Part the crowd storming the Capitol, on exactly the day power is being transitioned, made threats to murder the one person who could give that power back, but earlier refused to.
Haha. What the. You used an example of women with babies strapped to them in comparison with dudes that stormed the Capitol, killed a cop, looted, all while encouraged by the outgoing president?
> The reality is none of them resulted in any consequences for the activists
The article you linked to has the title: 'Nearly 600 protesters at Women's March arrested on Capitol Hill'
I mean, if you're gonna do false equivalencies, maybe make some effort, instead of going with the spewing hose approach.
How many is that? I can't even count. More than 50, less than 100? Versus 10, possibly way less, depending on what kind of comparisons one wants to draw? [1]
Doesn't this point exactly to the significance of what happened on the 6th? Race riots have been happening in the United States for a hundred some years. They are obviously not significant in achieving the goals of the rioters. Meanwhile the storming of seats of power by an ousted leaders' supporters has the potential to change history. The former is a passing event, the latter is a rare event with some potential to change global history.
> It doesn't matter whether the containers were "hidden"
Then don't write hidden? Just write 'ballots'. Or write 'ballots that were sealed because the counting stopped, but then re-opened when the counting resumed'.
> You didn't read the other sources I linked, which contain sworn statements from two observers, as well as articles published by several news stations stating that observers (and news) were told to go home because they were done for the night.
Yes. Thats what the video in the tweet said. Thats basically what I wrote when I described what the video said.
> You aren't interested in holding a dicussion, just labelling. Typical anti-intellectualism coming from the political party that won the election.
The source that you cited contradicted your claim of 'hidden ballots'. You are a liar.
> Georgia election officials intentionally deceived journalists and (Republican) observers into leaving a vote-counting event by lying to them and telling them that they were done for the night, then pulling out hidden containers of ballots and counting them[1]
This is a joke, right? Did you even watch the video from the tweet you're citing? The video states that ballots were placed in containers because counters thought they were finished for the night. People start going home. Phone call comes in saying keep counting. They take out those containers and start counting again. Observers return an hour later.
These are not 'hidden containers'. You are a liar and a seditionist.
You can go to /r/conservative right now, and write any crap you want. You're conflating the notion of deplatforming with the notion of a place having a certain political leaning.
I can go comment liberal ideas on Breitbart and immediately be shouted down as a commie CCP bootlicker and be blocked. I guess by your logic that means liberals are getting deplatformed too!
Deplatformed conservatives eh? This has got to be one of the oldest conservative tropes.
FoxNews screams conservatives have no voice, while patting themselves on the back for being the most watched cable channel. [1] Rush Limbaugh is the most listened to Radio show in the United States. [2]
Conservatives scream they have no platform on Facebook, yet the top 10 shared links of Facebook are almost exclusively conservative. [3], and you can observe this trend holding over time.
Conservatives have plenty of other platforms to go to. No one is deplatforming conservatives on 4chan, or Parler, or hell, even Reddit.
The 'deplatformed' narrative is a manufactured, and used to drive a persecution complex. Its not real, and used to rile the base.
> So when confronted with an extremely implausible voter turnout, people say the real turnout is votes/total eligible voters... which is very different than every other time I’ve experienced voter turn out
Not sure how whatever conjured view of voter turnout YOU have is relevant. You can go to https://elections.wi.gov/elections-voting/statistics/turnout
grab `Voter Turnout Partisan-NonPartisan Through August 2020.xlsx` and see that turnout percentage is computed as `number of votes cast` / `voting age population`.
Which puts Wisconsin turnout at 72.3% [1]
We were talking about ballot rejection, and you start going off about "shocking" voter turnout statistics because you had no retort to the rejection stuff. Either you have an axe to grind or you are a troll. Or maybe you're a masked free speech crusader. The hero we deserve. But I kind of doubt that.
I remember being on MDMA with my girlfriend, her talking to me about us, our relationship, and me thinking how little I care about any of this. We broke up within 6 months. YMMV indeed. Maybe molly is just molly.
> How do we have a higher mail in ballot rejection rate in non-pandemic times than we do in pandemic times?
I mean, here's an explanation for a specific case
> According to the nonprofit, nonpartisan organisation Ballotpedia, Georgia rejected 6.42% of mail-in ballots in total in the 2016 general election and 3.10% in total in the 2018 midterm (here). These totals include rejections because of signatures, but also include, for example, ballots received late or past deadlines, problems with return materials or a voter having already voted in person.
> It may be that Trump was referring to the 0.15% of ballots specifically rejected for "missing or non-matching signatures" when saying that ballots rejected in 2020 were "almost zero", but this percentage is consistent with past years. The higher percentage he mentions for past years is likely based off the total rejected ballots (here) which can not be compared with 2020, as this information is not available.
But, one of the reasons for the fires is that due to lack of housing in cities, populations have been pushed more and more into wilderness areas, preventing proper forest management and exposing themselves to greater risks of fires.
Not to mention the second order effects of less density: more driving, more C02, more warming... more fires.
Is that an event you can agree happened?