• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trump's Second Term

bruto said:
I imagine the pretty donkeys (and the camels too) chased the real Americans' pets until they jumped on top of the Communist solar panels, where they fried. Not many people know this, because the sneaky Somalians threw them all into the trunks of their Mercedes, and sold them to the Haitians as heat and serve snacks.
Click to expand...
You are a genius you've seen through it all!
 
Mike! said:
I can't look at Mike Johnson and not see this guy...

1793467425060.png
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but come on, Binghamton was smarter than that sideshow, maga-weirdo-freak, Jamestown Johnson.
 
Last edited:
P.J. Denyer said:
It seems completely legal, presuming no-one actually changes their name to run, how would a law on this work? If your name is similar to another candidate's you're not allowed to run? How similar? Who chooses which one gets to run out of the two? Does it only count if it's the same race, the constituency the same state? Should Donald Jessica Trump(D) of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊, Arkansas be allowed to run for Town Dogcatcher or might the local MAGAs be tricked into voting for him? No way could such a law be constitutional.
Click to expand...

plague311 said:
I'm slow on the uptick so I might not be getting the point here. I am a criminal and still vote.

I think the point of what the gentleman from Alaska was trying to get across is that voters do have some personal responsibility to educate themselves about the ballot and voting process, including who is on it. There are tons of resources out there, and a bunch that don't require internet to access, including at the voting centers.

Knowingly spreading dis\misinformation (lying about voting days or who can vote) and recruiting a rep with a similar name don't seem to be apples to apples to me.
Click to expand...

The scandal is not that someone with the same name is running. It's that the Peltola campaign engaged in what it called "The Ballot Composition Project." It's wild that citizens want to act like lawyers on behalf of a political party. Well, let's put on our lawyer hat and point out that it's not illegal to lie about Haitians eating cats. It's not illegal to say that El-Sayed denies that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. Why would you give politicians and their teams the permission structure to engage in dirty tactics? After all, the law is not exactly a bright line. If you've learned nothing from Trump, laws can be bent and reinterpreted by malicious actors. Most critically, why would you want to eviscerate your own credibility? This whole scheme can be condemned from an amoral, Machiavellian perspective on the grounds that it's stupid.
 
Cain said:
The scandal is not that someone with the same name is running. It's that the Peltola campaign engaged in what it called "The Ballot Composition Project." It's wild that citizens want to act like lawyers on behalf of a political party. Well, let's put on our lawyer hat and point out that it's not illegal to lie about Haitians eating cats. It's not illegal to say that El-Sayed denies that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. Why would you give politicians and their teams the permission structure to engage in dirty tactics? After all, the law is not exactly a bright line. If you've learned nothing from Trump, laws can be bent and reinterpreted by malicious actors. Most critically, why would you want to eviscerate your own credibility? This whole scheme can be condemned from an amoral, Machiavellian perspective on the grounds that it's stupid.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending it, if the allegations are true then it's pretty poor behaviour, albeit almost comical compared to some of the gerrymandering and vote restricting that has been attempted with varying degrees of success. But my point was that legislating against it is pretty much impossible short of circumstances in which someone deliberately and obviously changed their name to be a spoiler candidate.
 
Cain said:
The scandal is not that someone with the same name is running. It's that the Peltola campaign engaged in what it called "The Ballot Composition Project." It's wild that citizens want to act like lawyers on behalf of a political party. Well, let's put on our lawyer hat and point out that it's not illegal to lie about Haitians eating cats. It's not illegal to say that El-Sayed denies that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. Why would you give politicians and their teams the permission structure to engage in dirty tactics? After all, the law is not exactly a bright line. If you've learned nothing from Trump, laws can be bent and reinterpreted by malicious actors. Most critically, why would you want to eviscerate your own credibility? This whole scheme can be condemned from an amoral, Machiavellian perspective on the grounds that it's stupid.
Click to expand...
At the moment all we have is the unverified allegations of the TACO lawsuit and the unverified allegations of a fired ex-staffer who's sounding more like an Amy Johnson than anybody else. And the NYT ran with it because of their unrequited love for TACO.

I wouldn't presume to assume the allegations are anywhere near true until we see something substantive. Remember extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
At the moment all we have is the unverified allegations of the TACO lawsuit and the unverified allegations of a fired ex-staffer who's sounding more like an Amy Johnson than anybody else. And the NYT ran with it because of their unrequited love for TACO.

I wouldn't presume to assume the allegations are anywhere near true until we see something substantive. Remember extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Click to expand...
I think most Alaska voters know it was a shenanigan whether or not the Democrats were behind it. You'd have to be pretty naive to believe it's just a coincidence. As has been mentioned, it's not exactly new territory; I suspect it won't make much of a difference in the end. And it's pretty insulting to suggest Alaskans are that too dumb to not to understand the word 'incumbent' - that could backfire too.
 
PitPat said:
I think most Alaska voters know it was a shenanigan whether or not the Democrats were behind it. You'd have to be pretty naive to believe it's just a coincidence. As has been mentioned, it's not exactly new territory; I suspect it won't make much of a difference in the end. And it's pretty insulting to suggest Alaskans are that too dumb to not to understand the word 'incumbent' - that could backfire too.
Click to expand...
Yeah its obviously a shenanigan, but there doesn't seem to be any actual evidence that the Democrats were behind it, and I know US politicians have demonstrated there is no bottom to their stupidity but even so this doesn't seem like something the Democrats would think was a good plan. The most likely explanation is that the second Dan Sullivan detests the incumbent and realized he could screw with him.
 
Garrison said:
Yeah its obviously a shenanigan, but there doesn't seem to be any actual evidence that the Democrats were behind it, and I know US politicians have demonstrated there is no bottom to their stupidity but even so this doesn't seem like something the Democrats would think was a good plan. The most likely explanation is that the second Dan Sullivan detests the incumbent and realized he could screw with him.
Click to expand...

Yup, for all anyone knows, it might've been the fat clown (or one on his maga-weirdo freaks) who came up with the idea to give the king of liars (and his sideshow magaratz) an excuse to attack Peltola and send the FBI after her.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom