VOTE! Election thread

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

What will be the results of todays vote?

  • Trump wins big

    Votes: 11 14.1%
  • Trump wins small

    Votes: 12 15.4%
  • No decision by tomorrow morning

    Votes: 29 37.2%
  • Biden wins small

    Votes: 17 21.8%
  • Biden wins big

    Votes: 9 11.5%

  • Total voters
    78
Status
Not open for further replies.

PF5

Cowboy
Jan 3, 2014
862
262
613
They tried official avenues. The tea didn't belong to the government, it was goods for sale. They were protesting the tax on the tea.
They actually paid the ship merchant back for the tea AND the lock they broke.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
where do u get your info?! Benjamin Franklin offered to pay for tea, but they refused. Britain passed the Coercive 'Intolerable' Acts to make colonists pay for tea, and closed Boston Harbor until the tea was paid for.. led to the First Continental Congress...
 

PF5

Cowboy
Jan 3, 2014
862
262
613
US election: Trump signals he is prepared to leave White House
Asked on Thursday whether he would agree to leave the White House if he lost the electoral college vote, he said: "Certainly I will, certainly I will and you know that."
However, he went on to say that "if they do [elect Joe Biden], they made a mistake", and suggested he may never accept defeat.
"It's going to be a very hard thing to concede because we know there was massive fraud," he said, an allegation he has stood by without offering proof.
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
17,478
10,528
1,743
40
Fairmont, MN
US election: Trump signals he is prepared to leave White House
Asked on Thursday whether he would agree to leave the White House if he lost the electoral college vote, he said: "Certainly I will, certainly I will and you know that."
However, he went on to say that "if they do [elect Joe Biden], they made a mistake", and suggested he may never accept defeat.
"It's going to be a very hard thing to concede because we know there was massive fraud," he said, an allegation he has stood by without offering proof.

Yes yes, this is normal for American politics. I remember in the previous administrations when the Bush and Obama houses did everything they could to prevent a partisan change of power.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
10,511
4,173
743
where do u get your info?! Benjamin Franklin offered to pay for tea, but they refused. Britain passed the Coercive 'Intolerable' Acts to make colonists pay for tea, and closed Boston Harbor until the tea was paid for.. led to the First Continental Congress...
OK, so they offered. Still. I doubt you'll see anyone offer to pay for this statue:

https://twitter.com/TheSunUS/status/1332091922488373250?s=20
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
I didn't realize belief in the rule of law was my feeling. It's not an overriding premise for everyone because I think it, it's because it's the law. I thought that was pretty common ground.
That logic didn't work at Nuremberg now, did it? I guess rule of law is more important than stopping genocide to the "common ground" folks. I see you already ignored the breaking of the law that was a big part of the folklore of the starting of our great nation. You stay concrete, it suits you. I'll keep looking at situations and analyzing each one, that suits me.

And, likewise, I thought getting rid of monuments to racism would be common ground. I thought not celebrating teens illegally patrolling the streets and killing people would be pretty common ground. I thought condemning a person lying about our system of democracy to steal an election would bee pretty common ground. I like this game. I'll start making "this is common ground" statements that butcher and/or strawman other people's opinions to demean other opinions and make me feel like I am above them. It's fun!
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
So you think it's ok to pull down and destroy a statue just because a mob decided to?

/QUOTE]
already answered:
I'm not for roving bands of people creating wanton destruction. But, sometimes the law does not protect the will of the people, it hamstrings it because it is controlled by the powerful few. This is a case by case basis sort of thing.

Yawn.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
So you are comparing the Boston Tea Party with a group of people in Sacramento toppling a statue of a 18th century Roman Catholic priest? :lol:
Pleeezze. To quote Biden, “c’mon man”.
So, when that happened do you think the Tories thought it was fine and dandy?

And, your argument is SO WEAK that despite me repeatedly saying something you continue to lie about it. Where exactly did I mention a priest or say anything about thinking that a statue of a priest should be pulled down. Honestly, are you that dense that you can't get what I am saying, or is your argument so weak that you need to make up stuff to say? IT is like me saying, "So, you want White Supremacy moments everywhere? Herp Derp! I don't consider you much of a thinker, but you are better than this complete waste of space.

Here, maybe if I BOLD it you can see it a third time before arguing against what you hope to read instead of what I write:

So you 100% disagree with me saying, “I'm not for roving bands of people creating wanton destruction.” I guess that makes you in favor of roving bands which, interestingly, is also what you complained about.

But, in matters of race, I’m often quite content with you disagreeing 100% with me so don’t worry about it, we can leave it as is.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
They tried official avenues. The tea didn't belong to the government, it was goods for sale. They were protesting the tax on the tea.
They actually paid the ship merchant back for the tea AND the lock they broke.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
So, if a statute to racism was agreed by a city council to stay in place by requesting the removal by official avenues, then it is OK to tear down as long as it isn't at the expense of the city.

Gotcha. I am fine with that.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
And don't forget the statue of the Dutch guy that helped slaves. They tore down his statue too.

They also had a statue taken down that was paid for by freed slaves because it hurt someone's feelings. Only because they didn't educate themselves as to the meaning of the statue and it's history.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
And again, for the FOURTH time I have written this: "I'm not for roving bands of people creating wanton destruction."

More herp derp.

What if everything you posted, I ignored and just responded with examples of dead racists who have statues? Even if you said, "I am fine with removing statues of actual racists" (which I haven't seen you write but we will pretend you said that instead of the "erasing history" rationalization). Now, wouldn't you think I was either clueless or simply a huge jerk if I still gave the same examples in response to the very posts in which you said it?
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,338
2,006
1,743
So, when that happened do you think the Tories thought it was fine and dandy?

And, your argument is SO WEAK that despite me repeatedly saying something you continue to lie about it. Where exactly did I mention a priest or say anything about thinking that a statue of a priest should be pulled down. Honestly, are you that dense that you can't get what I am saying, or is your argument so weak that you need to make up stuff to say? IT is like me saying, "So, you want White Supremacy moments everywhere? Herp Derp! I don't consider you much of a thinker, but you are better than this complete waste of space.

Here, maybe if I BOLD it you can see it a third time before arguing against what you hope to read instead of what I write:
Did you forget you made this statement below..just yesterday??

steross said:
I'm not sure I agree on the "within the law" part. Law is not always just. I'm not for roving bands of people creating wanton destruction. But, sometimes the law does not protect the will of the people, it hamstrings it because it is controlled by the powerful few. This is a case by case basis sort of thing.
 

PF5

Cowboy
Jan 3, 2014
862
262
613
OK, so they offered. Still. I doubt you'll see anyone offer to pay for this statue:

https://twitter.com/TheSunUS/status/1332091922488373250?s=20
"they" didn't...one person did (Ben)...and Boston Tea Party is a bit different than a few people vandalizing...I hope these three people ARE forced to pay for it, if found guilty...
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
Did you forget you made this statement below..just yesterday??

steross said:
I'm not sure I agree on the "within the law" part. Law is not always just. I'm not for roving bands of people creating wanton destruction. But, sometimes the law does not protect the will of the people, it hamstrings it because it is controlled by the powerful few. This is a case by case basis sort of thing.
You seriously have no reading comprehension. None. You are like debating with a child who only hears what he wants to hear. Bolded and now underlined. You ignore the critical words like "not always" and "sometimes." Three of the five sentences you quote counter your random point about some priest statue yet you are still too clueless to get it. Such a concrete thinker. Your brain just can't do more than "black/white" analysis. All things good/bad. Never any gray. It is clearly jus beyond your capacity.

These subject with you are like:
ME: It is supposed to rain today.
YOU: NO, you are WRONG! It is not raining. How can you say such things when we all know it isn't raining?
ME: Well, I said it might rain today. That doesn't mean all rain all day.
YOU: You said rain today. You can't even make a valid argument. Blah, Blah. Blah.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,338
2,006
1,743
You seriously have no reading comprehension. None. You are like debating with a child who only hears what he wants to hear. Bolded and now underlined. You ignore the critical words like "not always" and "sometimes." Three of the five sentences you quote counter your random point about some priest statue yet you are still too clueless to get it. Such a concrete thinker. Your brain just can't do more than "black/white" analysis. All things good/bad. Never any gray. It is clearly jus beyond your capacity.

These subject with you are like:
ME: It is supposed to rain today.
YOU: NO, you are WRONG! It is not raining. How can you say such things when we all know it isn't raining?
ME: Well, I said it might rain today. That doesn't mean all rain all day.
YOU: You said rain today. You can't even make a valid argument. Blah, Blah. Blah.
Are you incapable of admitting you may have been in error? Perhaps you didn’t mean what you typed, but just own it. Communicating via a thread sometimes gets lost in translation, just say ...that’s not what I meant.

With your multiple arguments with differing posters. Maybe you need to start thinking ... what is the common denominator.
 
Last edited:

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,307
32,010
1,743
oklahoma city
Are you incapable of admitting you may have been in error? Perhaps you didn’t mean what you typed, but just own it. Communicating via a thread sometimes gets lost in translation, just say ...that’s not what I meant.

With your multiple arguments with differing posters. Maybe you need to start thinking ... what is the common denominator.
If I make an error, I admit it. I didn't. It has been pointed out to you numerous times and you just continue to ignore the obvious. You want me to be saying "Tear down any statue you want when you want." But, that is not what I said. But, that doesn't stop you from relentlessly arguing against the strawman, as usual. I used to think it was just disingenuous. But I now realize you just do not have the ability to think beyond "for it/against it." Most problems are more complex than good/bad.

The common denominator is this is a board filled with trumpies (most of who show they are with their words then deny it.) If I was debating that OU sucks with three different OU t-shirt fans I would not be worried that maybe I am wrong. The common denominator is that they are t-shirt fans so rationalize their thoughts around that.
 

PF5

Cowboy
Jan 3, 2014
862
262
613
If I make an error, I admit it. I didn't. It has been pointed out to you numerous times and you just continue to ignore the obvious. You want me to be saying "Tear down any statue you want when you want." But, that is not what I said. But, that doesn't stop you from relentlessly arguing against the strawman, as usual. I used to think it was just disingenuous. But I now realize you just do not have the ability to think beyond "for it/against it." Most problems are more complex than good/bad.

The common denominator is this is a board filled with trumpies (most of who show they are with their words then deny it.) If I was debating that OU sucks with three different OU t-shirt fans I would not be worried that maybe I am wrong. The common denominator is that they are t-shirt fans so rationalize their thoughts around that.
sometimes it's better just to walk away...
tenor (1).gif
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,292
17,930
1,743
He admitted guilt. I don't really care about the pardon but he admitted that he committed a felony.

I don't understand how you can spin it into he was railroaded when he confessed that he committed a felony.

Flynn rescinded his guilty plea, after which based on questionable actions of FBI the justice department dropped all charges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.