Posts made by royalcrown89

Let's also hope North Carolina has serious election reform after Republicans committed massive election fraud in that state while not being able to come up with any credible evidence of "Democratic voter fraud" that the President rambles about at his klan rallies.

https://time.com/5535292/north-carolina-election-fraud/
https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/the-tearful-drama-of-north-carolinas-election-fraud-hearings
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/n-c-election-fraud-case-witness-says-operative-held-800-n946831
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/21/north-carolina-voter-fraud-charges-dog-house-race-mark-harris/2938521002/
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/us/politics/north-carolina-vote-fraud-absentee.html
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/voter-fraud-means-new-election-in-north-carolina
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/two-more-arrested-in-connection-to-alleged-north-carolina-election-fraud

Or is this all MSM fake news? North Carolina's 9th District has to have a new election next month because of right-wing thugs who broke the law to steal an election. There is now more evidence that election fraud is much more likely from Republicans than so-called voter fraud from Democrats.

@raphjd:

I already did a thread on this.

1995 Georgia was completely ruled by Dems at the state level.      They passed the law that removed voters after 11 years of non-voting and/or not returning the postcards (free postage) on the odd year.    Kemp was only following the law, passed by Dems.   He suspended the removals in 2015 due to a lawsuit.  The state won the lawsuit and the removals resumed in 2017.

Mmm hmm, and how many of these "Dems" later became Republicans during the late 1990s or the next decade like many, many other conservative Democrats before them (i.e. Strom Thurmond, Sonny Perdue, etc.)? It's funny how so many on the right conveniently leave out the fact that many Southern and conservative Democrats became Republicans between the late-1960s to the mid-2000s because conservatives moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party.

@raphjd:

Whites also get removed from voting rolls under this law.

Black people are too stupid to have an ID and register to vote.  At least that's what Dems always say, which is why they are against voter ID laws.   That's the racism of low expectations.    Every black person I know has ID and registered to vote.   There's plenty of videos on YouTube where blacks are asked if they have ID and if they know how to register to vote.

When you exclude Chicago and East St Louis, the majority of people in Illinois removed from voting rolls for being felons are white.

I just love how you conveniently skipped over the main point of my post: If you're a legal citizen of the United States and you have a photo ID and are registered, you should be able to cast a ballot without any issues. I know for a fact that there were people who had to face other hurdles to vote if they were black and voting Democratic in Georgia in 2018. My grandpa, aunt, two uncles, cousins, and a few family friends were harassed by state police for trying to help get people to the polls in Augusta, GA. Everyone had ID and it is not illegal to provide rides to a local precinct to vote. They weren't driving in a bus, they drove separate vehicles and were surprised at the coordinated effort to pull each car over on one day during Georgia's early voting period. It makes me question, was then-Secretary of State Kemp's office monitoring Facebook, Twitter, other social media posts of black Georgia residents who were offering rides to vote early across the state? My family wasn't the only black Georgia voters who were harassed during the 2018 midterm election, there are other stories of it happening and I'm happy to provide another example for you.
https://www.ajc.com/news/state–regional-govt--politics/black-senior-citizens-ordered-off-georgia-bus-taking-them-vote/42lZxIGOF1uFo637TEc9jP/amp.html

Lastly, black people are not "too stupid" to have photo ID, it was just odd that so many states decided to add that requirement following the election of the first black president who won the most votes of any candidate ever when he won over 69.4 million votes in 2008. Stacey Abrams received the most votes for a Democratic candidate for governor in the state of Georgia, a chunk of which came from black voters who did have photo ID. Your argument that black people are "too stupid" is invalid and heavily flawed.

@raphjd:

Do you also believe that PBS is racist for reporting on Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc, etc, etc and their horrible problems?   What about Bernie, Biden and the countless other Dems?

Was the term "infested" actually used? Do you have a source for that information? Did PBS also attack affluent or middle-class areas that are predominately black the way President Trump has (i.e. Rep. John Lewis GA district)? Until the president refers to white crime-ridden and drug-ridden areas as infested, your argument is futile.

@raphjd:

"Shitholes" is an accurate statement.  It's racist and a lie to call these countries shitholes until Trump wants to deport them, then liberals say "you cant sen them back to that shithole".      Liberals want it both ways.

I would not call a place like Sierra Leone a shithole since it was white people who ravaged the country for its diamonds and it's white people who continue to exploit parts of Africa. While there have been problems with the African continent since the beginning of time, you cannot deny the savagery whites from around the world have wreaked on many African nations and other black nations around the world. I'm not just talking about slavery by the way. I'm not saying white people are the root of all problems in said nations, but that they have largely contributed to those problems historically and currently.
That being said, once again, how come Mississippi isn't a "shithole?" How about rural Alabama, West Virginia, etc.? Have you been to those parts of the country and seen how the white people there live? Those are Republican-run states, towns, and neighborhoods filled with crime and drugs, including an increasing amount of opioid addiction and death. Which brings to mind, how come drug use is viewed differently when it comes to white people and black people?

@raphjd:

Bernie, PBS and many others have called Baltimore "rat-infested".   I saw both PBS shows before Trump's comments.

Oddly, it was (mostly) white Trumpers who went to Baltimore and cleaned it up.   The black residents were thankful.  Their Congressman hasn't done a thing for his district in the 26 years in office.

I have no defense for Bernie, I never have supported him and never will because he's ignorant to America's continuing race problem. Can you provide evidence of PBS themselves using the term "rat-infested" and not some opinion from someone they spoke to? You brought this up; therefore, you should show your evidence to strengthen your argument. Rep. Cummings is a member of Congress. While he is responsible for representing his constituents in Congress, what do you propose he could do outside of requesting federal help to fix the part of Baltimore he represents? Shouldn't there be more education on voting for local candidates that can be held accountable instead of focusing on one person be the goal to fixing local issues? I'm sure you know he doesn't represent all of Baltimore and that they have recently had corruption issues with their previous mayor.

–- Before I get into this topic, I just have to say I am sad to see how low participation in this forum has become. I had a feeling this would happen due to how one-sided this section of the forum was becoming and how the constant trolling/derailing was making this an uncivil place to debate (example of my prediction: https://forum.gaytorrent.ru/index.php?topic=50735.0). That being said, I'm happy to see the Politics & Debate section is still here and it was a joy revisiting some of my old threads and topics I participated in. –-

Now to the topic, Stacey Abrams was right when she launched lawsuits against Brian Kemp and the state of Georgia. The way the election was handled left room for her criticisms and the fact that the courts had to get involved is proof that Georgia and other states like it have a long way to go to earn back the trust of voters. While Republicans in Georgia have been unable to prove in court that there has been serious voter fraud on the left, Democrats have successfully proven the voting system in Georgia is severely outdated and that there should be a paper trail for votes. There are still some issues with how Kemp and his administration are making the changes; however, combined with the changes other judges have made in Georgia, it should be a much smoother process to vote and the attempts to suppress the vote should weaken. Other states have already followed Georgia's lead and have made various changes to their systems to ensure fairness. Those of us who do have the right to vote should not have to go through extra hurdles based on where we live, how we vote, or who we are. The days of poll taxes and other forms of voter suppression are dead so the efforts to bring back those suppression tactics need to die as well. If you're a legal citizen of the United States and you have a photo ID and are registered, you should be able to cast a ballot without any issues.

Now if only the federal government could get its act together and pass some serious legislation to further secure our elections. Hopefully, we'll soon have a president who takes election interference seriously and will take us into the future with real voter reform. The ruling in Georgia makes me somewhat optimistic that we're finally heading in a progressive direction.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/judge-georgia-must-scrap-old-voting-machines-after-2019/2019/08/15/b1c07a5e-bf5f-11e9-a8b0-7ed8a0d5dc5d_story.html?noredirect=on

I actually agree with you on most of this. Baltimore is HEAVILY corrupt and has been for a very long time, even back in the days when Republican Sprio Agnew was involved with city politics there–-which is why he had to be removed as Vice President under Nixon. However, for me, I believe President Trump is a racist for the things he has said and done. His word choices when describing black people, spaces occupied by black people, and nearly everything in connection with black people is universally different than how he describes white people and their communities. West Virginia has a serious poverty problem but I've never heard him refer to West Virginia as "rat-infested" or "incompetently run" or "shithole." There are white-majority places in West Virginia, Mississippi, Ohio, etc. where the communities are just as drug-ridden, crime-ridden, and filled with corrupt politicians as Baltimore and they are never referred to as "infested" with anything by President Trump.

Still, it's an opinion that he's racist and I wish the media would stress that more in their reporting of him instead of instantly labeling him as racist as fact because none of us truly know what's in his heart and mind. Unless he himself says he's a racist, it's an opinion and not a fact. Those of us who believe he is indeed racist hold that opinion because of his words and actions. I heard there is a tape where he refers to a black person using the n-word and if that's true, it will change the opinion/fact dynamic for me. If a tape is released of him referring to a black person with that term then it will be a fact that he is racist. Using that term in context does not make a white person racist; however, calling a black person that term is and always will be racist because of this country's history. Hopefully, the tape is a myth because it would be the end of his presidency if it's true and is released to the media.

I live in South Carolina. She didn't have to lie since we had one of the most racist recent attacks on black church members in the country. Those were real victims of a very deadly hate crime and should have been a warning sign of what was to come post-2015.

Yes, they ruined themselves. I had very high traffic on my primary blog prior to the porn ban and my other blog had over 100,000 followers until they deleted it without even warning me that they were deleting it. I did break their rules by uploading porn clips via a glitch in their system, but they could've given me a chance to remove each upload instead of deleting my page without a warning. Screw them and their new deal with Automattic. I'm leaving my primary blog up until they delete it like they did the other one. I refuse to do their work for them and delete the blog I've operated since December 2012.

Just revisited this thread and I'm so happy that someone wholesome and positive has this Congressional seat now. Lucy McBath is awesome and I hope she is reelected in the 2020 election. I believe Karen Handel is running again and she will be defeated again. The people in Georgia's 6th district reject Handel and the way she embraces Trumpism.  :cheers:

18, still in high school, my brother's best friend  :cheers: His dick was amazing and we later became a secret vers couple for almost 2 years. Now, I mostly bottom :cry2:

I agree that it's okay and could actually benefit the relationship in some instances. I've been in a relationship since 2012 and I've regularly watched porn and so has my partner. We watch it together and separately.

@JohnAllenson:

Hmmm, I mentioned that the Orthodox Church is pushing homophobia but some of the worst are places like Dagestan and Chechnia.

And now people are only talking about how bad Muslims are while Yelena was almost certainly killed by Christians and the Saw website is run by Christians.  To be fair, there's no reports of homophobic violence coming out of the Pagan or Buddhist parts of Russia.

And I have met some of the people who have been brought to Toronto from Chechnia by Rainbow Railroad.

They're participating in whataboutism and deflection by bringing up Muslims. It's typical behavior in this forum and why some of us have limited our participation when it comes to topics like this one. :blind:

Same here. Came to the forum for the first time in a while to see if I was the only one. Good to know it's not just me.

It doesn't say that the dossier is the ONLY reason or even the main reason for why the investigation began. The judges were not lied to, no one can prove they were lied to, they themselves aren't saying they were lied to; therefore, that baseless allegation is along the lines of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Like I said, if the president has nothing to hide then he should let the investigation conclude on its own. If he has the special prosecutor fired then that itself will be an impeachable offense and if the Republicans try to protect him, we'll see 1974 repeated all over again. Not only will they lose this midterm, they won't have majorities in both the House and Senate again until 2038 or later because it happened to them between 1974 and 1994 after the Watergate scandal. It simply isn't about collusion anymore, it's about obstruction and borderline treason at this point. The more he meddles with the investigation the worse it will be. This is 2018 and everyone is leaking. Do you honestly believe the "deep state" can fabricate anything against a sitting president without ANYONE noticing? If you believe that then you're in the cult as well and I feel sorry for you.

@raphjd:

Comey should have been fired long before he was.

I would support impeaching Trump if they find anything real.   The problem with Mueller is his investigation lost credibility when it was filled with corrupt anti-Trump people.

Now lets talk about the things we do know and all those people that should be in prison.

Okay, what we do know for a fact is that making attempts to stop any investigation before it is complete makes the person being investigated look guilty. You can yell until you're blue in the face that the investigation is corrupt, but the majority of Americans believe it is a legitimate investigation. Now you're all alleging that judges appointed by GWB are corrupt and granted Obama's administration illegal warrants based on a dossier EVEN THOUGH DOCUMENTS SHOW THE WARRANT WAS GRANTED BASED ON OTHER METHODS.

https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/02/02/no-internet-nunes-memo-not-show-memo-not-cause-russia-probe/

I refuse to even entertain the idea that the FISA court warrant was obtained by using a dossier that wasn't even in play in July 2016 when the president's campaign officials began being investigated. The investigation began when George Papadopoulos ran his mouth and got caught up. That's what got Carter Page investigated and that's what led to the larger investigation. Go to the Wikipedia page for the dossier and you tell me the time frame of when it was written and when certain people even knew about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Russia_dossier

This president will most likely be removed or forced to step down and if his cult followers want to burn down the country defending him, they will lose just like the South lost during the Civil War. It should not have to get to that but if it does, history shows us how it will end up.

@Shami94:

It is without doubt that the Russian government deliberately acted to influence the 2016 US Presidential election and primaries, firstly against Clinton favouring Sanders and secondly against Clinton favouring Trump.

It is without doubt that in the second case (Clinton vs. Trump), there influence materially effected the result. That is, they got Trump elected.

It is without doubt that the Trump campaign and Trump himself colluded with Russians to bring about that result.

However, Trump will never be impeached. Trump is fully aware that he is guilty of crimes against the state and high treason. He will make every effort to shut down the investigation. That is the reason behind his recent firing of the Secretary of State and attempted instalments to the CIA. However, when he has no more plays left to try to prevent the inevitable, he will simply resign.

The moment #45 has Mueller fired, the process to remove him will begin. If #45 has nothing to hide then he should let the investigation continue. It appears that the investigation is near completion anyway and for all we know, Mueller may not even recommend impeachment based on his findings. Having Mueller fired at this point will be a clear case of obstruction of justice and if Congress fails to impeach and remove him once he makes that move then the 2018 midterms need to be based solely on removing the "corrupt president." The 65 million people who voted against him plus the 71 million eligible people who did not vote DO NOT support this president and enough of them will need to turn out and put a Congress in that will remove him if he has Mueller fired. As we've seen from the off-off-year (Virginia & New Jersey) and special elections (Alabama & Pennsylvania) the numbers are there for Democrats to flip over 60 Republican seats in the House alone. The pressure of a wave election may sway Republicans into removing him this year but if not, he'll definitely be removed in 2019 by a different Congress.

I have personally come to the conclusion that this president needs to resign or be removed immediately because he is compromised by scandals and money ties that foreign countries can use to influence his decisions. This whole thing could've been settled a year ago had he not fired Comey but we're way beyond that now. He's choosing to do this the hard way and history tells us how this whole thing will go. This is an election year and while those on the right want to believe impeachment talk will turn off voters, you're going to be proven wrong when the president goes out of his way to stop the investigation and everyone is left asking the questions, "what is he hiding?" and "why wouldn't he just cooperate if he's innocent?"

@raphjd:

We've had this discussion before.   I hate that Colin Ferguson (Long Island RR shooter) can be legally declared a nut case in the state of New York, but he can go to Virginia and buy a gun.    Anyone legally declared a nut case, anywhere in the US, should not be allowed to buy a gun anywhere in the US.

But where should the line be drawn? Someone could have had a manic episode years ago, declared legally insane, got help and managed to balance their mental instability with reality and pose no threat to society. Should they not be able to purchase a gun to protect themselves because of one manic episode years ago? If we go down that route, my side is going to pounce on and begin the slippery slope and you know that. Today it will be to keep anyone who has been declared legally insane at one point from getting a gun and tomorrow it will be to ban anyone who once got into an argument from getting a gun or anyone whose neighbor tells the government, "I don't think he should have a gun because he once sprayed my house with water during an argument." Once we go down that route, there's no going back and it could very well lead to a change in the 2nd Amendment. If someone is declared legally insane, their current state of mental health needs to be the biggest factor in determining whether they can own a gun or not.

@brianboru72:

Speaking as someone on the outside looking in- I do understand the need for gun ownership for protection and hunting purposes. However, it really feels like it has been taken to an extreme level and needs to be reined in.
For instance- would assault rifles and automatic weapons really be needed for hunting or self-defense?
And as for mental illness- as much as I see your point about responsible, medicated gun owners who have minor mental illness, as a point of public safety, I personally would feel better with stricter restrictions.

In the end, the statistics speak for themselves. Places like Australia and Japan have proven that limiting gun ownership leads to a big drop in gun related deaths and shootings. So really it becomes a question of what is more important- the lives of potential future victims, or the freedom to carry.

We have several historical divides that remain in our society and these historical divides are the main catalysts for our violence and support of gun culture. Sorry to say, those historical divides aren't going to be resolved anytime soon. The "browning" of America contradicts the purpose of America in the eyes of millions; therefore, many feel like they should own guns to protect themselves from the "brown" people. That's just one part of the problem and not even the biggest. You also have deeper conflicts between the haves and the have nots, between conservatives and liberals, between different religions, etc. Inner city violence is magnified when you throw in the fact that most inner cities have gun bans; however, their neighboring states and even neighboring counties do not; meaning hundreds of thousands of criminals are purchasing guns from nearby counties and states with either lax regulations or no regulations at all. It simply would be too much of an effort to make the many, many red conservative counties change their ways and implement better background checks and procedures to stop illegal sales.

That's not to say there are no laws in place, we do have laws in place to stop illegal gun purchases but they're not enforced. We arrest the person after he shoots someone, but not the gun owner who illegally sold the weapon to the criminal. Sometimes it's because the serial numbers have been scratched off but most of the time it's because officers know who will get arrested if they track down the gun seller and it's not common to go around arresting a super majority of white men living in deep red counties outside of urban cities.

@vaylon:

I have a pretty extensive collection of guns and other weapons. Including a few assault rifles and military grade big guns.
Do I hunt with an assault rifle? No. Those are for one kind of prey and one alone. People.
Why do I keep them?
As a gay man, I have carried weapons since I was a kid and have only had to use them a few times in three decades. But I like the security of having a weapon that can take out a group of intruders fairly quick. Be it thugs or some state-sponsored bunch of nazi scum.
But America is in a bad place at the moment.
For being the land of the free? We have more laws on the books restricting freedoms than any other 1st world nation, including Russia and China combined.
We have the largest prison systems than all first world nations combined and it keeps growing by 10% every year.(Thanks to privatized prisons). In the state of Florida, if you go to jail, you are responsible for your daily cost to a prison corporation. After you get out, you will be given a bill for your stay. If you don't pay it? You lose your drivers license and any other valid form of state ID. Still don't pay? You go back to jail and it starts again. This is all in addition to all the money the state and feds give them.
Then we have law enforcement killings. Law enforcement in America kills more people each year than all the other 1st world countries combined. Percentage wise, we are even higher than African countries.
Then there are the murder rates. Americans kill each other at the highest numbers than most the rest of the world combined.
Then we have a justice system that is based on your social status and size of your bank account.  Add to that some states that will give you the same if not worse sentence for a drug possession than to kill someone. If you get charged with rape in most of America, you will spend more time in prison for rape than if you kill and dump the body. Its all in the way the system works. Kidnapping is the same as killing. So whats the incentive to not kill?
Americans have made their choice in what kind of society they want. Its a violent one and by living in it I will stay armed to the teeth.

There are reasons for why this country has become so pro-prison, but I'll save that discussion for another day.

I actually agree with most of what you said here. I don't think there are any other plausible solutions except to buy a gun and if you live in a state that allows conceal or open carry then get the license to do so. Americans have indeed made our choice and it's time to face that reality. We have a Constitution and unless it's changed as it has been before, we have to live by the text of it especially when it comes to the 1st and 2nd Amendments. I've always felt like the first two are our most important Amendments. My friends always push back against me on that; saying the 13th is the most important, but if someone tries to physically enslave me like those disgusting antebellum Southern savages did my ancestors then they'll get a bullet between their eyes. We all have the right to defend ourselves and that would clearly be self-defense.

I have a huge problem with this blanket statement. While I agree that people who are currently or have recently been institutionalized for manic episodes or severe mental breakdowns should not have access to guns until they no longer show those signs, what about the many people in this country who are mentally ill but are medicated and are responsible gun owners? This is the trap of "gun control." I'm a liberal and those on here who have argued with me know that is an undeniable fact, but I do not agree with blanket statements like the one used today by Florida Governor Rick Scott. The 2nd Amendment gives everyone the right to own guns and you only lose that right if you commit a violent crime and serve time in prison for that felony. Those with felonies should not be able to get guns but they do because no one enforces the laws on the books. There are literally THOUSANDS of laws in place that are specifically designed to stop the wrong people from getting guns yet they are not being enforced properly.

My dad is a legal gun owner. He had to go through background checks to obtain the multiple guns he owns and had to get a license to carry his pistol outside of his home. He had to do that because of LAWS ALREADY IN PLACE. Why are some people being held to that standard but others aren't? That's the conversation we need to have because "gun control" is not the answer and is unrealistic to accomplish. The moment we begin naming classes of people who cannot own guns (outside of convicted criminals) is the moment we begin the slippery slope into naming larger classes of people who cannot own guns. My partner, also a legal gun owner, is responsible and does not show off his gun in public or threaten people with it. If we were to one day find out he's bipolar and needs to be put on medication, I wouldn't want him to lose his right to own a gun.

I think people are jumping to too many conclusions because of these mass shooting incidents and are not realizing that the Constitution clearly defines this issue. We all have the right to bear arms and unless someone has committed a felony and has served prison time for that felony, that person has the right to own a gun legally. If people want to crack down on gun violence, then crack down on the illegal purchasing of weapons. If people want to focus on the mentally ill, then fund health centers that deal with mental illness instead of slashing their support from state budgets. You can address the mentally ill separate from infringing on the rights of the people to own guns.

Nope, he lost and your prediction was 100% wrong. The people of Alabama decided they did NOT want a pedophile representing them and the exit polling proves #45 is underwater in the state of Alabama just like in many, many other states. Roy Moore ran on the MAGA message and he lost, so that "he didn't embrace Trumpism" excuse doesn't apply here. Trumpism lost in deep red Alabama tonight just like it lost in Virginia last month. #45 partially caused two elections to go another way; he caused Luther Strange to lose the primary with his endorsement and now Roy Moore has lost Jeff Sessions' senate seat after the president got involved. Doug Jones will hold the seat until January 2021, and that's if he doesn't somehow win a full six year senate term. If this doesn't prove that a president with 32% approval has absolutely no political capital, then I don't know what will. Alabama is a red state, but not red enough to elect a vile racist, homophobic pedophile like Roy Moore; and especially not when an unpopular president weighs in on the election.

And with that said, goodnight.  :cheers: