Fox News: surge in new cases
11-19-2020, 03:11 PM
#851
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 762
Man. You’re having a hard time with this. False Dilemma, (False Dichotomy) are logical fallacies. You presented an “or”, which limits options to the two you provided. There are other options. This is how it works in the English language, most programming languages and also in math.
In this specific case BOTH many of the cases were Republicans v Republicans and it doesn’t matter to me. For instance, if you bothered to put down your copy of Newsmax you might have noticed that 100% of the post election cases in Georgia were filed against Republicans. Just to help you out, I said “post election”. Multiple cases have been filed in Arizona, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania against Republican respondents.
Now, that doesn’t really matter to me because the current count is 30-1 for Biden. I don’t expect any of these cases to matter. How hard is that to understand?
In this specific case BOTH many of the cases were Republicans v Republicans and it doesn’t matter to me. For instance, if you bothered to put down your copy of Newsmax you might have noticed that 100% of the post election cases in Georgia were filed against Republicans. Just to help you out, I said “post election”. Multiple cases have been filed in Arizona, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania against Republican respondents.
Now, that doesn’t really matter to me because the current count is 30-1 for Biden. I don’t expect any of these cases to matter. How hard is that to understand?
Not only that but the comment you responded to was specifically in regards to Philadelphia and the distance of poll watchers. A case that was specifically one party against the other.
So your initial comment is irrelevant by both your own admission and in regards to the specific discussion being hand. However, you only admitted to it being irrelevant after it was called into question, which is what prompted my question to you.
11-19-2020, 05:00 PM
#852
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Position: Under beer over couch after skool
Posts: 316
It’s not a false dilemma, “or” options are not by default false dilemmas. You dismissed the importance of your initial point only after it was called into question.
Not only that but the comment you responded to was specifically in regards to Philadelphia and the distance of poll watchers. A case that was specifically one party against the other.
So your initial comment is irrelevant by both your own admission and in regards to the specific discussion being hand. However, you only admitted to it being irrelevant after it was called into question, which is what prompted my question to you.
Not only that but the comment you responded to was specifically in regards to Philadelphia and the distance of poll watchers. A case that was specifically one party against the other.
So your initial comment is irrelevant by both your own admission and in regards to the specific discussion being hand. However, you only admitted to it being irrelevant after it was called into question, which is what prompted my question to you.
adjective
- not connected with or relevant to something.
"an irrelevant comment"
I said it didn’t really matter. I never said my own comment was irrelevant. If you have a guy that hasn’t practiced law in 28 years in charge of your case, a guy that can’t tell the difference between a landscaping company and a luxury hotel, a guy that can’t tell the difference between a suitable mate and his cousin, a guy that doesn’t know what strict scrutiny is in charge of your lawsuits, THEN THE PARTIES TO THE LAWSUIT DON’T MATTER much to me. That is not the same thing as irrelevant. The other attorney was fired for misconduct in the state of Colorado. The fact that both of these attorneys are incompetent and they have very little chance of victory means I don’t really care who they are suing. I merely pointed out that they are suing state actors, acting in their official capacity. Some of the respondents were Republicans.
It is funny to me that you think I’m trying to hide from my comment. It is a matter of public record that Republicans have sued Republicans in this election. Republicans have also sued state actors; some of whom are Republicans. Some respondents are democrats. This isn’t just Republicans vs Democrats it’s Republicans vs anybody they can sue. However, I don’t really care because the lawsuits are meritless in most cases. Their all star legal team is made up of duds and the scoreboard reads 30-1. So I don’t care. I can’t say it any other way.
Last edited by Ronaldo; 11-19-2020 at 05:15 PM.
11-19-2020, 05:50 PM
#853
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Position: Under beer over couch after skool
Posts: 316
I should add that the case you were referring to in Philadelphia has already been decided by the PA Supreme Court and Trump lost.
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
v. PHILADELPHIA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
The respondents, PHL BOE is a bi-partisan board. Including one Republican.
https://www.philadelphiavotes.com/en/about-us
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
v. PHILADELPHIA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
The respondents, PHL BOE is a bi-partisan board. Including one Republican.
https://www.philadelphiavotes.com/en/about-us
11-19-2020, 06:16 PM
#854
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 762
I should add that the case you were referring to in Philadelphia has already been decided by the PA Supreme Court and Trump lost.
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
v. PHILADELPHIA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
The respondents, PHL BOE is a bi-partisan board. Including one Republican.
https://www.philadelphiavotes.com/en/about-us
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
v. PHILADELPHIA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
The respondents, PHL BOE is a bi-partisan board. Including one Republican.
https://www.philadelphiavotes.com/en/about-us
Sort of defeats the point of having observers if you can prevent them from observing.
Either way the PA legislature has indicated that they will conduct an audit of the vote.
11-19-2020, 06:19 PM
#855
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,145
This used to be a good forum when the first rule was no partisan politics. Now it’s worthless.
11-19-2020, 06:25 PM
#856
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,488
Seriously not trying to be an Ahole, but welcome back from the rock you've been under.
Let's start with just the last few weeks where a sitting president won't accept the results of an election that looks to be 'landslide' according to his definition 4 years ago. He has falsely claimed he won the election, fired the head of CISA for spite, has essentially abdicated his role and is golfing/tweeting only (to be fair that's not much of a change), without evidence numerous times claimed massive fraud to sew the seeds of discontent, hasn't attended a COVID task force meeting in months, etc, etc, etc.
And I won't miss things like this...
“We won’t let a RIGGED ELECTION steal our Country!” and “how badly shattered and violated our great Constitution has been in the 2020 Election. It was attacked, perhaps like never before!”
Compound that by four years and I think America has a legit complaint or three thousand.
Let's start with just the last few weeks where a sitting president won't accept the results of an election that looks to be 'landslide' according to his definition 4 years ago. He has falsely claimed he won the election, fired the head of CISA for spite, has essentially abdicated his role and is golfing/tweeting only (to be fair that's not much of a change), without evidence numerous times claimed massive fraud to sew the seeds of discontent, hasn't attended a COVID task force meeting in months, etc, etc, etc.
And I won't miss things like this...
“We won’t let a RIGGED ELECTION steal our Country!” and “how badly shattered and violated our great Constitution has been in the 2020 Election. It was attacked, perhaps like never before!”
Compound that by four years and I think America has a legit complaint or three thousand.
11-19-2020, 06:42 PM
#857
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2020
Posts: 237
Correct, the PA Supreme Court did overturn a lower court ruling, stating that “being in room” was sufficient access to observe the ballot counting regardless of the distance.
Sort of defeats the point of having observers if you can prevent them from observing.
Either way the PA legislature has indicated that they will conduct an audit of the vote.
Sort of defeats the point of having observers if you can prevent them from observing.
Either way the PA legislature has indicated that they will conduct an audit of the vote.
There is no bottom. How does that make you feel?
11-19-2020, 06:46 PM
#858
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 125
You could argue that the PA Supreme Court that consists of 5 Democrats and 2 Republican judges is a partisan body. Especially considering that they are elected, so you know they had to campaign and and sway voters.
11-19-2020, 06:48 PM
#859
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2020
Posts: 237
By the way, I thought all of you said that Trump needed to "have his day in court." He's had it. He can't surmount an 80,000 vote deficit unless they toss 500,000 ballots. He hasn't even asked for that much remediation in court.
But now he's going to the legislatures. That was never part of the bargain, unless getting to the bottom of things was never really the goal. The only reason Trump is going down this path is to overthrow a duly-elected President of the United States. And that, my friends, is sedition.
11-19-2020, 06:57 PM
#860
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 125
Justices are instructed to be impartial. If you cannot abide by their rulings then this whole experiment called America is soon to be over.
By the way, I thought all of you said that Trump needed to "have his day in court." He's had it. He can't surmount an 80,000 vote deficit unless they toss 500,000 ballots. He hasn't even asked in court for that much remediation.
But now he's going to the legislatures. That was never part of the bargain, unless getting to the bottom of things was never really the goal. The only reason Trump is going down this path is to overthrow a duly-elected President of the United States. And that, my friends, is sedition.
By the way, I thought all of you said that Trump needed to "have his day in court." He's had it. He can't surmount an 80,000 vote deficit unless they toss 500,000 ballots. He hasn't even asked in court for that much remediation.
But now he's going to the legislatures. That was never part of the bargain, unless getting to the bottom of things was never really the goal. The only reason Trump is going down this path is to overthrow a duly-elected President of the United States. And that, my friends, is sedition.
I understand that. But it doesn’t mean that’s always the case. If you’re elected into a position and want to stay there, there’s a good chance you might try to not **** off the party who elected you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
