really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
Incompetence and malice are so hard to tell apart sometimes, and these days I feel the blurred lines are used strategically.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
Incompetence and malice are so hard to tell apart sometimes, and these days I feel the blurred lines are used strategically.
Michigan has mail in voting and same day voting. When voting surges 30%, you're going to have lines. While not perfect, it's not the reason Bernie didn't win one county. Not ONE county.
read this whole thread. especially bernie supporters.
Because shaming people works....🤷♂️
Get it out now. Biden will still need your vote in November. You'll have to get over yourself before then.
Did you not see where I said I will be voting for Biden or is your head way up in there admiring your own brand?
See? Shaming people does work.
That was pre shaming. Brought on by my view that beating Trump is the most important thing at this point. If the strategy is to shame people into supporting Biden I think Trump has already won. In fact for some people shaming may have the opposite effect. Why not give people positive reasons to support Biden outside of the tired “He’s not Trump” argument. Joe has a long way to go to unify the left before November. At least Bernie staying in the race will give Biden some debate practice.
Lets not forget lesser of two evils voting has gotten us to this point. For the R side Trump isn’t the lesser of two evils he is straight up their guy. I would prefer that Biden and co make the case that he is our guy and not just the best non Trump option we are gonna get.
Focus. Stay on message. Don't get distracted by shiny objects and whataboutism.
This election is a referendum on Trump.
It's a referendum on Trump's policy.
It's a referendum on Trump's nepotism.
It's referendum on Trump's corruption.
What an inspiring message
Get it out now. Biden will still need your vote in November. You'll have to get over yourself before then.
I'm starting to think you are a bot with intentions of actually turning people away from voting D
I'll say it a different way. The 50% of the country who dislike Trump and are generally members of the Democratic party were given a choice. Do we want to make this election about Trump or about democratic socialistic ideals. The people spoke clear and unequivocally and said they want to make it about Trump. And they decided Biden was the man to lead that fight. Respect the process.
I'm going to vote for Biden in the fall, but this is a bit of a spin on what happened. Biden won South Carolina and the party decided he was the choice. Pete and Amy getting out at the same time and endorsing him was smart politics, but it was also orchestrated. That happened before Super Tuesday, not after.
Let's not forget the GOP 2016 hesitation is the only reason trump is president.
He was barely at 35% and the "normal" republicans combined would have beaten him by 30 points. At the time most GOP pundits were saying for months dont worry when its 1 on 1 we will beat trump. That never happened.
Having the major political parties nominate someone because there are fewer extremist candidates is dangerous.
I'm hoping most see trump and the toxic divisiveness as proof. Thankfully the dems acted quickly as to not give sanders this unfair advantage.
I don't disagree, but if the goal is to bring the party together, then let's dispense with the idea that this was of the people, by the people. This was orchestrated. Maybe for the best, but orchestrated nonetheless.
But please remember they didnt give Biden an unfair advantage. Super tuesday was 2 vs 2. Sanders had every chance to prove there were more progressives in the party.
If anything, Sanders proved much of his 2016 support was protest Hillary vote.
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
This virus is going to get worse and it’s going to really hurt Trump politically. I thought around New Years that he couldn’t lose. But with this mishandled pandemic response, I think most reasonable undecided voters will have to think that Biden or Sanders would handle it better.
I agree but super tuesday showed... sorry m russ... enormous turnout in key areas that paralleled the 2018 blue wave.
If suburbs are sold blue zones now, the gop will need to maximize voter suppression to win national elections
And if we weren't all collectively fixated on Covid19, that might've helped him bounce back, but it seems to be a hugely unimportant topic when the two are put side-by-side.
No, it wouldn't have helped. He won the state last Tuesday effectively, and it was baked into the narrative already.
Biden actually has been pulling closer. The late vote has gone to him. Under 7 points now. At first they were talking +20 sanders.
really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
If you poorly manage on purpose, say in minority neighborhoods?
really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
If you poorly manage on purpose, say in minority neighborhoods?
Im not saying there's no such thing, I'm saying the charge in this case is specious.
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
That's a guy talking shit. I'm not sure if anyone followed up on it, but there's no evidence of any voter suppression in that article. As it actually says when you scroll down.
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
That's a guy talking shit. I'm not sure if anyone followed up on it, but there's no evidence of any voter suppression in that article. As it actually says when you scroll down.
schrodinger's douchebag strikes again
He got caught saying the quiet part out loud. and had to backpedal....nonono that's not what I meant
for further evidence, look at what the GOP does, not just what they say: the GOP is constantly trying to pass voter id laws, closing polling stations, removing voters, and stopping any legislation that would make it easier to vote, or have a paper trail
hard to believe he really meant anything else in that context
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
That's a guy talking shit. I'm not sure if anyone followed up on it, but there's no evidence of any voter suppression in that article. As it actually says when you scroll down.
schrodinger's douchebag strikes again
He got caught saying the quiet part out loud. and had to backpedal....nonono that's not what I meant
for further evidence, look at what the GOP does, not just what they say: the GOP is constantly trying to pass voter id laws, closing polling stations, removing voters, and stopping any legislation that would make it easier to vote, or have a paper trail
hard to believe he really meant anything else in that context
Lots of bluster, lots of insults, no evidence. This is what I'm talking about.
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
That's a guy talking shit. I'm not sure if anyone followed up on it, but there's no evidence of any voter suppression in that article. As it actually says when you scroll down.
schrodinger's douchebag strikes again
He got caught saying the quiet part out loud. and had to backpedal....nonono that's not what I meant
for further evidence, look at what the GOP does, not just what they say: the GOP is constantly trying to pass voter id laws, closing polling stations, removing voters, and stopping any legislation that would make it easier to vote, or have a paper trail
hard to believe he really meant anything else in that context
Lots of bluster, lots of insults, no evidence. This is what I'm talking about.
There has been a fair amount of crying wolf over voter fraud, rigged elections, voter suppression, etc. these last few years. We are inevitably going to have a no-bullshit case of one of the above and no one is going to believe it.
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
That's a guy talking shit. I'm not sure if anyone followed up on it, but there's no evidence of any voter suppression in that article. As it actually says when you scroll down.
schrodinger's douchebag strikes again
He got caught saying the quiet part out loud. and had to backpedal....nonono that's not what I meant
for further evidence, look at what the GOP does, not just what they say: the GOP is constantly trying to pass voter id laws, closing polling stations, removing voters, and stopping any legislation that would make it easier to vote, or have a paper trail
hard to believe he really meant anything else in that context
Lots of bluster, lots of insults, no evidence. This is what I'm talking about.
Of course it happens. But there's no evidence in the case you linked to. There's also no evidence to back up AOC's claim about Michigan, which is what started this conversation.
This is precisely the problem I'm talking about. People pointing to unrelated examples and applying it to any election where they don't like the results. Being angry and vulgar doesn't make you more right. It means no one is going to believe you when that situation actually happens.
really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
If you poorly manage on purpose, say in minority neighborhoods?
Im not saying there's no such thing, I'm saying the charge in this case is specious.
Damn these executives and their fancy words.
If in Nov everything returns to normal and our emperor allows elections, we’ll be pretty pissed if thousands can’t vote in the swing cities.
The funny thing about AOCs claim, is voting was up 30% in Washtenaw County.
really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
If you poorly manage on purpose, say in minority neighborhoods?
Im not saying there's no such thing, I'm saying the charge in this case is specious.
Damn these executives and their fancy words.
If in Nov everything returns to normal and our emperor allows elections, we’ll be pretty pissed if thousands can’t vote in the swing cities.
The funny thing about AOCs claim, is voting was up 30% in Washtenaw County.
really want to know her definition of suppression...
I’d say waiting in line for 3 hours is a form of suppression, particularly when you compare population density of registered voters by precincts and subsequent distribution of polling place employees and voting machines. It’s well documented. Whether AOC’s claim in this particular instance is accurate, I don’t know. But it’s worth investigating and if found to be true, there should be remedies.
my counter would be, despite a higher registered voter number, the election boards prepare based on historical turnout i.e. number of poll workers and machines at a given location.
further, there is no way to predict, along with actual turnout, just what time a set of voters will actually appear.
so the states either put up the cash to have enough machines in place for all eligible voters, registered or not. And have an equal number of volunteers on hand to meet that potential demand. or the voters put ul with the inconvenience consistantly to force states to to put up the cash to meet demand.
this is driven by citizen apathy not sinister motives although that can also play a role.
I disagree.
The charge of voter suppression carries the accusation that it was intentional and deliberate. Being poorly managed, underestimating the turnout, not having enough workers, these are examples of perhaps unpreparedness, but not a deliberate attempt to try and prevent one group of people from voting.
If you poorly manage on purpose, say in minority neighborhoods?
Im not saying there's no such thing, I'm saying the charge in this case is specious.
Damn these executives and their fancy words.
If in Nov everything returns to normal and our emperor allows elections, we’ll be pretty pissed if thousands can’t vote in the swing cities.
The funny thing about AOCs claim, is voting was up 30% in Washtenaw County.
30% statewide, including Ann Arbor, as you point out. That's the whole crux of my argument here.
Primaries can't work when people decide their candidate and their candidate only is worthy of support.
Yep. I’ve been disengaged ever since Williamson dropped out.
Kidding. Yeah, the theory is that people in the party ultimately support the collaborative consensus. This is based on the assumption that people will compromise. Some won’t and great becomes the enemy of good.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
I think there's a pretty stark difference between Bernie and Biden. It's like a Cruz or Rubio supporter who wouldn't vote for Trump. Not everyone is Party Above All.
If you are a Bernie supporter unwilling to support Biden in the fall, then you are saying you are ok with a second Trump term. That's your choice, but that's on you. The same goes for anyone who would have refused to support Bernie if he became the nominee. The differences between Sanders and Biden don't make Trump any more qualified or acceptable. Get over yourselves and help end this.
If you are a Bernie supporter unwilling to support Biden in the fall, then you are saying you are ok with a second Trump term. That's your choice, but that's on you. The same goes for anyone who would have refused to support Bernie if he became the nominee. The differences between Sanders and Biden don't make Trump any more qualified or acceptable. Get over yourselves and help end this.
You're going to have a difficult time persuading people by telling them to get over themselves. If that's all Biden supporters have for Bernie supporters, independents, disaffected Republicans, etc., he's screwed.
If you are a Bernie supporter unwilling to support Biden in the fall, then you are saying you are ok with a second Trump term. That's your choice, but that's on you. The same goes for anyone who would have refused to support Bernie if he became the nominee. The differences between Sanders and Biden don't make Trump any more qualified or acceptable. Get over yourselves and help end this.
You're going to have a difficult time persuading people by telling them to get over themselves. If that's all Biden supporters have for Bernie supporters, independents, disaffected Republicans, etc., he's screwed.
If you are a Bernie supporter unwilling to support Biden in the fall, then you are saying you are ok with a second Trump term. That's your choice, but that's on you. The same goes for anyone who would have refused to support Bernie if he became the nominee. The differences between Sanders and Biden don't make Trump any more qualified or acceptable. Get over yourselves and help end this.
You're going to have a difficult time persuading people by telling them to get over themselves. If that's all Biden supporters have for Bernie supporters, independents, disaffected Republicans, etc., he's screwed.
Not up to me to convince Bernie supporters of anything. Biden will make overtures and they will make their own decisions. Those decisions will have consequences, for better or worse. None of us need to pretend otherwise. You are either going to help get Trump out of office or you're not. No policy difference changes that.
If you are more invested in the argument between left-leaning factions than you are in beating Trump, then you are part of the toxic political culture that helped get him elected. I like Bernie, I like Joe. Neither were my preferred candidate, both would get my vote in November.
Wherein people dicussing divergent political views is a toxic culture. If beating Trump means conforming to a different group of petty fascists, then you can start to understand the appeal of third parties.
Comments
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
But please remember they didnt give Biden an unfair advantage. Super tuesday was 2 vs 2. Sanders had every chance to prove there were more progressives in the party.
If anything, Sanders proved much of his 2016 support was protest Hillary vote.
Trump adviser tells Wisconsin Republicans that GOP has ‘traditionally’ relied on voter suppression but will ‘start playing offense’ in 2020
https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-trump-gop-wisconsin-voter-suppression-20191221-wm6pi27zufctxmbe6gx4i2r4ce-story.html
“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” Justin Clark, a senior political adviser and senior counsel to Trump’s re-election campaign, said at the event. “Let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are. ... Let’s start playing offense a little bit. That’s what you’re going to see in 2020. It’s going to be a much bigger program, a much more aggressive program, a much better-funded program.”
Clark made the comments Nov. 21 in a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association’s Wisconsin chapter. Attendees included the state Senate's top Republican, Scott Fitzgerald, along with the executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
I agree but super tuesday showed... sorry m russ... enormous turnout in key areas that paralleled the 2018 blue wave.
If suburbs are sold blue zones now, the gop will need to maximize voter suppression to win national elections
But as you said covid is a game changer.
If you poorly manage on purpose, say in minority neighborhoods?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Emily Ratajkowski Thinks Bernie Bros Are a Myth
https://youtu.be/1B2EhhmQ6aI
Cool shirt:
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
He got caught saying the quiet part out loud.
and had to backpedal....nonono that's not what I meant
for further evidence, look at what the GOP does, not just what they say:
the GOP is constantly trying to pass voter id laws, closing polling stations, removing voters, and stopping any legislation that would make it easier to vote, or have a paper trail
hard to believe he really meant anything else in that context
this shouldn't be so difficult to comprehend
This is precisely the problem I'm talking about. People pointing to unrelated examples and applying it to any election where they don't like the results. Being angry and vulgar doesn't make you more right. It means no one is going to believe you when that situation actually happens.
If in Nov everything returns to normal and our emperor allows elections, we’ll be pretty pissed if thousands can’t vote in the swing cities.
The funny thing about AOCs claim, is voting was up 30% in Washtenaw County.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."