Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Craig Lamson]

If anyone should reply to this very long post, please don't quote the entire thing. Quote the relevant part or a portion of it. It clutters up the board when entire long posts are quoted.

Clearly others disagree with your assessment as the long link I posted the last time we had this discussion offered, which iirc was written by a constitutional law scholar.

Now maybe you stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I’ll take the expert over your opinion.   

[digitaldog]

First you write (copy and paste):

But it was Hillary who complained for four years that she was "robbed".

Then, when asked to backup what you wrote, we are told:

Saying you "wuz robbed" is an expression.  I'm sure you remember how Hillary complained that she lost because of Comey's reports that he should not have released about her emails and servers right before the election.   

So she didn't say it/complained as you write, for four years no less!
Like your idea that all prints are 300DPI, it is BS made up and passed along, and until you are pushed to provide proof of post, we are supposed to accept your writings for anything other than misinformation and utter BS.
Again, if you're going to post stuff, about prints or photography or what people said, please base them on facts and data, not what you misunderstand and believe. Your audience might take your writings seriously which I assume (and I hate to assume), you want your readers to do.

[chez]

First you write (copy and paste):Then, when asked to backup what you wrote, we are told:So she didn't say it/complained as you write, for four years no less!
Like your idea that all prints are 300DPI, it is BS made up and passed along, and until you are pushed to provide proof of post, we are supposed to accept your writings for anything other than misinformation and utter BS.
Again, if you're going to post stuff, about prints or photography or what people said, please base them on facts and data, not what you misunderstand and believe. Your audience might take your writings seriously which I assume (and I hate to assume), you want your readers to do.

Hey, if it works for Trump ( BS with no facts to backup anything ), why not for Alan?

[faberryman]

I’ll ask again, does anyone besides Alan care if Hillary was a poor loser? It was four years ago. Who cares? Alan is obsessed with Hillary. Maybe he will tell us all again how she stole the White House china 20 years ago, and claim that Trump is better because he didn’t steal the White House china (yet). As if Hillary being a poor loser is an excuse for Trump being a poor loser. They are both despicable human beings. Let Trump continue his lawsuits as he is entitled. He'll be gone soon, though not soon enough.

[digitaldog]

He is kind of obsessed with Hillary while ignoring the National Security impact of Trump dragging his feet in a smooth power transfer as was seen and reported in 2000 and its effect on 9/11. Like Trump causes no harm on democracy too. Head in sand.
Alan:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/4963229/charles-j-sykes-where-the-right-went-wrong/%3famp=true

[TechTalk]

Clearly others disagree with your assessment as the long link I posted the last time we had this discussion offered, which iirc was written by a constitutional law scholar.

The link that you posted last time is a good read. I'm not sure that you read it very carefully as it isn't in conflict with anything that I wrote then or now.

The article that you linked—which was written a year ago—is really quite prescient as it accurately predicts what we're seeing now in terms of Trump's behavior before and after the election. It's pretty well written and goes into a fair amount of detail. I would encourage you to read it.

https://lawecommons.luc.edu/An Exercise in Election Risk Assessment and Management

Included in the article are some hypothetical scenarios which include the PA State Legislature ignoring all of the Constitutional and legal issues that I posted today and sending their own slate of electors to the U.S. Senate to be counted, albeit without the required governor’s certificate of ascertainment. That's extremely unlikely for the reasons that I stated earlier today; but I never said that they couldn't attempt it. That would trigger an entirely different discussion of the relative Federal laws that cover that contingency.

In anything that I've posted before or now on the subject, I've posted what the actual text says in the applicable Federal and State Constitutions and laws. The opinion that I've expressed is that it would be monumentally difficult to achieve the desired result thru those means. It would be the equivalent of pushing a bolder up a mountain; kind of like getting facts thru to people that won't even attempt to understand them and instead rely on simplistic counterfactual argument and assertion ad nauseam.

Now maybe you stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night

I hardly slept last night. Maybe I should try your suggestion.

I’ll take the expert over your opinion.   

Experts should be chosen carefully. Hope you find one that suits you.

[faberryman]

Team Trump won one today. I don't know if there will be an appeal. I don't know how many ballots are affected, or the number of votes Biden and Trump will each be deprived of. I am somewhat surprised by the ruling and would like to read the legal briefs to determine if an estoppel argument was made.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pennsylvania-court-secretary-of-state-changed-deadline

[TechTalk]

The number of ballots affected would be too small to matter in the final result. It wouldn't surprise me either way if the ruling is appealed or left unchallenged.

[Alan Klein]

First you write (copy and paste):Then, when asked to backup what you wrote, we are told:So she didn't say it/complained as you write, for four years no less!
Like your idea that all prints are 300DPI, it is BS made up and passed along, and until you are pushed to provide proof of post, we are supposed to accept your writings for anything other than misinformation and utter BS.
Again, if you're going to post stuff, about prints or photography or what people said, please base them on facts and data, not what you misunderstand and believe. Your audience might take your writings seriously which I assume (and I hate to assume), you want your readers to do.

She "wuz robbed". That's figurative speech. An idiom.  Only politicians read idioms as anything but figurative speech.   You're playing word games.  She called Trump an illegitimate President just last year.  Sounds like she "wuz robbed" to me.     

we wuz robbed
Also, we was robbed or we were robbed. We were cheated out of a victory; we were tricked or outsmarted. For example, That ball was inside the lines-we wuz robbed! This expression, with its attempt to render nonstandard speech, has been attributed to fight manager Joe Jacobs (1896-1940), who uttered it on June 21, 1932, after his client, Max Schmeling, had clearly out-boxed Jack Sharkey, only to have the heavy-weight title awarded to Sharkey. It is still used, most often in a sports context.

[digitaldog]

The number of ballots affected would be too small to matter in the final result. It wouldn't surprise me either way if the ruling is appealed or left unchallenged.

Exactly. It’s game over in Pennsylvania. Plus all trumps lawyers were able to do was keep ballots from both sides from being counted.

[Alan Klein]

Maybe this will help

What is figurative speech?
A figure of speech is a word or phrase that possesses a separate meaning from its literal definition. It can be a metaphor or simile, designed to make a comparison. It can be the repetition of alliteration or the exaggeration of hyperbole to provide a dramatic effect.

[kers]

Team Trump won one today. I don't know if there will be an appeal. I don't know how many ballots are affected, or the number of votes Biden and Trump will each be deprived of. I am somewhat surprised by the ruling and would like to read the legal briefs to determine if an estoppel argument was made.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pennsylvania-court-secretary-of-state-changed-deadline

Is this the fraud they were looking for?

[Craig Lamson]

The link that you posted last time is a good read. I'm not sure that you read it very carefully as it isn't in conflict with anything that I wrote then or now.

The article that you linked—which was written a year ago—is really quite prescient as it accurately predicts what we're seeing now in terms of Trump's behavior before and after the election. It's pretty well written and goes into a fair amount of detail. I would encourage you to read it.

https://lawecommons.luc.edu/An Exercise in Election Risk Assessment and Management

Included in the article are some hypothetical scenarios which include the PA State Legislature ignoring all of the Constitutional and legal issues that I posted today and sending their own slate of electors to the U.S. Senate to be counted, albeit without the required governor’s certificate of ascertainment. That's extremely unlikely for the reasons that I stated earlier today; but I never said that they couldn't attempt it. That would trigger an entirely different discussion of the relative Federal laws that cover that contingency.

In anything that I've posted before or now on the subject, I've posted what the actual text says in the applicable Federal and State Constitutions and laws. The opinion that I've expressed is that it would be monumentally difficult to achieve the desired result thru those means. It would be the equivalent of pushing a bolder up a mountain; kind of like getting facts thru to people that won't even attempt to understand them and instead rely on simplistic counterfactual argument and assertion ad nauseam.

I hardly slept last night. Maybe I should try your suggestion.

Experts should be chosen carefully. Hope you find one that suits you.

As we ended last time it was your opinion that courts would never side with the Penn Legislature.  As I said at the time others disagree.  I’m quite happy with that state of affairs.

[digitaldog]

Maybe this will help

What is figurative speech?
A figure of speech is a word or phrase that possesses a separate meaning from its literal definition. It can be a metaphor or simile, designed to make a comparison. It can be the repetition of alliteration or the exaggeration of hyperbole to provide a dramatic effect.

Maybe this will help. You were caught spewing bullshit (print DPI and about Hillary) please stop from doing so if you want others to take you seriously.

[faberryman]

She "wuz robbed". That's figurative speech. An idiom.  Only politicians read idioms as anything but figurative speech.   You're playing word games.  She called Trump an illegitimate President just last year.  Sounds like she "wuz robbed" to me.

Hillary obsession.

[Craig Lamson]

The number of ballots affected would be too small to matter in the final result. It wouldn't surprise me either way if the ruling is appealed or left unchallenged.

It’s a field goal in the first quarter. Lots of game left to play. 

[faberryman]

I don't know how I missed the Million MAGA March in Washington D.C. on Saturday. It will be interesting to see who and how many attend.

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/525673-mcenany-expects-turnout-to-be-quite-large-at-million-maga-march

[LesPalenik]

Rounding the corner - 150K new infections just in US today. Some of them as a result of the MAGA marches. At this rate, we can expect 1 million new cases per week.

[digitaldog]

Rounding the corner - 150K new infections just in US today. Some of them as a result of the MAGA marches. At this rate, we can expect 1 million new cases per week.

Alan will tell you, 'Rounding the corner' was just a figure of speech. 
Shocking is there are more than 60 thousand Covid-sick in the hospitals in the US, and lots more beds (PPEs, care workers) we don't have!

[texshooter]

It’s a field goal in the first quarter. Lots of game left to play.

I love surprise endings.