lowenz on 8/12/2020 at 09:52
Quote Posted by demagogue
illegally bringing in Mexican guards to protect construction sites
Nice, see how a market-based reality
really works beyond any stupid "identitarian" propaganda to cover it up and manipulate desperate people? :D
Like the Trump Tower, built by true
american polish workers.
But of course you can deny the reality in the post-truth world. Trump won the elections!
june gloom on 8/12/2020 at 13:07
Quote Posted by nemyax
At least you guys were free people who fought back. You won't believe the shit we let our rulers get away with.
The difference between me and you is that I won't use that as an argument that you might have deserved it. Scum.
Kolya on 8/12/2020 at 22:32
Quote Posted by lowenz
[...] And that it can create a perverted and merciless стахановское like soviet communism?
I had to look that up. The (
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5) Stakhanov movement arose in 1935 and was named after the miner A.G. Stakhanov, who mined a record amount of coal in a shift. The movement optimized the production process by increasing labor discipline, division of labor, etc. On the other hand their outstanding results were often attributed to one leader, instead of the whole brigade that had achieved them. Presumably lowenz is referring to this sort of misattribution.
Jason Moyer on 8/12/2020 at 23:08
The Supreme Court refused to hear their appeal of the case they've repeatedly lost in PA, seeking to invalidate mail in ballots. Also, they still haven't taken this website down (
http://www.pagop.org/mailin/)
Re: The Stakhanovite Movement, we already have that mentality in the US. Everyone thinks being ultra-productive and having someone else reap the rewards of it is patriotic or something.
lowenz on 9/12/2020 at 07:47
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
being ultra-productive and having someone else reap the rewards of it is
patriotic neuroticFixed :D
Jason Moyer on 9/12/2020 at 11:24
Can anyone explain to me what the gist of this "Texas suing 4 states over Article 2 of the Constitution" thing is all about? It makes no sense whatsoever to me. It sounds like the Texas AG thinks that the 2nd Article gives state legislatures the right to select electors for their state, but that's not what it says. It says that they have the right to select the method that their state uses to select electors, and in all 4 states named the legislature was able to exercise that right prior to the election so I don't know wtf they're actually arguing.
SubJeff on 9/12/2020 at 12:14
Don't get into the weeds on the details Jason. Let these idiots work their idiocy out themselves.
Quote Posted by nemyax
When people are used to normality and comfort, they will always oppose importing of savagery. It's very hard to explain to a civilised person why it's suddenly a fact of their life that they can have their head chopped off over a fucking magazine cartoon.
No it's not.
Importing of savagery? What about the export of it?
demagogue on 9/12/2020 at 12:47
It's beyond stupid that Texas would be suing other states over this, and I'm not happy with my people.
First of all, there's a clause in the constitution called full faith & credit clause that requires states to respect the legal processes of other states (it's the reason why if a gay couple got married in a state that allowed it, all the other states had to recognize the marriage as legal), which looks like the kind of thing that should prevent this from being possible.
But even aside from that, it's kind of outrageous for one state to question the democratic bona fides of another state. For one thing, Texas was a hair width away from going blue itself, so practically half the state was happy with the outcome. Why would the state government think they're speaking on behalf of the population that wants to overturn the election?
Anyway, the writing is on the wall. Texas should flip to be a democratic state sooner or later, and all of their hemming and hawing is just so much noise against the tide of history.
heywood on 9/12/2020 at 13:36
Because the challenge is coming from another state, it seems like a ploy to skip over the state courts and go directly to SCOTUS. I think this one will get rejected right away. Texas has no standing to challenge election law in other states.