There is plenty of time to set up mail in votes. Most states already do it in one form or another.Another day, another beatdown.
There would be less risk to election workers and voters in a mail-in election. Mail workers wouldn't have much more exposure than they do now.
Sorry.
But you admit they have to sustain risk to their lives.
Not sorry.
Blood-sport Chump affirming his checkmate.
How many times are you going to call for your daddy DMC and be ignored?
Of course they do.
They're at the same risk right now.
Mail-in ballots wouldn't elevate that risk.
You want expand the risk to include voters, poll workers and observers.
Why?
Big talk from a guy who was told by his daddy chump that he had better stay in the closet.
Big talk from a guy who was told by his daddy chump that he had better stay in the closet.
Because you put lives on the altar to sustain your political ambitions. You don't have to keep affirming dat checkmate, chump.
What else did you want me to say? I sent the mentions for people to have a laugh. He even forecasted no response coming from one of them, thus affirming my intention.
That said, the only thing left to do was
They won't be at any more risk than normal.
You want to elevate the risk to a much larger group of people-- voters, poll workers, observers, etc.
Why do you want expose millions more people to that risk?
Thus affirming their laughing at something they weren't going to read?What else did you want me to say? I sent the mentions for people to have a laugh. He even forecasted no response coming from one of them, thus affirming my intention.
That said, the only thing left to do was
If true, that would only make it more pathetic that you're consistently bothered.Thus affirming their laughing at something they weren't going to read?
That's a bold-faced lie you decided to spout after your checkmate.
BTW, you've already admitted multiple times that there is more risk. So, before you say it's not a lie, you're caught in a lie either way.
Show how there would be more risk for mail workers.
Also show how there would be less risk for voters and poll workers.
Let's see it.
Nothing about your desperate distraction bothers me.
It's frankly just a white flag you like to run up the pole.
Besides your statement(s) that there would be?
Take your checkmate with grace. Throwing a tantrum does nobody any good.
Distract you from what? Crying out for men again?Nothing about your desperate distraction bothers me.
It's frankly just a white flag you like to run up the pole.
Post the statements.
Also show how there would be less risk for voters and poll workers.
Let's see it.
Or fold.
Standard play. For why? To waste my time on something we both know you did?
Say you'll walk away from SpursTalk for a week if I do. Give me a reason to further bust your ass.
derp folds then demands muh conditionsStandard play. For why? To waste my time on something we both know you did?
Say you'll walk away from SpursTalk for a week if I do. Give me a reason to further bust your ass.
You wanted to put millions more people at risk.
That's all.
Did you watch the video you posted?
You're not confident in your lie(s)?
You just want to throw dat tantrum.
Yep.
People at risk in my voting scheme: <500,000 who were already at risk.
People at risk in your voting scheme: >137,000,000
Did you forget your lie about how you're not putting people at risk?Yep.
People at risk in my voting scheme: <500,000 who were already at risk.
People at risk in your voting scheme: >137,000,000
So, here you are for the third time admitting you're willing to put people at risk.
LOL Dump
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote