Search results

So, anyone with questions should be given access to machines? The policy is to replace machines that are accessed by outside parties to prevent future anomalies. This is very expensive. There are laws and rules about recounts. And, there are deadlines. All long passed.

Read the entire Amendment. Its not long. Note the conditional clause.

True - the implication is right to arms cannot be infringed arbitrarily ie for no good reason.

You state this like I haven't qualified my general statement. I did. You seem to reject improvement if there is no guarantee of perfection. Maybe stop doing that.

That qualifies as a dumb answer. But, thank you for actually engaging in a dialogue. Monologues can be so tedious. You would acknowledge that our Constitutional rights to free speech, assembly, and even religion can be regulated, right? Under particular circumstances for good reason, right...

Stop signs do not stop cars from rolling right through the intersection. Should we remove them?

So, you are here to declare things rather than discuss them. Supporting conclusions is a waste of time for you when you can just pronounce the truth for us. What would my role be? Do you seek unearned praise. You will get none from me.

It appears you will lose sight of rationality in the face of tribalism, although you understand the overarching dilemma.

So, 60 hearings on the election do not count? Probable cause is needed to have a trial. Trump's surrogates could no produce plausible evidence. Why would judges that Trump appointed, deny further action? Spoiler Alert: the cases had no merit.

I think I understand why you refuse to answer the hypothetical.

I find the hands up scenario plausible, and if some witnesses described it that way, I would go with it tentatively. It appears it was not true in that particular killing. Have you seen the video of the guy shot who is just running away from police (about a nonviolent warrant).

If the government nudges its citizens to take a course of action that is actually the most reasonable, do you suggest doing the opposite to show your freedom and independence?

Taking a story at face value isn't lying. Retractions usually never are placed in a position as prominent as the original story. That is the nature of capitalism. Retractions do not increase ratings. Do you think Smollette was part of a conspiracy that the media knowingly participated in?

Trump had sixty hearings on the matter. Only one went beyond preliminary issues because the cases were so weak.

Yes, there is a subset of people who would not be infected either way. There is also a subset who will not be infected who would have been and a subset who will not die who would have died. We vaccinate for the community in solidarity even when the benefit to self is negligible. What would...

If you are young and do not get the vaccine or practice safe social interactions, you have a greater chance of infecting someone who infects someone who will die because of it.

Democratic votes did tend to increase in the days following elections but it is because of hanging chads, butterfly ballots, late counts of mail-in ballots, and irregularities related to lowered access to polling stations.

Do you think it smart to reject and an improved condition / reduced risk because it is not absolute in favor of continued higher risk?

The point is Gore would have won (if he forced a recount on the total state of Florida) but he did not meet the deadline. So, to avoid degrading democracy, he conceded. Contrast that with Trump who has no substantial grounds for recounts. Sour grapes. He and you are bigger whiners than Gore...

True, but getting the antibodies naturally carries the risk of complications of Covid. If only there were a way to get antibodies without getting covid and bearing the higher risk!