Evangelicals and Politics

[AU9377 5,922]

10 hours ago, JMWATS said:

if you think that an effort by democratic activists to organize african americans and get them to the polls so they may vote is not intended to benefit democratic candidates you are dumber than a fence post and there is no help for you.  

 

Isn't that a good thing?  The goal should be to get everyone eligible to vote.

[AU9377 5,922]

2 hours ago, autigeremt said:

It’s obvious that there’s a lack of seriousness about the historical significance of slavery, Jim Crow and racism within the history of the Democratic Party. 

Really?  All of this is a bit too much.

[AU9377 5,922]

14 hours ago, autigeremt said:

Obviously not. The Democratic Party continues to exist under the said name. 

As does the United States.  Germany is also still Germany.  This is literally looking for something to have  a problem with.  Its silly.

[autigeremt 7,133]

7 hours ago, Leftfield said:

Man, you're weird. This is just a bizarre way of thinking.

Should everyone whose ancestors owned slaves change their last name?

I’m only weird because I’m calling out your parties inadequate evolution. It’s only bizarre because Democrats won’t admit that the party was built on segregation, slavery and the unfair treatment of human beings. 
 

 

Edited July 24 by autigeremt

[autigeremt 7,133]

6 hours ago, AU9377 said:

As does the United States.  Germany is also still Germany.  This is literally looking for something to have  a problem with.  Its silly.

Seems like an easy fix to me. Looks like your party affiliation is more important than the nation itself. 

[Leftfield 3,307]

1 minute ago, autigeremt said:

I’m only weird because I’m calling out your parties inadequate evolution. It’s only bizarre because Democrats won’t admit that the party was built on segregation, slavery and the unfair treatment of human beings. 

What the hell are you talking about? There aren't any Democrats denying the Party's history, but the history has no bearing whatsoever on what the Party is now. It's changed. What are you not understanding about this?

This is a thoroughly ridiculous argument. "Inadequate evolution"? Is changing the name more important than changing what the Party stands for? If you think so, it would be very telling of who you are.

[autigeremt 7,133]

14 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

What the hell are you talking about? There aren't any Democrats denying the Party's history, but the history has no bearing whatsoever on what the Party is now. It's changed. What are you not understanding about this?

This is a thoroughly ridiculous argument. "Inadequate evolution"? Is changing the name more important than changing what the Party stands for? If you think so, it would be very telling of who you are.

Why do you care who I am? You’ve pretty much called me a grade school weirdo. It’s my take on the matter and that’s the way it is. 

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

7 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The goal should be to get everyone eligible to vote.

What????  How do you get non citizens eligible to vote?  and why would you?  Unless, of course, you want to skew the results of a fair election.  Or did you mean get all that are eligible to vote register?  A Freudian slip maybe?

Edited July 24 by I_M4_AU

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

7 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Really?  All of this is a bit too much.

And libs say Rebulicans won’t face facts about slavery.  Too much.

[auburnatl1 6,020]

17 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

What????  How do you get non citizens eligible to vote?  and why would you?  Unless, of course, you want to skew the results of a fair election.  Or did you mean get all that are eligible to vote register?  A Freudian slip maybe?

This is an invented maga narrative.  Isn’t legal in any state and no evidence it’s ever been an issue. Anywhere. If I’m wrong, please correct me. 
https://apnews.com/article/voting-immigrants-noncitizen-trump-republicans-2024-1c65429c152c2a10514b5156eacf9ca7

Edited July 24 by auburnatl1

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

1 minute ago, auburnatl1 said:

This is an invented maga narrative. Please lisdt a state where any non citizen can vote in a federal election. 

I didn’t make the incorrect comment, 77 did.  I just pointed it out.  Are you saying a Dem/Lib that wants to get *everybody* eligible to vote is a MAGA talking point?

 

[auburnatl1 6,020]

1 minute ago, I_M4_AU said:

I didn’t make the incorrect comment, 77 did.  I just pointed it out.  Are you saying a Dem/Lib that wants to get *everybody* eligible to vote is a MAGA talking point?

 

The debate is simply this:  gop voters do better with physically voting  on Election Day. Dems have better turn out with mailing or other remote voting techniques.  It’s about demographic behaviors and both sides keenly understand their bases. Therefore you get 2 narratives to disguise this:

1) Dems - we need to make it easier for every vote to be heard so use techniques to assist with this

2) GOP - the only way to stop any perception of voter fraud is physical presence voting with rigorous ID checks.

Both sides sound noble and rationale - both sides do it purely and only to improve their odds

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

15 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

The debate is simply this:  gop voters do better with physically voting  on Election Day. Dems have better turn out with mailing or other remote voting techniques.  It’s about demographic behaviors and both sides keenly understand their bases. Therefore you get 2 narratives to disguise this:

1) Dems - we need to make it easier for every vote to be heard so use techniques to assist with this

2) GOP - the only way to stop any perception of voter fraud is physical presence voting with rigorous ID checks.

Both sides sound noble and rationale - both sides do it purely and only to improve their odds

Great, but this has nothing to do with libs wanting non citizens eligible to vote.

[Leftfield 3,307]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

You’ve pretty much called me a grade school weirdo. It’s my take on the matter and that’s the way it is. 

Not entirely accurate, but since you won't address any of my points I guess further discussion doesn't matter, anyway.

[auburnatl1 6,020]

10 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Great, but this has nothing to do with libs wanting non citizens eligible to vote.

That’s a fringe group but in either case  what solely motivates both parties is purely winning and blocking or getting access to the most voters.  Theres nothing noble imo about either party on this one but it is creative messaging.

Edited July 24 by auburnatl1

[arein0 1,101]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

What????  How do you get non citizens eligible to vote?  and why would you?  Unless, of course, you want to skew the results of a fair election.  Or did you mean get all that are eligible to vote register?  A Freudian slip maybe?

You read it wrong. He's saying the goal should be to get everyone that is eligible to vote to vote.

[AU9377 5,922]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

And libs say Rebulicans won’t face facts about slavery.  Too much.

There is real and there is ridiculous.  This falls into the ridiculous category.

[AU9377 5,922]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

What????  How do you get non citizens eligible to vote?  and why would you?  Unless, of course, you want to skew the results of a fair election.  Or did you mean get all that are eligible to vote register?  A Freudian slip maybe?

Everyone THAT IS ELIGIBLE to vote.  Is that clearer for you?

[AU9377 5,922]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Great, but this has nothing to do with libs wanting non citizens eligible to vote.

NOBODY is arguing they should be.  NOBODY

[AU9377 5,922]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

The debate is simply this:  gop voters do better with physically voting  on Election Day. Dems have better turn out with mailing or other remote voting techniques.  It’s about demographic behaviors and both sides keenly understand their bases. Therefore you get 2 narratives to disguise this:

1) Dems - we need to make it easier for every vote to be heard so use techniques to assist with this

2) GOP - the only way to stop any perception of voter fraud is physical presence voting with rigorous ID checks.

Both sides sound noble and rationale - both sides do it purely and only to improve their odds

The irony is that, before Trump, Republicans always voted by mail/absentee in much greater numbers than Democrats.

Edited July 24 by AU9377

[wdefromtx 3,494]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

The debate is simply this:  gop voters do better with physically voting  on Election Day. Dems have better turn out with mailing or other remote voting techniques.  It’s about demographic behaviors and both sides keenly understand their bases. Therefore you get 2 narratives to disguise this:

1) Dems - we need to make it easier for every vote to be heard so use techniques to assist with this

2) GOP - the only way to stop any perception of voter fraud is physical presence voting with rigorous ID checks.

Both sides sound noble and rationale - both sides do it purely and only to improve their odds

Yeah, I get this random text a few weeks ago. It is some blue volunteer group....anyways, we had moved a while back and I am lazy and had not changed my DL and my voter registration needed to be renewed. So, I guess I was on some list for them to call me. Their words were "because it is so hard to get registered as a voter in Texas, can we send you a card and walk you through filling it out." I responded thanks, you can send it but, I am just lazy and it is super easy to register. Which I went online, changed my DL address and clicked the box to re-register. Boom Easy Peasy. 

For whatever reason it took over 3 weeks to get their registration card. I registered before I got it. LOL 

[AU9377 5,922]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

I didn’t make the incorrect comment, 77 did.  I just pointed it out.  Are you saying a Dem/Lib that wants to get *everybody* eligible to vote is a MAGA talking point?

 

There was no incorrect statement.  You chose to read it in a way that it was never intended.  That is on you, not me.

[autigeremt 7,133]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

Not entirely accurate, but since you won't address any of my points I guess further discussion doesn't matter, anyway.

Spot on

[JerryAU 1,822]

VOTE - GET OUT AND VOTE - VOTE people!   

The Democratic Party would like you to completely ignore the fact that they booted the candidate that you actually VOTED for because he was losing to the opposition.  The Party then proceeded to appoint his replacement with a candidate of the Party's choosing without allowing voters to VOTE for the candidate of their choice and whoever the Party chooses to place as her running mate.  Don't worry about where the candidate stands on issues, don't worry about the record of her potential running mate.  Just get out and ....

VOTE - VOTE - VOTE people!

 

 

 

[CoffeeTiger 5,843]

4 hours ago, autigeremt said:

I’m only weird because I’m calling out your parties inadequate evolution. It’s only bizarre because Democrats won’t admit that the party was built on segregation, slavery and the unfair treatment of human beings. 
 

 

While you and other Conservatives reminisce about the Democrat party of 1840,  the Republican party of 2024 is having to beg it's elected members to stop focusing on Kamala's race and gender when attacking her because it's making them look bad: 

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/23/gop-race-comments-harris-00170735