The GTP Unofficial 2020 US Elections Thread

[McLaren]

In North Carolina? NC's age of consent is 16...which is higher than what I'd expect for the state. There's no consent if the account is accurate, obviously, but this isn't an age issue as seems to be so common for the GOP right now.

But by technical terms across the country, under 18 is still a minor, right? I was kind of trying to emphasis that point specifically in a humorous way to add on to your post.

 

[TexRex]

But by technical terms across the country, under 18 is still a minor, right? I was kind of trying to emphasis that point specifically in a humorous way to add on to your post.

I didn't catch that. I also didn't help by using the term "minor" to describe someone that can't legally consent to sexual activity. They're different things.

 

[Famine]

Obviously you missed where he talks down to me.

That's difficult to convey or perceive in text form. However you just did it to me with that sentence...

Sorry I ain't as smart as y'all when typing but I also understand when someone is talking **** about me.

You have literally infinite time to sit, compose your thoughts, edit, review, and re-edit until a post says what you want it to say. This whole "I ain't as smart as y'all" schtick you've been pushing for the last few months is just that: schtick.

Nobody else is posting for you, and your posts convey exactly what you want convey about yourself. You've decided that you're the dumb redneck (your words) and you're playing that part and repeatedly posting self-pity about this role you've created for yourself in place of any reasoned discussion or thought ever... for some reason.

If this is going to continue I'd prefer you bring Jordan into it.

Then why didn't you tag him yourself?

All site staff can see and review all reports made, including @Jordan, and as the site FAQ says, you can contact him directly to contest any moderator action. You can also send the staff PMs at any time.

 

[TexRex]

Gosh, this is awkward.

 

[ryzno]

You have literally infinite time to sit, compose your thoughts, edit, review, and re-edit until a post says what you want it to say. This whole "I ain't as smart as y'all" schtick you've been pushing for the last few months is just that: schtick.

I've always posted the same... I dropped out after my 2nd time in the 9th grade...
Actually I posted way worse in the old drag racing threads... Something I fought for to become its own sub section in GT6 and saw in the GTSport section.

Remember Danny280zxturbo whatever? Y'all banned him...

 

[Blitz24]

Gosh, this is awkward.

I'm guessing the end outcome is they find someone else who is crazy enough to support them. However they have to hope they are LESS crazy than refusing to believe Covid-19 is real.

 

[TexRex]

I'm guessing the end outcome is they find someone else who is crazy enough to support them. However they have to hope they are LESS crazy than refusing to believe Covid-19 is real.

It could end up being Madison Cawthorn.

GOP Congressman Says He Wants to Bust Out Jan. 6 ‘Political Prisoners’ - VICE

When Republican Rep. Madison Cawthorn was asked about what he’s doing to help the hundreds in jail awaiting trial for their roles in the violent January 6 riots, he called them “political prisoners”—and said he wanted to “bust them out.”

“The big problem is we don’t actually know who all the political prisoners are, and so if we were actually to go and try to bust them out—and let me tell you, the reason why they have taken these political prisoners is they’re trying to make an example, because they don’t want to see the mass protest going on in Washington,” he said at a Macon County Republican Party event on Sunday.
Someone in the audience then asked “when will you call us to Washington again.”

“We are actively working on this,” Cawthorn responded.” We have a few plans in motion I can’t make public right now,” he said, before calling those facing charges for their role in the January 6 insurrection “political hostages”—for the second time.

The speech was streamed live on Facebook by the Macon County Republican Party on Sunday. His comments were first noticed by a local anti-Cawthorn activist.

A Cawthorn staffer insisted that he wasn’t suggesting another massive protest in Washington like the one that turned into a violent riot on January 6, as Congress met to certify President Joe Biden’s election.

“Congressman Cawthorn was referring to actively working on getting answers about political prisoners following January 6,” Cawthorn spokesman Luke Ball told VICE News in an email. “Nothing else. He is not actively working on any ‘protest’– to assert otherwise would completely take his remarks out of context.”

When asked about Cawthorn’s comments about busting out prisoners, Ball said his boss “wants due process for the prisoners and does not believe that is what they are currently receiving.”
“He was not advocating for any form of illegal action, only that they receive full due process,” he continued.

Cawthorn’s remarks came during a question-and-answer period after his speech, where he claimed that “Trump obviously won” and repeated false claims that voter fraud had stolen the 2020 election for Democrats.

“Can we actually trust our voting system? Because I’ll tell you, anybody who tells you that Joe Biden was duly elected is lying to you,” he said to cheers. “We all saw the fraud, it was on full display in front of us, we all know it was a stolen election.”

Cawthorn even claimed issues with his own state and suggested that North Carolina Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper had won because of voter fraud too, even though Trump and the GOP won nearly all of the statewide races.

During the rest of his remarks, Cawthorn asserted that Democrats are “planning to destroy everything we believe in,” “want to take the bulletproof vests off the men who are in uniform,” and “want to take our children away and put them in indoctrination camps—I don’t even call them public schools anymore.”

He also said Biden is “In such clear mental cognitive decline that he is incapable of carrying out the duties of his office,” and called to remove Biden via the 25th Amendment while warning that Republicans couldn’t wait until 2024 to remove Biden from office.

“We need to fix what happened with 2020,” he added later, complaining of Republicans who talked about the next presidential election.

Cawthorn has been one of the loudest voices echoing Trump’s 2020 election lies before the and since the riots, while downplaying the January 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol, suggesting supporters “lightly threaten” their congressmen if they didn’t support Trump’s challenge to the election.

“Say: ‘If you don’t support election integrity, I’m coming after you. Madison Cawthorn’s coming after you. Everybody’s coming after you,’” Cawthorn said in December.

On January 6, he spoke at the Stop the Steal rally that presaged the riots, telling the crowd he thought it had “some fight in it.”

 

[UKMikey]

Whoops... tree'd the hell out of by @Famine above re nukes.

As for "calling @ryzno a racist", I basically pointed out that he mixed up Al-Isis and the TaliQaeda several times on the Afghanistan thread and threw in an off colour joke about them all being towelheads. Sorry if the irony was lost on anyone.

He sent me a bunch of PMs (a couple of which were pretty foul mouthed) in relation to this to which I've advised him multiple times to report the post and I'll take the points if they're warranted. But I haven't received any points as a result of that post so far if he has.

He also called me a selfish prick on that thread for pointing these errors out so I'm not surprised if he's received points for his own abusive behaviour. If so, I don't see them being wiped out any time soon.

 

[ryzno]

Whoops... tree'd the hell out of by @Famine above.

Please enlighten us man.

 

[UKMikey]

Please enlighten us man.

I independently looked up your video about the nukes in Google and found it had been quote mined to hell and back by right wing outlets just as @Famine pointed out and that Biden wasn't nuking anybody. But since I refreshed the page it turned out he'd already posted everything I said so there's no need to post it all twice and pile on.

 

[ryzno]

I independently looked up your video about the nukes in Google and found it had been quote mined to hell and back by right wing outlets just as @Famine pointed out and that Biden wasn't nuking anybody. But since he posted everything I said there's no need to post it all twice and pile on.

There was another video that was different but brought up what I posted in the other video. I can't find it anymore. Besides the glitch the video isn't edited.

It was a video of a Vet telling an enlisted soldier who threatened marshall law shootings if something happened, a number of vets would stand up to help the American citizens and I can't help y'all if you don't get what Biden is saying.

FYallsI. I ain't got nothing better to do till I go to jail Oct 7th(wanted to get it started but Rona and ****... Court didn't go well on the 24th...

 

[UKMikey]

This is what Biden is saying. It tallies up with what @Famine said above. Nobody's nuking anyone, let alone their own people.

Biden mocked gun-rights advocates who say they need assault weapons to fight the government: 'You need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons'

President Joe Biden made the joke in a White House speech outlining his administration's plan to combat gun violence in the US.

www.businessinsider.com

President Joe Biden joked that people who think they needed guns to take on the US government would actually need nuclear weapons.

In a speech outlining his plan to combat gun violence on Wednesday, Biden said: "If you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons."

Biden also said there had always been limits on what kinds of weapons people could legally own: "The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own. You couldn't buy a cannon."

"The point is that there has always been the ability to limit — rationally limit the type of weapon that can be owned and who can own it."

Biden also said his administration would adopt a "zero tolerance" approach toward gun dealers who violate existing law. The president has long pushed for gun control legislation, including a ban on assault weapons.

 

[ryzno]

This is what Biden is saying. It tallies up with what @Famine said above. Nobody's nuking anyone, let alone their own people.

Biden mocked gun-rights advocates who say they need assault weapons to fight the government: 'You need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons'

President Joe Biden made the joke in a White House speech outlining his administration's plan to combat gun violence in the US.

www.businessinsider.com

I disagree. How is mocking them not a threat?

 

[UKMikey]

I disagree. How is mocking them not a threat?

I can see that it might be a threat to the insecure.

Not a nuclear one, however.

The point still stands. 2A doesn't entitle government resisters to heavy artillery, nukes and F-15s.

 

[ryzno]

I can see that it might be a threat to the insecure.

Not a nuclear one, however.

The point still stands. 2A doesn't entitle government resisters to heavy artillery, nukes and F-15s.

Where does it deny them? You can own a tank with the right papers.

Also last I checked, you do have a right to overthrow a tyrannical government.

Oh wait it's a crime. Damn laws...

 

[UKMikey]

Where does it deny them? You can own a tank with the right papers.

Also last I checked, you do have a right to overthrow a tyrannical government.

Oh wait it's a crime. Damn laws...

He says you'll need more than a tank to take on the whole US government.

Doesn't it deny nukes and F-15 assault aircraft? Those are the examples he specifically quoted.

Even the tank is a bit iffy if the stated purpose for acquiring one is to roll on Washington, I would've thought.

At any rate this isn't Biden declaring war on his own people.

 

[ryzno]

He says you'll need more than a tank to take on the whole US government.

Doesn't it deny nukes and F-15 assault aircraft.

Sounds like a threat. God forbid people remove the corruption.

I mean, Danoff said the Taliban aren't a terrorist group since they've become a dysfunctional state.

Not that I know of. It never really specifies "arms".

It's in reference to America a point y'all won't admit yet somehow prove it in y'all argument. Biden threat.

Actually you can own a jet, good luck getting it working...

 

[UKMikey]

Sounds like a threat. God forbid people remove the corruption.

Pointing out the law is not a threat unless you intend to ignore it. You have to prove the corruption not just march up to a government building and stick guns in someone's face.

Not that I know of. It never really specifies "arms".

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

It's in reference to America a point y'all won't admit yet somehow prove it in y'all argument.

Pardon? What difference does that make?

Actually you can own a jet, good luck getting it working...

I think you'd need several and I'm not sure they'd sell you any if your purpose is to use them to drop bombs on Capitol Hill or the Pentagon. Russia might, maybe.

 

[TexRex]

You can own a tank with the right papers.

Not one that is fully functional with firing capabilities and the munitions to be fired.

Also last I checked, you do have a right to overthrow a tyrannical government.

Oh wait it's a crime. Damn laws...

As in...the Declaration of Independence?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

You might consider familiarizing yourself with history before latching onto narratives such as one that alleges a mounting effort to erase it. By the way, "I wanted the other guy to win the election" would be exactly the sort of light and transient cause to which the document refers.

 

[UKMikey]

It's 5:18 over here. I'm "done" with this argument. Which of course means I'll be back tomorrow to carry on slogging through the posts.

 

[ryzno]

It's 5:18 over here. I'm "done" with this argument. Which of course means I'll be back tomorrow to carry on slogging through the posts.

Check my edit tomorrow, Buenos Noche.

"I wanted the other guy to win the election"

I wanted Tulsi to win...

**** me, DP... Sorry y'all.

Almost 1:30 here, I'll go to sleep with Mikey so we can watch each others 6.

 

[UKMikey]

Check my edit tomorrow, Buenos Noche.

If you mean this edit...

I mean, Danoff said the Taliban aren't a terrorist group since they've become a dysfunctional state.

I think he said under some people's definition you stop being terrorists when you start running a country but also that it's not a cut and dried question.

It really gets into the definition of terrorist. For some, states can't be terrorists, and the Taliban at this point are considered a state actor (at least by some). I think the organization has carried out terrorist attacks, and so I'd say it's fine to call them terrorists. But as they transition into a government, that term doesn't apply so well.

Definitely the Taliban harbored terrorists and have in the past carried out terrorist actions, so it's fair, but getting muddier.

Were the ANC still terrorists when they ran South Africa? Thatcher seemed to think so, but she was kind of biased as her husband profited under apartheid.

Menachim Begin blew up the King David Hotel. Was he still a terrorist when he was Prime Minister of Israel?

Were Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness still terrorists when they became politicians in Northern Ireland?

Certainly they weren't revolutionaries any more. Whether they constitute an actual terrorist government is probably a matter of whether they continue to do terrorist things once their aims are met.

I don't see how @Danoff's statement expresses support for the Taliban or its actions in any way, or more importantly what it has to do with the right to bear arms under the second amendment to the US Constitution. For me the crux of the conversation is this:

The video shows Biden saying - back in June - that 2A nutters* don't need assault rifles to take on the US Government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons. That's citizens using "nukes and ****" against government (of which Biden is the head).

So far I haven't seen anything to disprove this.

 

[merseyxshore]

I saw an interesting video of a Vet talking about how if you took, half, of retired vets they'd out number our current troops and wouldn't hesitate to "un-retire" to protect the American citizens against a tyrannical government.

Where were these guys and the militia fantasists last year when the US government and police were literally murdering people on camera, attacking the press, crushing the right to protest against police murdering citizens and KOing elderly people in the street? I'd be very interested to hear what actually qualifies as tyrannical enough for one of these Gravy Seals to actually "regrettably" (lol) take action with their noble weapons?

 

[eran0004]

I’m sure the retired vets would outnumber the current troops, but their problem is that they don’t have any equipment.

Chances are that a lot of them would also take the side of the tyrannical government since such a regime couldn’t really seize power without the support of the military and the kind of policy that appeals to the military probably appeals to a lot of veterans as well.

 

[TexRex]

I wanted Tulsi to win...

Why? Do you think this a rational desire given her never presenting a full ticket, her endorsement of Joe Biden and her absence from ballots across the country?

What policies did she have that appealed to you? Did her position on some things outweigh her position on others? I can think of a few that run counter to views you've expressed here, such as gun control advocacy resulting in an "F" grade from the NRA, elimination of the private incarceral industry, federal abortion funding, universal basic income, a universal healthcare model resembling that of Australia, free community college for all citizens, support for the Green New Deal and legislation to get off of fossil fuels for energy production by 2035, fracking bans...I'm certain there are more but I'm struggling to think them up and I don't particularly want to go looking. Tulsi was never a serious candidate.

Oh and I guarantee the majority of those advocating for overthrow of the current government, whose sentiment you've very recently echoed, don't give a flying **** about Tulsi Gabbard. They're pissy that Biden beat Trump in an election they refuse to acknowledge was fair.

Where were these guys and the militia fantasists last year when the US government and police were literally murdering people on camera, attacking the press, crushing the right to protest against police murdering citizens and KOing elderly people in the street?

Cheering it on.

 

[TexRex]

It could end up being Madison Cawthorn.

GOP Congressman Says He Wants to Bust Out Jan. 6 ‘Political Prisoners’ - VICE

More detail on this..

https://mobile.twitter.com/Fritschner/status/1432387442989015043
https://mobile.twitter.com/Fritschner/status/1432395560330436612
https://mobile.twitter.com/Fritschner/status/1432409641833598980
https://mobile.twitter.com/Fritschner/status/1432433455200096259
https://mobile.twitter.com/Fritschner/status/1432477174586556416

Edit: Not all of the links in the thread are embedding. Here's the thread unrolled:

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

 

[ryzno]

I honestly don't get how you can make anything out of Tweets. Looks like a wall of gibberish.

 

[TexRex]

I honestly don't get how you can make anything out of Tweets. Looks like a wall of gibberish.

That's curious. I'd imagine they appear the same for most anyone who doesn't utilize a plugin or third party app that alters appearance.

You've mentioned you have a severely cracked phone screen. Does this impede you making out the contents of posts on GTPlanet to any significant degree?

 

[ryzno]

That's curious. I'd imagine they appear the same for most anyone who doesn't utilize a plugin or third party app that alters appearance.

You've mentioned you have a severely cracked phone screen. Does this impede you making out the contents of posts on GTPlanet to any significant degree?

No, I can read the Tweets and posts here just fine. There seems to be no order in the Tweets. Just random posts. Two people even posted the same thing.

 

[McLaren]

Someone let Madison know they're not political prisoners, they're CIA-trained Antifa agents. I know the guy decided to miss out on Congressional duties earlier this year, but he needs to keep up with the Q-Anon bulletin boards, please.