Jump to content

Can They Count?


Hagar

Recommended Posts

Texas, 269,000 square miles - Arizona 116,000.  That’s well,over two times bigger for you liberals who are mathematically challenged.

Texas population 29,000,000 - Arizona 7,000,000.  That’s over four times more people.

So please tell me how by Wednesday morning Texas has all the votes counted and in Arizona, they’re still taking off their socks to use their toes to count.  Four days later.  Could it be another functionally illiterate Democratic Governor?  Or could there be something more Machiavellian coming into play?  How many more votes do we need?  Get another box of blanks.  Something’s rotten in Santa Fe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hagar said:

Texas, 269,000 square miles - Arizona 116,000.  That’s well,over two times bigger for you liberals who are mathematically challenged.

Texas population 29,000,000 - Arizona 7,000,000.  That’s over four times more people.

So please tell me how by Wednesday morning Texas has all the votes counted and in Arizona, they’re still taking off their socks to use their toes to count.  Four days later.  Could it be another functionally illiterate Democratic Governor?  Or could there be something more Machiavellian coming into play?  How many more votes do we need?  Get another box of blanks.  Something’s rotten in Santa Fe.

Hagar, I've been wondering the same thing.  Is this the sign of cheating?  I mean what else could it be.  Florida had their count on time as did Texas.  Nevada is in the same boat.   Something awfully fishy!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hagar said:

Texas, 269,000 square miles - Arizona 116,000.  That’s well,over two times bigger for you liberals who are mathematically challenged.

Texas population 29,000,000 - Arizona 7,000,000.  That’s over four times more people.

So please tell me how by Wednesday morning Texas has all the votes counted and in Arizona, they’re still taking off their socks to use their toes to count.  Four days later.  Could it be another functionally illiterate Democratic Governor?  Or could there be something more Machiavellian coming into play?  How many more votes do we need?  Get another box of blanks.  Something’s rotten in Santa Fe.

It doesn’t even raise an eyebrow with some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reagan said:

Hagar, I've been wondering the same thing.  Is this the sign of cheating?  I mean what else could it be.  Florida had their count on time as did Texas.  Nevada is in the same boat.   Something awfully fishy!  

In Arizona I think that they cannot start counting mail in ballots until the day of the election  I don't think it is like that in Texas 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big girl said:

In Arizona I think that they cannot start counting mail in ballots until the day of the election  I don't think it is like that in Texas 

You wonder why that is?  Why would they do that?  I can’t think of but one reason and it’s not a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Hagar said:

You wonder why that is?  Why would they do that?  I can’t think of but one reason and it’s not a good one.

Kari Lake said she gets elected one of the first things she's going to do if take care of their voting system.  She understands that it should take so long.  If it's built this way, then it needs to be fixed.  I say model it after Texas and/or Florida.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Kari Lake said she gets elected one of the first things she's going to do if take care of their voting system.  She understands that it should take so long.  If it's built this way, then it needs to be fixed.  I say model it after Texas and/or Florida.  

Amen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...