|
Post by blue-footedbooby on Mar 15, 2023 14:32:41 GMT -5
uh, yea. Guys like this have shown a propensity to go great lengths to retain power outside the democratic process. This along with Desantis's history of removing elected officials who have conflicting political stances sends a pretty chilling message. Wake-up dude, have you been smoking the Hoolie dust? So you’re accusing DeSantis of winning his last election by something like 19 percentage points by rigging the whole system in his favor? And that he will use whatever nefarious means necessary to maintain that power? Is that what you’re saying? No, I said no such thing. Do I need to cut-n-paste here what I said or is reading a problem with you? I simply said, to rephrase it, he's a creepy guy, in the mold of a Trump when it comes to respecting democracy. However, I wouldn't put anything past him. We're talking about a guy that flies Texan immigrants to Martha's V-yard for no apparent reason other than to make a political statement, mean time, local Cuban immigrants aren't sent anywhere. Maybe he doesn't want to piss off the ~1 million Cuban locals? He's a paper doll.
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Mar 15, 2023 14:40:17 GMT -5
Let’s not forget Desantis’ highly publicized political stunt of arresting several people for illegally voting after they were told they could vote. Did those “several people” turn the tide in DeSantis’ favor? Is that why he won his last election? In the 2018 Florida gubernatorial election, DeSantis won by 32,463 votes. In that same election, Florida voted to approve Amendment 4, which restored voting rights to most people with felony convictions who have completed their sentences, roughly 1.4 million people. Do you suppose that might have made a difference if that law was passed BEFORE the 2018 election? So what did the Republicans do? in 2019 the GOP-controlled legislature passed a law requiring that people with felony convictions pay off all fines, fees and restitution before they are eligible to vote. That removed roughly 774,000 people who would have been eligible to vote. DeSantis did that. The courts have gone back and forth on the legality of that law, especially since Florida makes it so difficult to even find out if you owe anything, and the registrar of voters told people they were eligible then DeSantis had them arrested for a felony. 15 of the first 19 arrested were black. That sent a chilling message to the other 600K+ that were legally eligible to vote. Yes, those "several People" arrested to intimidate 1.4 million potentially had a huge impact.
|
|
moody
Banned
Posts: 18,679
|
Post by moody on Mar 15, 2023 14:51:20 GMT -5
Did those “several people” turn the tide in DeSantis’ favor? Is that why he won his last election? In the 2018 Florida gubernatorial election, DeSantis won by 32,463 votes. In that same election, Florida voted to approve Amendment 4, which restored voting rights to most people with felony convictions who have completed their sentences, roughly 1.4 million people. Do you suppose that might have made a difference if that law was passed BEFORE the 2018 election? So what did the Republicans do? in 2019 the GOP-controlled legislature passed a law requiring that people with felony convictions pay off all fines, fees and restitution before they are eligible to vote. That removed roughly 774,000 people who would have been eligible to vote. DeSantis did that. The courts have gone back and forth on the legality of that law, especially since Florida makes it so difficult to even find out if you owe anything, and the registrar of voters told people they were eligible then DeSantis had them arrested for a felony. 15 of the first 19 arrested were black. That sent a chilling message to the other 600K+ that were legally eligible to vote. Yes, those "several People" arrested to intimidate 1.4 million potentially had a huge impact. Canman, looks like your silly "gotcha questions" kicked you right in the ass. Better luck next time.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,849
|
Post by bluepenquin on Mar 15, 2023 15:14:14 GMT -5
Did I misunderstand - you believe that the unborn child has rights? What I did say is that the rights of the woman come first and foremost and any decision she makes is between her, her doctor and her God. She doesn't need to consult me, you or DeSantis. It is just not a political issue. Never was in the past, and should not be now. Which means - you do not believe the unborn child has any rights at any point. That a mother has the right to choose to kill her child at any time up until birth. Which would also mean that you were opposed Roe (that Roe was to restrictive in this unquestioned right of the mother). This seems like a rather extreme position on abortion rights.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Mar 15, 2023 15:50:34 GMT -5
Did those “several people” turn the tide in DeSantis’ favor? Is that why he won his last election? In the 2018 Florida gubernatorial election, DeSantis won by 32,463 votes. In that same election, Florida voted to approve Amendment 4, which restored voting rights to most people with felony convictions who have completed their sentences, roughly 1.4 million people. Do you suppose that might have made a difference if that law was passed BEFORE the 2018 election? So what did the Republicans do? in 2019 the GOP-controlled legislature passed a law requiring that people with felony convictions pay off all fines, fees and restitution before they are eligible to vote. That removed roughly 774,000 people who would have been eligible to vote. DeSantis did that. The courts have gone back and forth on the legality of that law, especially since Florida makes it so difficult to even find out if you owe anything, and the registrar of voters told people they were eligible then DeSantis had them arrested for a felony. 15 of the first 19 arrested were black. That sent a chilling message to the other 600K+ that were legally eligible to vote. Yes, those "several People" arrested to intimidate 1.4 million potentially had a huge impact. Thank you for your perspective, I do appreciate it. Even if all 1.4 million had voted for Crist (highly unlikely), DeSantis would have won the election if you strictly look at the numbers. Not to mention not knowing where these 1.4 million lived, makes it completely uncertain how the election would've been affected. Do you know for certain that the 600K+ that were eligible to vote did not? And do you know for certain they would've voted for Crist? www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/08/us/elections/results-florida-governor.html
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Mar 15, 2023 15:51:30 GMT -5
Who cares about DumbSantis? Hopefully that idiot Trump gets the GOP nomination so he can lose again.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Mar 15, 2023 15:52:59 GMT -5
What I did say is that the rights of the woman come first and foremost and any decision she makes is between her, her doctor and her God. She doesn't need to consult me, you or DeSantis. It is just not a political issue. Never was in the past, and should not be now. Which means - you do not believe the unborn child has any rights at any point. That a mother has the right to choose to kill her child at any time up until birth. Which would also mean that you were opposed Roe (that Roe was to restrictive in this unquestioned right of the mother). This seems like a rather extreme position on abortion rights. The Woman has rights, not the fetus. If you want the fetus to have rights, let it survive on its own.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Mar 15, 2023 16:02:21 GMT -5
What I did say is that the rights of the woman come first and foremost and any decision she makes is between her, her doctor and her God. She doesn't need to consult me, you or DeSantis. It is just not a political issue. Never was in the past, and should not be now. Which means - you do not believe the unborn child has any rights at any point. That a mother has the right to choose to kill her child at any time up until birth. Your mishandling of "rights" in American society and law continues to amaze me.
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Mar 15, 2023 16:37:58 GMT -5
In the 2018 Florida gubernatorial election, DeSantis won by 32,463 votes. In that same election, Florida voted to approve Amendment 4, which restored voting rights to most people with felony convictions who have completed their sentences, roughly 1.4 million people. Do you suppose that might have made a difference if that law was passed BEFORE the 2018 election? So what did the Republicans do? in 2019 the GOP-controlled legislature passed a law requiring that people with felony convictions pay off all fines, fees and restitution before they are eligible to vote. That removed roughly 774,000 people who would have been eligible to vote. DeSantis did that. The courts have gone back and forth on the legality of that law, especially since Florida makes it so difficult to even find out if you owe anything, and the registrar of voters told people they were eligible then DeSantis had them arrested for a felony. 15 of the first 19 arrested were black. That sent a chilling message to the other 600K+ that were legally eligible to vote. Yes, those "several People" arrested to intimidate 1.4 million potentially had a huge impact. Thank you for your perspective, I do appreciate it. Even if all 1.4 million had voted for Crist (highly unlikely), DeSantis would have won the election if you strictly look at the numbers. Not to mention not knowing where these 1.4 million lived, makes it completely uncertain how the election would've been affected. Do you know for certain that the 600K+ that were eligible to vote did not? And do you know for certain they would've voted for Crist? www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/08/us/elections/results-florida-governor.htmlin 2018, he won by 32,463 votes Ron DeSantis: 4,076,186 (49.6%) Andrew Gillum: 4,043,723 (49.2%) In the reelection, after all of his shenanigans, he won by the largest margin for a Republican in history. You can argue that he was fantastic in winning over Florida, or you can argue that he was fantastic in solidifying his power, rallying his base and suppressing his opposition. 2018 Florida gubernatorial election
|
|
|
Post by bobinmd on Mar 15, 2023 16:44:57 GMT -5
Trump with better hair. No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Mar 15, 2023 16:53:50 GMT -5
What I did say is that the rights of the woman come first and foremost and any decision she makes is between her, her doctor and her God. She doesn't need to consult me, you or DeSantis. It is just not a political issue. Never was in the past, and should not be now. Which means - you do not believe the unborn child has any rights at any point. That a mother has the right to choose to kill her child at any time up until birth. Which would also mean that you were opposed Roe (that Roe was to restrictive in this unquestioned right of the mother). This seems like a rather extreme position on abortion rights. Your religious interpretation is at odds with the thousands of year old Jewish legal interpretation. You've conspicuously avoided commenting on that, even though I explicitly asked you for comment. Why do you think your religion should take precedence? Does Jewish law state that life begins at conception?No, life does not begin at conception under Jewish law. Sources in the Talmud note that the fetus is “mere water” before 40 days of gestation. Following this period, the fetus is considered a physical part of the pregnant individual’s body, not yet having life of its own or independent rights. The fetus is not viewed as separate from the parent’s body until birth begins and the first breath of oxygen into the lungs allows the soul to enter the body. Does Jewish law assert that it is possible to murder a fetus? No, Jewish law does not consider a fetus to be alive. The Torah, Exodus 21:22-23, recounts a story of two men who are fighting and injure a pregnant woman, resulting in her subsequent miscarriage. The verse explains that if the only harm done is the miscarriage, then the perpetrator must pay a fine. However, if the pregnant person is gravely injured, the penalty shall be a life for a life as in other homicides. The common rabbinical interpretation of this verse is that the men did not commit murder and that the fetus is not a person. The primary concern is the well-being of the person who was injured What does Jewish law say about the rights of the person who is pregnant and the rights of the fetus? Judaism values life and affirms that protecting existing life is paramount at all stages of pregnancy. A fetus is not considered a person under Jewish law and therefore does not have the same rights as one who is already alive. As such, the interests of the pregnant individual always come before that of the fetus.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Mar 15, 2023 17:10:19 GMT -5
Thank you for your perspective, I do appreciate it. Even if all 1.4 million had voted for Crist (highly unlikely), DeSantis would have won the election if you strictly look at the numbers. Not to mention not knowing where these 1.4 million lived, makes it completely uncertain how the election would've been affected. Do you know for certain that the 600K+ that were eligible to vote did not? And do you know for certain they would've voted for Crist? www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/08/us/elections/results-florida-governor.htmlin 2018, he won by 32,463 votes Ron DeSantis: 4,076,186 (49.6%) Andrew Gillum: 4,043,723 (49.2%) In the reelection, after all of his shenanigans, he won by the largest margin for a Republican in history. You can argue that he was fantastic in winning over Florida, or you can argue that he was fantastic in solidifying his power, rallying his base and suppressing his opposition. 2018 Florida gubernatorial electionYep, I'm aware his first victory was by the narrowest of margins. Arguments for either position can be made, depending on where you stand. While most of the panel on Gutfeld! was lauding praise over DeSantis for the Martha's Vineyard maneuver, guest Sonnie Johnson made an astute observation. She cautioned falling in love with someone like DeSantis who knows how to wield the levers of Government. It's on YouTube if anyone really cares, go to the 8 minute mark.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Mar 15, 2023 17:26:16 GMT -5
Which means - you do not believe the unborn child has any rights at any point. That a mother has the right to choose to kill her child at any time up until birth. Which would also mean that you were opposed Roe (that Roe was to restrictive in this unquestioned right of the mother). This seems like a rather extreme position on abortion rights. Your religious interpretation is at odds with the thousands of year old Jewish legal interpretation. You've conspicuously avoided commenting on that, even though I explicitly asked you for comment. Why do you think your religion should take precedence? Does Jewish law state that life begins at conception?No, life does not begin at conception under Jewish law. Sources in the Talmud note that the fetus is “mere water” before 40 days of gestation. Following this period, the fetus is considered a physical part of the pregnant individual’s body, not yet having life of its own or independent rights. The fetus is not viewed as separate from the parent’s body until birth begins and the first breath of oxygen into the lungs allows the soul to enter the body. Does Jewish law assert that it is possible to murder a fetus? No, Jewish law does not consider a fetus to be alive. The Torah, Exodus 21:22-23, recounts a story of two men who are fighting and injure a pregnant woman, resulting in her subsequent miscarriage. The verse explains that if the only harm done is the miscarriage, then the perpetrator must pay a fine. However, if the pregnant person is gravely injured, the penalty shall be a life for a life as in other homicides. The common rabbinical interpretation of this verse is that the men did not commit murder and that the fetus is not a person. The primary concern is the well-being of the person who was injured What does Jewish law say about the rights of the person who is pregnant and the rights of the fetus? Judaism values life and affirms that protecting existing life is paramount at all stages of pregnancy. A fetus is not considered a person under Jewish law and therefore does not have the same rights as one who is already alive. As such, the interests of the pregnant individual always come before that of the fetus. I am a little mystified as to why Judaism is supposed to be the bedrock for Evangelicals or anybody who is not Jewish. I get that you and Zen point to Jesus being one who followed the laws and customs of Judaism, but there are significant times where He did not. Working on the Sabbath and "blasphemously" claiming He was the Son of God come to mind. His willingness to go against Jewish culture and interact with Samaritans is another. Juxtapose that with how He regarded children in the New Testament leaves me wondering how exactly He would have regarded abortion. I can live with saying that no one knows for sure, but by the accounts left, it seems doubtful to me that He would be favorable towards abortion. Especially abortion as a means of birth control. Also, as far as I know, Christians who didn't come from a background of Judaism were not expected to convert to Jewish custom or law. Just asking.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Mar 15, 2023 17:54:07 GMT -5
Evangelicals are the biggest group of frauds and hypocrites in existence. A bunch of clowns.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Mar 15, 2023 17:59:12 GMT -5
Which means - you do not believe the unborn child has any rights at any point. That a mother has the right to choose to kill her child at any time up until birth. Which would also mean that you were opposed Roe (that Roe was to restrictive in this unquestioned right of the mother). This seems like a rather extreme position on abortion rights. The Woman has rights, not the fetus. If you want the fetus to have rights, let it survive on its own.
|
|