re: Breaking: Kari Lake loses trial to overturn Arizona Governor election - Vows to appeal

The jerseys are the same
That was the point

quote:

---

Mail in ballots enable the Dems to collect ballots from people who don’t care and otherwise wouldn’t vote. If not for that…the country is majority red.

---

It's not really majority red. If you forced all of those people to vote DEMs would beat Republicans pretty soundly.

The DEMs have motivation-turnout issues. That's why turnout is their major focus and they like harvesting and MIV to aid in turnout.

quote:

---

Without mail in ballots, you would have Trump as president and a GOP congress.

---

Likely. That's why the GOP fights to restrict access to voting...to thwart DEM turnout efforts (cited above).

This is nothing new. DEMs want to expand access to voting to aid the turnout. GOP wants to restrict access to voting to decrease turnout. Getting into which system is better is an impossible task on this board. Too philosophical and there are too many emotional-partisan posters who couldn't objectively discuss the issue. All I can tell you is which system helps DEMs and which part helps the GOP.

quote:

---

DEMs want to expand access to voting to aid the turnout. GOP wants to restrict access to voting to decrease turnout. Getting into which system is better is an impossible task on this board. Too philosophical and there are too many emotional-partisan posters who couldn't objectively discuss the issue. All I can tell you is which system helps DEMs and which part helps the GOP.

---

Good summary. It will be subjected to emotional attacks.

Like I always say, I have absolutely no problem with voter ID, because I do not want stupid, lazy people voting. I feel exactly the same way about excuse-free voting by mail.

What entertains me is the people who actually seem to believe their own bullshite, when claiming that they support voter ID and oppose mail in voting… “to protect the integrity of the system.” Serious belly laughs.

These are adults who likely also believe in the Easter bunny

quote:

---

You don't need to wait for fraud to tell you to make improvements that make the system less vulnerable to fraud. Do you wait until to you are robbed before you start locking your doors?

---

Gee. I wonder why nobody in AZ thought if this.

AZ enacted a number of new laws designed to tighten up elections. From voter registration/ID to restricting harvesting to co-domiciled voters, some work was done. DOJ sued AZ over the restrictive registration law.

Chain of custody remains an issue, IMO. And I think voting by mail should be limited to those that have no choice - but that’s a national thing. Not just AZ.

quote:

---

What entertains me is the people who actually seem to believe their own bullshite, when claiming that they support voter ID and oppose mail in voting… “to protect the integrity of the system.” Serious belly laughs.

---

I always get some amusement from the competing rationale behind voter ID and firearms licensing schemes.

quote:

---

I mean if you want a similar example, look at the 2 biggest pieces of viral content from the trial. The expert's "invalid" response and the alleged perjury. That's how a solid chunk of the Lake-supporting population sees the entire trial. They can't discuss any other aspect of the trial or have meltdowns when confronted with them (see: your responses to David_DJS in this very thread). That's the value of debates these days. Promote the viral content or melt.

---

This is some serious irony. The attempt at viral content was a simple response during the cross examination of an expert witness in which the defense was trying to frame the witness as lacking knowledge of the law, and got exposed? The question was the attempt, not the response.

It is a pretty big moment in the trial that is now being dismissed by folks like yourself. The defense, by its own strategy, brings up what the law actually says, realizes he is talking to someone that knows what it says, and immediately passes on the opportunity to ask that person any more questions. It’s a perfect example of how election integrity conversations typically go. You are the one that doesn’t want to discuss the aspects of the trial you don’t like.

The modern left will not have a conversation unless it’s on their terms. See global warming/climate change.

There is nothing to see here, please move along.

quote:

---

Republicans, as they have been for about 30 years

---

Rino republicans like mcstain
At some point you need to realize this

quote:

---

Pointing out the institutional inequities as a justification for debates is a far cry from calling Lake a clown show.

---

Pardon me if I’m misunderstanding your post, but I don’t think she meant Lake was the clown show. She meant the debate was. And she’s right. I posted video of it on this board. I’d say it was an SNL skit, but it was actually hilarious. Lake made repeated comments about feeling like she was being Punk’d.

quote:

---

Lake was a clown show. She clearly was using the Trump strategy to be antagonizing to seem "strong". She was a walking soundbite and short-form SM content creator more than any sort of politician. Lake's whole strategy was to draw Hobbs in so that she could get clips of "owning" Hobbs. That's the "clown show".

---

Message A - "we're not debating this candidate because we don't have to, because the legacy media won't challenge our candidate's viewpoints."

Message B - "we're not debating this candidate because she's a clown show and unworthy of debate."

Message A is strategic and substantive. Message B is emotional. Democrats will never use Message A to justify not debating because it clearly implies that there are institutional biases against conservative candidates. So they jump to Message B, which is the emotional appeal. This is clearly intellectually disingenuous, as Hobbs's refusal to debate her fellow Democrats shows it has nothing to do with Lake's personality or views.