Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (194719)	2/24/2021 11:21:43 AM
From: Wharf Rat	1 Recommendation Recommended By Lane3 Respond to of 355643

"So, how would you propose stopping the easily influenced from registering?" Trump public service announcements to his people, telling them that Biden is taking away the guns of all registered voters.

To: Lane3 who wrote (194719)	2/24/2021 12:30:44 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 355643

>> So, how would you propose stopping the easily influenced from registering? What I would propose is outlawing the influx of private money into voting districts and precincts. To begin with. That won't undo the damage. But I cannot think of a good reason an individual should be able to flood money into areas selected for the potential vote-getting value. At all. In real life, these things tend to go the other direction, however, once someone breaks the extant rules. So, I fully anticipate that Republicans will fight back in a serious way over the next three years. They don't have any Zuckerberg's on staff but they will find money. The big problem here is it is not okay for a Zuckerberg to be able to come in and say, "Look, we've got $10 Million for you to fund a satellite operation and here is where we want it. We will make sure it has a mail drop box out front. We've included money to staff it with, and here is what we want the staff to do: They should instruct patrons on how to vote, help with any questions they have while filling out ballots, and make sure the ballot is safely in our drop box out front before they leave. Now, because it is a satellite operation, you're not technically required to have partisan observers present. We have very expensive lawyers who have checked this out." This is unfair, and it should be illegal. Anyone who wants to register and vote should be able to do it. But without undue influence, which they clearly received. Zuckerberg didn't drop $400 million to be a non-partisan player. You must know that, considering that while doling out money he was also censoring Trump's Facebook Account. While the original plan called for no "investment" in Texas, a judge here in Houston announced the plan to mail ballots to last known addresses for former voters. Overnight, Zuckerberg decided that instead of just funding the previously selected cities, he would flood money into Houston. And he did -- not as much as the other areas, but he was about rewarding that commitment: After all, 400K votes out of Houston and perhaps even Dallas could be enough to flip Texas. A big win. Of course, in the end, the courts here stopped that, making it clear you cannot just mail ballots to last known addresses, and that mail-in ballots are too susceptible to fraud to mishandle them that way. Which is what should have happened in PA, GA, and the rest. But you had liberals and RINOS in charge all the way down the line in the areas Zuck's money was targeting. With a few bucks spread around in specially chosen areas to make it look good. (Notably, funding for the five targeted areas was made BEFORE any payments to other areas). This is all part of the cheat. These are the things that would need to be rehabilitated to start returning to fairness. That said, you cannot have a fair election with the media doing what IT did. There is no precedent for a media blackout on a presidential candidate as was seen. Where major scandals were simply ignored. Where no challenging questions were EVER, in the course of his campaign, posed to him. For that, I would propose a ten-year exemption for the NYT, WaPo, all cable news channels, and selected other news papers, from the First Amendment protections they enjoy as part of the Fourth Estate. Potentially, with a phase-in of such protections earlier based on good (fair) behavior. I would support establishment of bipartisan criteria. Not that Democrats would agree to anything so sensible. TO BE CLEAR, I do not fault the voters here one bit. I'm quite sure most voters acted in good faith. It was the election officials and Zuckerberg who acted wrongly. They need to be publicly excoriated and perhaps some election officials replaced. But I don't know what else can be done. We cannot turn away from cheating in our election processes and just say, "It is done. Now we have Biden, OUR choice." To do so is about the most unpatriotic, un-American thing I can think of. Far worse than this bogus bullshit at the Capitol, which Congress is wasting its time on misleading the public.