- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Grassley says he won’t support the Save Act
Posted on 1/21/26 at 9:27 pm to djsdawg
Posted on 1/21/26 at 9:27 pm to djsdawg
quote:
What is the selling point for this?
That's where federal expansion and erosion of states rights ends up. It's not a selling point.
The selling point for states rights is that this isn't possible on a federal/national level. States maintain the authority to act independently as little experiments of democracy as they were intended. Also, if you don't like how a state regulates elections (or how it taxes, regulates behaviors, etc.) you can move to a state with more palatable policies. You can't do this with a federal takeover.
1
Posted on 1/21/26 at 9:29 pm to djsdawg
quote:
The fate of our nation matters more than "muh principles".
You're just confirming he's providing a fear-based stance that is antithetical to his stated principles. You're proving my point.
quote:
You refuse to acknowledge the threats because "muh emotions".
The threats are what the Left does with new power/authority.
Emotions are how you let the Left win in that manner or usher in right-authoritarianism, which is just as bad.
This post was edited on 1/21/26 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 1/21/26 at 9:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
States maintain the authority to act independently as little experiments of democracy as they were intended. Also, if you don't like how a state regulates elections (or how it taxes, regulates behaviors, etc.) you can move to a state with more palatable policies. You can't do this with a federal takeover.
This is yet another flaw of the set up: It allows for cheaters to flourish, take over, and destroy. This is what you support.
There is no valid selling point for making bad moves that prohibit use of ID and in person voting.
Since it only impacts the presidential election, moving out of a bad state would make zero sense.
Posted on 1/21/26 at 9:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You're just confirming he's providing a fear-based stance that is antithetical to his stated principles. You're proving my point.
Well, the fear is valid, and you havent disputed this reality.
quote:
The threats are what the Left does with new power/authority.
They dont need Trump to do this for them to do this, so this is flawed reasoning. The point is to keep them from being able to do this. Our fate depends on this.
Survival is far more important than "muh principles".
Posted on 1/21/26 at 9:49 pm to djsdawg
quote:
This is yet another flaw of the set up: It allows for cheaters to flourish, take over, and destroy. This is what you support.
Uh, let's revisit the question (that you didn't answer)
quote:
So you believe it is wise to permit the next Democratic government to make it illegal for any state to require ID and enact universal mail in voting, and no state may protest?
You support permitting a system where voter ID can be outlawed nationally and MIV enacted universally. That allows for many more cheaters to flourish, makes the takeover/destruction easier.
See how that works? My system is still better.
This post was edited on 1/21/26 at 9:51 pm
Posted on 1/21/26 at 10:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Uh, let's revisit the question (that you didn't answer)
They can already achieve this without needing precedent, so its an irrelevant question.
The point is to keep them from being in position to make a death blow like this.
Permitting widespread cheating helps put them in such a position to make the death blow.
Survival > "muh principles"
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:00 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
and those stolen elections lead to a mountain of monetary frauds that is driving our nation toward bankruptcy.
Principled States are well within their rights to engage in widespread federal fraud, and it’s irrational and emotional to point that out. Constitution over country, so he believes.
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:23 pm to TheOtherWhiteMeat
quote:
he ignored about 80% of that asswhooping.
So principled.
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:25 pm to djsdawg
quote:
The point is to keep them from being in position to make a death blow like this.
So you think the DEMs will never be in power again?
That's your plan?
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:26 pm to djsdawg
quote:
So principled.
Having principles isn't required to understand how silly that comment was.
I destroyed him with him arguing against his own point and that hasn't even been rectified.
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:29 pm to hawgfaninc
It’s a form letter aka a constituent response letter. Usually a response to an email or actual letter. Mass mail. While he’s gives an opinion, it doesn’t declare how he will vote. Means nothing.
Take it from someone who knows.
Take it from someone who knows.
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I destroyed him
By doing what?
quote:
him arguing against his own point and that hasn't even been rectified
Certainly not this. You purposely ignored most of his points.
quote:
that hasn't even been rectified.
somehow still focused on an irrelevant “gotcha”
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:44 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Certainly not this. You purposely ignored most of his points.
Other than being irrelevant to the conversation, they were neutered by him arguing against himself. Whatever value was in the irrelevancy was destroyed by him doing this.
quote:
somehow still focused on an irrelevant “gotcha”
Him making 2 separate points that completely contradict each other and devalue anything else is not an "irrelevant gotcha"
This is just mainly incoherent old man rambling
quote:
I am interested in stopping the 20,000,000 illegal aliens from casting votes in critical times - you defend that as a "status rights' issue - it is actually a "States Felony" issue - and your insist that unless THEY decide to stop stealing elections, the federal government has no power to fix the problem.
You are wrong - but that doesn't surprise anyone here. You exist to muddy up actual discussion of important matters.
There are at least 10 states which have gone rogue in their abuse of the taxpaying public. And YOU say - 'it is their RIGHT to abuse the taxpayer"
Now - if that abuse only affects their STATE's taxpayer, I would not be as worked up over the issue as I am now.
What is bullshite is to defend their rigging of elections which impact the entire nation.
If they want stupid idiots in THEIR legislatures then have at it.
But they are sending robots to the US congress who have ZERO integrity with respect to what is good for the entire USA. They will stand by and oppose ANY attempt to rein in the abuses.
You are one of the latter. You enjoy the election fraud and other fraudulent waste of our taxes.
edit - and nowhere do I claim that REPUBLICANS are free of this abuse.
And if you go back go his prior rambling
quote:
There is no more adamant supporter of state's rights than I.
But there is a higher moral standard than mere words.
I would not support a state that made it 'legal' to wantonly kill the people who do not vote the way the leadership wants.
We are witnessing in these 'blue' states absolute rape of their population in favor of luring more 3rd world problems. You know it - everyone knows it.
And the ONLY reason they can get away with it is by their 'state laws' that allow them to piss on the fundamental precepts of the constitution.
I have read your inputs over a period of time. Intellectually you are not stupid.
But you lend your intelligence to support stupid ideas.
You absolutely KNOW the elections have been subject to massive fraud for the past half century at least. Yet you smugly hide behind your facade of "no evidence" == which only means that those doing the 'stealing' are not interested in 'finding evidence.
So YES - I am in favor of making sure that CHEATERS can no longer hide behind their 'interpretation' of "what words mean."
Pick ANY historical figure of more than 100 years ago - and ask yourself if you think they would agree with you on the meaning of 'birthright citizenship' in light of the 20 years of the federal government not enforcing their own laws = and with some states taking advantage of that to pump up their census numbers and charging the FEDERAL taxpayer for the enormous extra cost.
You are not an honorable debater. Your interest is what you can 'get away with' using your interpretation of 'wording' while totally ignoring the MORAL certainties.
Unless you think it is moral to engage in fraudulent elections as long as you can get away with it.
and those stolen elections lead to a mountain of monetary frauds that is driving our nation toward bankruptcy.
You are unworthy.
It gets even worse and more incoherent/irrelevant.
He even brings up birthright citizenship
Posted on 1/22/26 at 7:51 pm to hawgfaninc
Chuck is good on many things, but he has no idea what he's dealing with in today's atmosphere. He's still in the senate gentlemen delusion that's been dead for decades.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 7:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Other than being irrelevant to the conversation, they were neutered by him arguing against himself. Whatever value was in the irrelevancy was destroyed by him doing this.
He simply gave you an opportunity to deflect from his main points, which he descibes as you "muddy up actual discussion of important matters".
It is reasonable to claim states' rights are great, but also believe they become problematic when they threaten the nation as a whole through fraud and abuse.
Contrary to your claim, there is no damning contradiction there, and the fraud and abuse from liberal states are very real.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 9:13 am to therick711
quote:
he has no idea what he's dealing with in today's atmosphere. He's still in the senate gentlemen delusion that's been dead for decades.
Agree. He thinks democrats are still reasonable people, which shows how out of touch he is.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 12:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If they want stupid idiots in THEIR legislatures then have at it. But they are sending robots to the US congress who have ZERO integrity with respect to what is good for the entire USA. They will stand by and oppose ANY attempt to rein in the abuses.
This is a good point.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News