(R) Elector - "Why I Will Not Cast My Electoral Vote for Donald Trump"

[Victorian Gray]

if i'm wrong, i'll admit it. However the story had been out for 4 days with no response. I'll wait and see. Ohh lol, i just read the C-span factoid.

Factoid? An official statement from the fire dept. showing that the accusation that he was not working for them at the time in question is false is a "factoid"? Deplorable.

 

[werepossum]

To all those people wondering what's wrong with abolishing the Electoral College:
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/22/50305...ion-day-california-continues-counting-ballots

Two weeks after Election Day, Hillary Clinton leads President-elect Donald Trump by 1.75 million votes. Despite Clinton's popular vote lead, Trump will move into the White House because he won the Electoral College.

Clinton's margin will grow in the coming weeks — mostly because of California, where there are still more than 2 million unprocessed ballots.

So why does it take California so long to count the votes?

Well, for one thing, blame coffee.

"Coffee stains look just like an oval mark," says Sacramento County Assistant Registrar of Voters Alice Jarboe. "So we have to remove all those coffee stains."

Yes, it seems at least some Californians like to fill out their vote-by-mail ballots over breakfast.

And it gets worse: jam and jelly.

"We do find those on the ballot," Jarboe says. "Those gum up our vote counting machines, so we will remake those ballots."

Remaking a ballot doesn't happen quickly. Two election workers pair up to copy the votes from the damaged ballot onto an unmarked duplicate.

"One person will call, the other person will mark," Jarboe says. "And then they'll double-check their work to make sure that the calling and the marking compares."

A nearby election worker calls out "65 yes, 66 yes, 67 no," as she and a colleague compare a ballot's votes on three of California's statewide propositions.

After they check their work, a quality control team will check again. And then, the damaged ballot gets a big blue "VOID" stamp.

Other times, Jarboe says, there's a slightly quicker fix involving white-out tape: "We will take that white-out tape and white over the problem ovals — the voter crossed out the oval, and said 'No not this one, this one' — we'll cross out the one they didn't want; we'll white that out; and then a star stamp next to it. The star stamp is everybody's indication that we touched that ballot and we corrected it in some way."

It's likely that 14 million people will have voted in California once all the ballots are processed — and Clinton won the state by a nearly 2-1 ratio. As voting by mail has surged, so too has the time it takes counties to count ballots.

Plus, there are provisional ballots, which take even longer to process, because it's often hard to verify a voter's eligibility. California provisional ballot laws are much more permissive than in other states.

"We would prefer that you show up at your own polling place and that you be registered," Jarboe says. "But we're not going to tell you to go away, that you can't vote. We'll go ahead and let you vote a ballot and put it in a provisional envelope, and then we true it up here."

"These expansions [of voting rights] end up slowing down the vote count process," says Paul Mitchell, one of California's top voting data analysts. "But to trade off 'we're gonna get our votes counted quicker and disenfranchise people on the front end,' I don't think is the right trade-off."

California counties have two more weeks to certify their final ballot counts. Some other large states like Florida and Virginia have already done so.

Mitchell says California's slow work is skewing Americans' perceptions of the election results.

"The presidential race was a much larger popular vote win for Hillary Clinton than was seen on Election Day or even the couple days after the election," he says. "And that's only going to expand."

In fact, Mitchell estimates Clinton could end up winning nationally by 2.5 million votes — the largest margin ever for an Electoral College loser.

http://www.scpr.org/news/2016/11/26/66440/california-still-ballot-counting-but-results-on-al/

Ah, here we go - finally an end to counting - four days ago!
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...-election-tally-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/
If we were purely a popular vote nation, California and New York would never stop counting until the Democrat wins. Hell, they might not even need New York.

As far as winning the popular vote, Hillary won California by 4.2 million votes. So counting every state except California, she actually lost the popular vote. Without the Electoral College, there is no "United States of America". There is only "California and its unnamed possessions".

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Factoid? An official statement from the fire dept. showing that the accusation is a lie is a "factoid"? Deplorable.

No it wasn't, it said and i quote "the Dale City Volunteer Firefighters have no records that can be relied on."
Read it, it isn't that hard.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/texa...ris-suprun-as-a-911-first-responder/371421191
Stop being gullible, learn to look into the facts. Lol a basket of deplorables that won.

 

[werepossum]

I'm under the misapprehension that we should count all the votes. I guess you must disagree!

Again though, nice try avoiding your convenient switch from electoral college booster to shrieking about a 'stolen election' when confronted with how the electoral college actually works. Color me shocked that you only support it when it does what you want.

Oh should I take this to mean you've jumped back off the millions of fraudulent votes bandwagon?

We just saw how the Electoral College works - just like it has always worked, in spite of you guys' best efforts. (Hint: If you really want your death threats to overturn an election, you may have to first give up your safe zones and adult coloring books.)

As a New Yorker, you can take comfort though: You elected a fellow New Yorker, by nominating a Democrat candidate so stinky that America chose Donald Trump instead. (Well, people who can count; not California, obviously.)

As far as the millions of fraudulent votes bandwagon, I'll grudgingly admit that Californians might actually count that much more slowly than people in every other state. After all, they did vote for Hillary 2:1, so stranger things have happened. lol

 

[werepossum]

Factoid? An official statement from the fire dept. showing that the accusation that he was not working for them at the time in question is false is a "factoid"? Deplorable.

You may not realize it, but "deplorable" is actually a term of endearment down here now.

Near as I can figure, it means a person with a job.

 

[werepossum]

Election turnout nationally this year set a near-record low, mainly because we had two horrible candidates that few people liked. 55% turnout, down 5% from 2012. http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/

Election turnout in California this year set a record - 14.6 million, or 75% turnout. California turnout jumped over 10% from 2012. Nearly 58% of all California ballots were mailed in - the ones they spent a month counting and "correcting".
http://www.latimes.com/politics/ess...etary-of-state-alex-1481927533-htmlstory.html

Allow me to suggest that even people who count at California level can do that math.

 

[fskimospy]

We just saw how the Electoral College works - just like it has always worked, in spite of you guys' best efforts. (Hint: If you really want your death threats to overturn an election, you may have to first give up your safe zones and adult coloring books.)

So wait, it's not a stolen election anymore? I'm having trouble keeping track of your conveniently shifting positions, haha.

As a New Yorker, you can take comfort though: You elected a fellow New Yorker, by nominating a Democrat candidate so stinky that America chose Donald Trump instead. (Well, people who can count; not California, obviously.)

As far as the millions of fraudulent votes bandwagon, I'll grudgingly admit that Californians might actually count that much more slowly than people in every other state. After all, they did vote for Hillary 2:1, so stranger things have happened. lol

You are very bad at admitting you said something stupid.

 

[werepossum]

So wait, it's not a stolen election anymore? I'm having trouble keeping track of your conveniently shifting positions, haha.

You are very bad at admitting you said something stupid.

Um, I never claimed it was a stolen election. That was you guys on the left. (Perhaps the part that is confusing you is where you convinced yourselves that you really won it.) I said that you are TRYING to steal it. Considering the number of leftists openly advocating that, I hardly think that's a controversial position. Luckily for America, you failed. Apparently that's as difficult as counting . . .

 

[Victorian Gray]

No it wasn't, it said and i quote "the Dale City Volunteer Firefighters have no records that can be relied on."
Read it, it isn't that hard.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/texa...ris-suprun-as-a-911-first-responder/371421191
Stop being gullible, learn to look into the facts. Lol a basket of deplorables that won.

The Dale City Volunteer Fire Department states that he was working with them from July 2000 through June 2002. Are you claiming that they are lying?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

The Dale City Volunteer Fire Department states that he was working with them from July 2000 through June 2002. Are you claiming that they are lying?

They "HAVE NO RECORD" of him being a 9/11 responder. Understand, they "HAVE NO RECORD" try to understand. Wait . They have no record eh.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

You may not realize it, but "deplorable" is actually a term of endearment down here now.

Near as I can figure, it means a person with a job.

That's why the democrats are so fucked up. They find anyone with a job to be deplorable, but they need people with jobs to be able to tax them to fund the people without jobs. The whole thing is very confusing to them.

 

[outriding]

We just saw how the Electoral College works - just like it has always worked, in spite of you guys' best efforts. (Hint: If you really want your death threats to overturn an election, you may have to first give up your safe zones and adult coloring books.)

The electoral college was designed for something completely different.

There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections

-James Madison.. one of the architects of the EC..

 

[Paratus]

They "HAVE NO RECORD" of him being a 9/11 responder. Understand, they "HAVE NO RECORD" try to understand. Wait . They have no record eh.

After the WFAA report c-span received the information that he was a 9/11 responder. I'll quote it agin for you:

HOST: I HAVE A STATEMENT HERE FROM THE DALE COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT. IT SAYS, IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY TO THE PRESS REGARDING THE MEMBERSHIP STATUS OF CHRIS SUPRUN, WE CONFIRM HE WAS AN ACTIVE MEMBER IN GOOD STANDING FROM JULY 2000 THROUGH JUNE 2002. THE OFFICIAL STATION RECORDS CONFIRM NO DALE CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMBERS WERE ON DUTY FROM 6:00 A.M. TO 6:00 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, THEREFORE, NO MEMBERS OF THE DEPARTMENT WERE INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL RESPONSE TO THE ATTACK ON THE PENTAGON IN THEIR CAPACITY AS A MEMBER OF THE DALE CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT. HOWEVER, MEMBERS WERE PART OF THE OPERATION FROM 1800 HOURS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, UNTIL RELEASED BY THE INCIDENT COMMANDER. MEMBERS WERE INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL RESPONSE ON THE PENTAGON IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS SAFETY OFFICIALS WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THAT

So Suprun and Dale county both say he was there.

Why does WFAA disagree? His linked in resume?

Do they have an explanation for why they believe Dale county doesn't know who was working for them? Because Dale County said he wasn't on duty the morning of 9/11 but in the evening?

Do you think WFAA stands by their story in light of this confirmation from Dale County?

And why does any of this matter?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

After the WFAA report c-span received the information that he was a 9/11 responder. I'll quote it agin for you:
So Suprun and Dale county both say he was there.
Why does WFAA disagree?
Do they have an explanation for why they believe Dale county doesn't know who was working for them?
Do you think WFAA stands by their story in light of this confirmation from Dale County?

"MEMBERS WERE INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL RESPONSE ON THE PENTAGON IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS SAFETY OFFICIALS WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS." They have no record that he was a part of the response. It says members, but they have no record that he was one of the members. Sorry, that's not good enough for me since there's no record of him being a responder. And since it's been proven that he's a liar.

 

[Paratus]

"MEMBERS WERE INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL RESPONSE ON THE PENTAGON IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS SAFETY OFFICIALS WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS." They have no record that he was a part of the response. It says members, but they have no record that he was one of the members. Sorry, that's not good enough for me since there's no record of him being a responder. And since it's been proven that he's a liar.

So to sum up:

• He was a member of the fire department on 9/11 - confirmed by the dept
• Members of the fire dept responded on 9/11 - confirmed by the dept
• He says he responded on 9/11 which is supported by the confirmations of the dept.
• He changed his mind about voting for Trump therefore he's a lying liar who lied about responding on 9/11

Sounds legit.

(Edit I guess you missed the part that while some Dale county firemen were part of the initial response in other capacities, (which you are correct there is no record of him responding in those capacities), the entire dept supported the effort stating at 1800 on 9/11 - so he supported on 9/11)

 

[imported_tajmahal]

So to sum up:

• He was a member of the fire department on 9/11 - confirmed by the dept
• Members of the fire dept responded on 9/11 - confirmed by the dept
• He says he responded on 9/11 which is supported by the confirmations of the dept.
• He changed his mind about voting for Trump therefore he's a lying liar who lied about responding on 9/11

Sounds legit.

He was a member of a volunteer fire department.
Some members of that volunteer fire department responded at 18:00 hours
A known liar claims to have responded
There is no known record of him responding
he is a known liar

EDIT - Dale County has never claimed he was there.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

double post

 

[Paratus]

He was a member of a volunteer fire department.
Some members of that volunteer fire department responded at 18:00 hours
A known liar claims to have responded
There is no known record of him responding
he is a known liar

EDIT - Dale County has never claimed he was there.

What confirmed lies has he told?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

What confirmed lies has he told?

"“I was required to sign an affidavit with my party saying that I would cast my ballot based upon the will of the people here,” said Nelson, describing a policy years in place for both parties."
http://kxan.com/2016/11/07/an-in-depth-look-at-how-the-texas-electoral-college-votes/

 

[Paratus]

"“I was required to sign an affidavit with my party saying that I would cast my ballot based upon the will of the people here,” said Nelson, describing a policy years in place for both parties."
http://kxan.com/2016/11/07/an-in-depth-look-at-how-the-texas-electoral-college-votes/

So did he sign it knowing he would break it or did he sign it intending to keep his word but changed his mind later?

How do you know which one it is?

Because one is a lie and the other is not.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

So did he sign it knowing he would break it or did he sign it intending to keep his word but changed his mind later?

How do you know which one it is?

Because one is a lie and the other is not.

No, they are both lies, he easily could have told officials that he could no longer in good conscience vote the will of the people and request to be replaced, but he didn't.

 

[OutHouse]

HAHAHHAHA Hillary had a lot of faithless electors. that speaks volumes on how unelectable she was. Powel and Faith Spotted Eagle were better candidates to electors than Hillary, HAHAHAHAH

But seriously, the scary part is that these electors voted for people not running and the people did not vote for. so in theory, if enough electors wanted a overthrow they could put anybody as POTUS.

State Pledged to Voted for
Hawaii Clinton Bernie Sanders
Texas Trump Ron Paul
Texas Trump John Kasich
Washington Clinton Colin L. Powell
Washington Clinton Colin L. Powell
Washington Clinton Colin L. Powell
Washington Clinton Faith Spotted Eagle

 

[Paratus]

No, they are both lies, he easily could have told officials that he could no longer in good conscience vote the will of the people and request to be replaced, but he didn't.

Well that would be a possible moral or ethical lapse, not lying. It's also arguable that he put his country ahead of his party by following his conscience. Something I would expect of a volunteer fireman and 9/11 first responder.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Well that would be a possible moral or ethical lapse, not lying. It's also arguable that he put his country ahead of his party by following his conscience. Something I would expect of a volunteer fireman and 9/11 first responder.

Well it makes sense that YOU don't think it's lying. Does he claim he's a FIRST responder? Or did you make that up also?

 

[Paratus]

Well it makes sense that YOU don't think it's lying. Does he claim he's a FIRST responder? Or did you make that up also?

Fine a 9/11 responder. It's late and I'm not being extremely careful with my wording.

Lying is knowingly stating something that isn't true. If he intended to follow the affidavit when he signed it, he wasn't lying. If did not intend to follow it he was lying.

Either way this doesn't really have anything to do with his 9/11 response.

You also don't have to demonize him to disagree with his actions. As a republican I would be upset with his actions but understanding of why he did them. No reason call him a liar about 9/11.