US Politics Thread 2021-24

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by mapuc

I've been looking in my crystal ball and I see two outcome on Tuesday 5th Nov. In some vision Harris win with a short margine and in others Trump win with a landslide.

Markus

It will be a tight race, but polling shows Trump far better off in the same battle ground states then he was with Biden. IMO it will come down to the state of PA calling the win. WI and MI will not play a part. Trump will take PA.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

It will be a tight race, but polling shows Trump far better off in the same battle ground states then he was with Biden. IMO it will come down to the state of PA calling the win. WI and MI will not play a part. Trump will take PA.

A tight race-Made me remember the battle between Gore and Bush Snr. Where the Florida result was sent to a court.

Markus

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by mapuc

A tight race-Made me remember the battle between Gore and Bush Snr. Where the Florida result was sent to a court.

Markus

Hanging chad.

[AVGWarhawk]

Great job Dominion. Another programming problem nationwide. One would think they would get their crap together after the last election. Nope, to busy sueing anyone they can.

[Catfish]

It is like a Bollywood film and seeing the audience is taking it all serious.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Great job Dominion. Another programming problem nationwide. One would think they would get their crap together after the last election. Nope, to busy sueing anyone they can.

And winning.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

And winning.

Not to worry. Forthcoming suits with their faulty programming is in the horizon. You see, FAUX news just may have been right....

I love the blind eye you have for a voting system that is still broken after 4 years. But that is the Democratic way afterall. ��

[Jimbuna]

Trump Files $10 Billion Lawsuit Against CBS News Over Deceptive Editing in Harris’ ‘60 Minutes’ Interview

Former President Donald Trump has initiated a $10 billion lawsuit against CBS News, alleging the network engaged in "deceptive editing" during Vice President Kamala Harris' interview on 60 Minutes. This legal action, filed on Thursday, claims that CBS's actions were aimed at interfering with the electoral process, particularly as the contentious 2024 Presidential Election approaches.

Allegations of Bias and Distortion
Donald Trump's attorneys assert that the complaint stems from what they describe as "CBS's biased and unlawful actions regarding election and voter interference." They argue that the network's editing practices significantly distorted the content of the interview, intending to "confuse, mislead, and deceive the public." According to the lawsuit, such actions have caused "immense harm" to Trump, his campaign, and his supporters across the nation.

As the election draws closer, Donald Trump's legal team contends that the alterations in the interview were designed to favor the Democratic Party, particularly given Trump's current lead in the polls. The lawsuit emphasizes the importance of transparent media coverage, asserting that "media outlets have a duty to faithfully convey the truth of events" rather than manipulate content to misrepresent candidates.

Demands for Transparency
Following the broadcast of the 60 Minutes interview, Trump's lawyers requested CBS to disclose the complete transcript, noting that the segment presented two differing responses from Kamala Harris to the same inquiry. They also asked CBS to retain all documents and communications related to the interview, anticipating a possible legal dispute. CBS, however, declined to release the full transcript, citing First Amendment protections, and maintained that the interview was not altered in a misleading manner.

Contentions Over Editing
The lawsuit specifically cites an exchange between Harris and 60 Minutes correspondent Bill Whitaker. In a preview clip that was broadcast on "Face the Nation," Kamala Harris was questioned regarding the apparent lack of attentiveness from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu towards the United States.

"Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region."

Kamala Harris faced ridicule from conservatives for providing an extensive and convoluted response to Whitaker. However, when the same question was posed the next evening during the primetime election special, the vice president delivered a more concise and targeted answer. "We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end."

Implications for Media Integrity
The lawsuit highlights broader concerns regarding media integrity and the portrayal of political figures. Donald Trump's legal team emphasizes that the editing of the interview led to public confusion about Kamala Harris's competence, suggesting that the manipulation of her responses creates an unfair narrative around her capabilities as a candidate.

The implications of this lawsuit extend beyond Trump and Harris, touching on the media's role in shaping public perception during a pivotal election. As Trump seeks a jury trial and a minimum of $10 billion in damages, the case raises critical questions about accountability in journalism and the responsibilities of news organizations to present truthful and unbiased coverage.
https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2024/...tes-interview/

[u crank]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I love the blind eye you have for a voting system that is still broken after 4 years. But that is the Democratic way afterall. 😂

As I said in a previous post, there seems to be only one reason why people would be against safe and secure elections, mainly proving citizenship. I would like to get an explanation as to why anyone would be against this. Is there is a valid reason for opposing voter ID? And I would say that if Democrats believed that people were illegally voting for the GOP things would probably be different.

[Catfish]

All ignoring Vienna's post and dumping the same tiresome garbage again and again.

https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho...ostcount=10346

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by u crank

As I said in a previous post, there seems to be only one reason why people would be against safe and secure elections, mainly proving citizenship. I would like to get an explanation as to why anyone would be against this. Is there is a valid reason for opposing voter ID? And I would say that if Democrats believed that people were illegally voting for the GOP things would probably be different.

Because a vote can be bought. We got you here over the border. Food, clothing, medical, housing....you owe us your vote. Even if you are not a full citizen yet, you get to vote...FOR ME CAUSE I DID ALL OF THIS FOR YOU. This has been going on for ages. The promise of money or things for your vote. Bring in a million illegals. Give them everything. They will vote for he hand that is feeding them.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Catfish

All ignoring Vienna's post and dumping the same tiresome garbage again and again.

Who says anybody is ignoring his posts? In your country and mine some kind of proof is required to vote. Are you against that? If not then why is it unreasonable to ask for that in all US states? What possible reason could there be for not requiring proof of citizenship?

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by u crank

As I said in a previous post, there seems to be only one reason why people would be against safe and secure elections, mainly proving citizenship. I would like to get an explanation as to why anyone would be against this. Is there is a valid reason for opposing voter ID? And I would say that if Democrats believed that people were illegally voting for the GOP things would probably be different.

Because voting is secure already. I would also point out that the majority of republican voters live outside urban areas where voting in person is easier than in dense urban areas where a majority of democrats reside.

Republican led voter purges also throw out legally registered voters before the vote while validation of suspected illegally cast votes just catches the illegal votes and is one reason why there is ten days after the vote deadline for certification.

And for the record, I do believe people vote illegally for the GOP. Many have been arrested and prosecuted.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Because voting is secure already.

I think that is a ridiculous statement. How can anybody prove that it is secure if anybody can vote without proof of who they are? Why not end this problem/criticism by simply requiring proof of citizenship. In Canada we have that requirement and it does not cost the voter a dime. Everyone has ID. It is not in any way a burden to the voter or the regulating authorities. Most of the states that require no document to vote are controlled by Democrats. Coincidence?

[mapuc]

I could provide you with a 3-5 minutes report from the Danish news channel-But then we have the problem with the understanding.

'cause then you would hear the Journalist saying-
'The country is severe divided. It has been so for many years, so it's not Trump's fault.'

In this video clip they even interviewet some elderly men who was part of some militia group. One of them said

'You can't rely on our sitting government and our Vice President-She is the one who shall approve the result of the election and if Trump wins she will refuse to acknowledge this result.'

Markus