social security disbursement he was forced to pay into for the 40-plus years of their working life?

He would be absolutely justified in doing so because he was forced to be in the system even if he disagreed with it.

If Democratic general assemblies and governors are going to cram vote-by-mail down our throats, Trump has every right to work within that bad system to try to generate as many votes as he possibly can. It's not his fault that the state governments are jamming this flawed and vulnerable system down our throats. He, as a candidate, must work within that system whether he likes it or not.

So no issue with him bringing the vote by now opportunities up to American voters if that is the hand that he's already been dealt.

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."

Trump, January 2016

"Jammed down our throats?"

Glad to see your weird homoeroticism continues from Pack Pride.

How is vote by mail being forced upon anyone? You can vote in person if you like.

He's done it again:

Yep - nothing to worry about. Should be fine....

You've chosen to repeat that copy and paste without answering what general assemblies you're talking about. North Carolina?

If I may inject a little humor on this post.....

Anyone got a connection to the WWE? Maybe we can get Civilized and Supply Chain hooked up on an episode of Monday Night Raw or one of those WWE Smackdown shows. Should be plenty entertaining.

Tootie4Pack said:

---

If I may inject a little humor on this post.....

Anyone got a connection to the WWE? Maybe we can get Civilized and Supply Chain hooked up on an episode of Monday Night Raw or one of those WWE Smackdown shows. Should be plenty entertaining.

---

Hey Civilized, maybe one of those old fashioned cage matches , like Ric Flair and Wahoo McDaniel used to battle in. You and Supply Chain will draw an IPS virtual crowd.

Just a little fun on a beautiful Saturday.

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

"Not only did the campaign fail to provide evidence that voter fraud was a widespread problem in Pennsylvania, they failed to provide any evidence that any misconduct occurred in the primary election or that so-called voter fraud is any sort of regular problem in Pennsylvania,"

How can you provide evidence when one would have to go out of their way to leave evidence?

---

Because people are impulsive and imperfect and the more people that are complicit the greater the chances someone ****s up and gets caught.

It's why most conspiracy theories don't survive even minor scrutiny. Too many people would have to successfully work around the safeguards, not mess up, tell too many lies for too long, and not get caught to make it work.

---

You probably supported the ongoing (dead for now) tirade of Trump and the Russian's?

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

See the bar analogy above to understand why your demand for evidence is problematic here.

If you think about it for awhile, you will probably begin to understand.

(Also, there are numerous evidences - you just refuse to accept them.)

---

LOL.

If there are 'numerous evidences' why didn't Trump's team produce them when compelled to do so by the courts?

---

So what?

I'm just curious as to why people do not support an ID to vote. Fo the life of me, what can we do, that is meaningful, without an ID?

We have, based on the framers, of the constitution, God Given right (some people may call this natural rights) and we still have to show an ID to buy a firearm. The second amendment does "NOT" give us the right to have a firearm; rather, it recognizes the God Given right and states the government will not infringe upon this rights.

With that said, a God Given right has been usurped by a tyrannical government and took it away, freely... Why then can we not require someone to show an ID to vote?

Are you talking about the one from the Senate Intel Committee or a different one?

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

See the bar analogy above to understand why your demand for evidence is problematic here.

If you think about it for awhile, you will probably begin to understand.

(Also, there are numerous evidences - you just refuse to accept them.)

---

LOL.

If there are 'numerous evidences' why didn't Trump's team produce them when compelled to do so by the courts?

---

So what?

I'm just curious as to why people do not support an ID to vote. Fo the life of me, what can we do, that is meaningful, without an ID?

We have, based on the framers, of the constitution, God Given right (some people may call this natural rights) and we still have to show an ID to buy a firearm. The second amendment does "NOT" give us the right to have a firearm; rather, it recognizes the God Given right and states the government will not infringe upon this rights.

With that said, a God Given right has been usurped by a tyrannical government and took it away, freely... Why then can we not require someone to show an ID to vote?

---

I can assure you that the framers didn't see any rights as being granted by God.

What actual problem does voter ID solve?

GoPack2008 said:

---

[I can assure you that the framers didn't see any rights as being granted by God.

What actual problem does voter ID solve?

---

I actually see what you did there.

GoPack2008 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

See the bar analogy above to understand why your demand for evidence is problematic here.

If you think about it for awhile, you will probably begin to understand.

(Also, there are numerous evidences - you just refuse to accept them.)

---

LOL.

If there are 'numerous evidences' why didn't Trump's team produce them when compelled to do so by the courts?

---

So what?

I'm just curious as to why people do not support an ID to vote. Fo the life of me, what can we do, that is meaningful, without an ID?

We have, based on the framers, of the constitution, God Given right (some people may call this natural rights) and we still have to show an ID to buy a firearm. The second amendment does "NOT" give us the right to have a firearm; rather, it recognizes the God Given right and states the government will not infringe upon this rights.

With that said, a God Given right has been usurped by a tyrannical government and took it away, freely... Why then can we not require someone to show an ID to vote?

---

I can assure you that the framers didn't see any rights as being granted by God.

---

Most were Deist. So, you are so incorrect!