NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
I see she's running for . . . re-election.

Last edited by a moderator:
Well you know, before not conceding and saying you won when you really lost was A-OK.I see she's running for . . . re-election.![]()
Well you know, before not conceding and saying you won when you really lost was A-OK.
Pretty sure she pulls this one out. Dems love her and the party of Trump is angry at Kemp for not bowing to Trump's pressure to illegally change the will of the people in 2020.
Just curious - assuming you’ve read her “concession speech” - do you see her actions and Trumps as equivalent?Well you know, before not conceding and saying you won when you really lost was A-OK.
Pretty sure she pulls this one out. Dems love her and the party of Trump is angry at Kemp for not bowing to Trump's pressure to illegally change the will of the people in 2020.
Pretty sure she pulls this one out. Dems love her and the party of Trump is angry at Kemp for not bowing to Trump's pressure to illegally change the will of the people in 2020.
Pretty sure she pulls this one out. Dems love her and the party of Trump is angry at Kemp for not bowing to Trump's pressure to illegally change the will of the people in 2020.
FTR - I think she should have explained her position a little further and officially conceded.
Just curious - assuming you’ve read her “concession speech” - do you see her actions and Trumps as equivalent?
Pretty sure she pulls this one out. Dems love her and the party of Trump is angry at Kemp for not bowing to Trump's pressure to illegally change the will of the people in 2020.
Why hasn't someone taken those numbers to court and filed a lawsuit?Direct Headline: Georgia’s Election Mess: Many Problems, Plenty of Blame, Few Solutions for November
Fair Fight Action, the voting rights organization started by Stacey Abrams, is considering more lawsuits on top of the one it has pending against the secretary of state’s office after the disputed 2018 governor’s race that Ms. Abrams lost to Gov. Brian Kemp. And a number of Georgia Democrats and voting rights advocates have called for Mr. Raffensperger to resign......
By Richard Fausset and Reid J. Epstein June 10, 2020
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/politics/georgia-primary-election-voting.html
*****
Abrams can't run for Governor without answering for the sheer number of voters she registered in the 2020 cycle. She's on record saying the formalized voting process in Georgia was cooked and corrupt and the Dominion systems couldn't be trusted. This lines up with a push by Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren saying the same things before Election Day 2020. As soon as Abrams runs, all of this resurfaces.
Putting Abrams back into the national daily media cycle only bolsters Trump's ability to look like a POTUS contender in 2024. Every scandal and conflict she brings only fuels a natural counter narrative to many of the core criticisms of another Trump run.
Consider the basic math behind votes that went for Biden and Democrats down the ticket that were accused of being in dispute -
2,056 Felons Illegally Voted
66,248 Under 18 Voted
2,423 Weren’t Not Registered At All
1,043 Used A PO Box
4,926 Voted Past The Voter Registration Date
10,315 Died Before The Election (Contestable)
395 Voted In Two States
15,700 Voted Though They Had Moved Out Of State
40,279 Changed County And Didn’t Re-register
----------------------------------------------------------------
133,070 Total Accused Invalid Votes ( Removing 10,315 Death Votes as that's contestable)
vs
12,500 - 12,670 Margin Of Victory (Recount Flux)
Just to mess with Kemp, typical Trump ramblings.Didn’t Trump endorse Abrams?
I don’t think this is an accurate statement. Do you have anything to back it up? My understanding is that Abrams is generally more of a “Biden” Democrat, and doesn’t share the views of AOC or Omar.She's of the mold of "The Squad" in Congress.
The Democrat Party just keeps getting further and further left.
I don’t think this is an accurate statement. Do you have anything to back it up? My understanding is that Abrams is generally more of a “Biden” Democrat, and doesn’t share the views of AOC or Omar.
“I think it’s absolutely necessary that AOC is a member of the same party that I am and the same party that every candidate running for the presidential nomination is. Because America is that diverse,” she says. “I live in the Deep South. Here, I’m considered incredibly progressive. In California, I’m a moderate.... But as long as we're on the same end of the spectrum, that's what I want. As long as we’re moving in the same direction...
She's of the mold of "The Squad" in Congress.
The Democrat Party just keeps getting further and further left.
I read that as Abrams saying even though AOC is different than me, it's good she's in the party because diversity is good.
I read that as Abrams saying even though AOC is different than me, it's good she's in the party because diversity is good.
What? No it doesn’t. You’re really stretching IMO.I see it as anytime someone says they want Socialists in their party, then that means they approve of that message.
I don't remember too much about Abrams except being impressed with here on a few interviews.I read this quote as saying the Dem party is a big tent thing, she said she would be considered a moderate in California.I see it as anytime someone says they want Socialists in their party, then that means they approve of that message.
Do moderates deny that they lost an election and still refuse to concede?I don't remember too much about Abrams except being impressed with here on a few interviews.I read this quote as saying the Dem party is a big tent thing, she said she would be considered a moderate in California.
I am not certain of what her contention is. Typically no though.Do moderates deny that they lost an election and still refuse to concede?
If you’re going to criticize her for that, then do so. But it has nothing to do with her political positions. Again, if you can find some that are similar to the Squad then point them out. I can tell you one area where she is absolutely opposed to the Squad- her strong support for Israel.Do moderates deny that they lost an election and still refuse to concede?
Which I would criticize her for.If you’re going to criticize her for that, then do so. But it has nothing to do with her political positions. Again, if you can find some that are similar to the Squad then point them out. I can tell you one area where she is absolutely opposed to the Squad- her strong support for Israel.
Why?
Yes I read that. I guess I just don't understand why it's considered an epithet. Do you?From the link I posted:
Democrat Party is an epithet for the Democratic Party of the United States, used in a disparaging fashion by the party's opponents. While the term has been used in a non-hostile way, it has grown in its negative use since the 1940s, in particular by members of the Republican Party—in party platforms, partisan speeches, and press releases—as well as by conservative commentators and third party politicians.[1][2][3]
I believe all four of them regard themselves as “democratic socialists”. I don’t think the distinction you’re making is that significant.There are no socialists in the squad. Not one of them has advocated for getting rid of the rapacious alleged "free market" and turning the means of production over to the community. People need to stop using words they obviously dont understand.
I know that. And I suspect that she would be far too centrist for you on a host of other issues as well. Which is why I strongly challenged @BladeRunner’s assertion.Which I would criticize her for.
Yes I read that. I guess I just don't understand why it's considered an epithet. Do you?
No, just republicansDo moderates deny that they lost an election and still refuse to concede?
Because wikipedia, which pretty much anyone can edit, says so. It's a strange hill on which to die, but I guess he gets off on badgering people left and right about the misuse of a word that is fairly harmless.Yes I read that. I guess I just don't understand why it's considered an epithet. Do you?
No, just republicans
ZING!!
You posted this in a thread about Stacey Abrams, who is most famous for refusing to concede an election that she lost.No, just republicans
ZING!!
Because wikipedia, which pretty much anyone can edit, says so. It's a strange hill on which to die, but I guess he gets off on badgering people left and right about the misuse of a word that is fairly harmless.
Sorry, completely my bad. I forgot this was no-joke serious burger Thursdays.You posted this in a thread about Stacey Abrams, who is most famous for refusing to concede an election that she lost.No, just republicans
ZING!!
Have you actually ever tried to edit Wikipedia? Its not how is really works (insert cluebot)Because wikipedia, which pretty much anyone can edit, says so. It's a strange hill on which to die, but I guess he gets off on badgering people left and right about the misuse of a word that is fairly harmless.
I think words have meanings. So yes it is a distinction. Democratic socialists are not Socialists. They have different philosophies on governance and policy.I believe all four of them regard themselves as “democratic socialists”. I don’t think the distinction you’re making is that significant.
I think you meant Republican lite. With that said she has done some stuff I can support so she's on my meh list. Don't hate her, not thrilled by her, won't send her money.I know that. And I suspect that she would be far too centrist for you on a host of other issues as well. Which is why I strongly challenged @BladeRunner’s assertion.
Oh it was funny - just not in the way you intended.Sorry, completely my bad. I forgot this was no-joke serious burger Thursdays.
I think words have meanings. So yes it is a distinction. Democratic socialists are not Socialists. They have different philosophies on governance and policy.