The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
Didn't she go further to say something to the effect of it being a threat to our democracy?Soccerdad1995 wrote:Hillary herself said that a refusal to accept the election results would be "horrifying". I think this is a very accurate description of the actions that she and the rest of the liberals establishment are taking. Horrifying.
Yes. And her buddy Hussein also said that it would be impossible to hack the election results. Of course, this was when they thought she would win....mojo84 wrote:Didn't she go further to say something to the effect of it being a threat to our democracy?Soccerdad1995 wrote:Hillary herself said that a refusal to accept the election results would be "horrifying". I think this is a very accurate description of the actions that she and the rest of the liberals establishment are taking. Horrifying.
Exactly! Funny how they seem to change their tune when things don't go their way.Soccerdad1995 wrote:Yes. And her buddy Hussein also said that it would be impossible to hack the election results. Of course, this was when they thought she would win....mojo84 wrote:Didn't she go further to say something to the effect of it being a threat to our democracy?Soccerdad1995 wrote:Hillary herself said that a refusal to accept the election results would be "horrifying". I think this is a very accurate description of the actions that she and the rest of the liberals establishment are taking. Horrifying.
Doesn't this prove that MSM is Fake News? 
But isn't it also illegal to offer someone money to do something illegal? What happens if you pay someone in another state to do it there, where it is illegal, regardless of whether it's legal in your state or not?TreyHouston wrote:$$$ in fines wont change anything at all.... Hitlary will pay that change in a heartbeat. However, making it a federal crime to harass an elector should be on the books and FOLLOWED!
gamboolman wrote:Here you go Mojo......
"Anyone not willing to accept the results of an election is a danger to democracy".
- Hillary Clinton
Your logic escapes me.mojo84 wrote:This supports why an elector must not succumb to the whining and protesting progressive dems that look to live off other people's money or further their own wealth. The electoral college is working as designed. This one elector is going against the grain by succumbing to the mob of progressive dems that just don't like the results.dale blanker wrote: Try this: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-re ... l-college/
"As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice."
It escapes you because I used logic. The citizens of the state of Texas, not a mob of angry lunatics, chose who they want to be president. This guy and one other went against the wishes of the people. Trump is both qualified and the choice of the people of the State of Texas.dale blanker wrote:Your logic escapes me.mojo84 wrote:This supports why an elector must not succumb to the whining and protesting progressive dems that look to live off other people's money or further their own wealth. The electoral college is working as designed. This one elector is going against the grain by succumbing to the mob of progressive dems that just don't like the results.dale blanker wrote: Try this: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-re ... l-college/
"As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice."
Hamilton describes what electors are intended to do, i.e. be informed, judgemental, and make a choice. The elector that this topic is about is trying to do that. Right or wrong, you have to respect his motives. He understands the founders' intent.
Sorry I have no respect for liars and frauds- and that is EXACTLY what this guy has been proven to be.dale blanker wrote: The elector that this topic is about is trying to do that. Right or wrong, you have to respect his motives.
Dale,dale blanker wrote:Your logic escapes me.mojo84 wrote:This supports why an elector must not succumb to the whining and protesting progressive dems that look to live off other people's money or further their own wealth. The electoral college is working as designed. This one elector is going against the grain by succumbing to the mob of progressive dems that just don't like the results.dale blanker wrote: Try this: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-re ... l-college/
"As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice."
Hamilton describes what electors are intended to do, i.e. be informed, judgemental, and make a choice. The elector that this topic is about is trying to do that. Right or wrong, you have to respect his motives. He understands the founders' intent.
bblhd672 wrote:Sorry I have no respect for liars and frauds- and that is EXACTLY what this guy has been proven to be.dale blanker wrote: The elector that this topic is about is trying to do that. Right or wrong, you have to respect his motives.
Respect is not the word that comes to mind with this Faithless Elector. Far from it.Ok, but your twisted "logic" shows no reasoning. What do you think electors are for???mojo84 wrote:It escapes you because I used logic. The citizens of the state of Texas, not a mob of angry lunatics, chose who they want to be president. This guy and one other went against the wishes of the people. Trump is both qualified and the choice of the people of the State of Texas.dale blanker wrote:Your logic escapes me.mojo84 wrote:This supports why an elector must not succumb to the whining and protesting progressive dems that look to live off other people's money or further their own wealth. The electoral college is working as designed. This one elector is going against the grain by succumbing to the mob of progressive dems that just don't like the results.dale blanker wrote: Try this: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-re ... l-college/
"As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice."
Hamilton describes what electors are intended to do, i.e. be informed, judgemental, and make a choice. The elector that this topic is about is trying to do that. Right or wrong, you have to respect his motives. He understands the founders' intent.
Your candidate lost and any efforts to justify discrediting the election or justify the elector's unfaithful actions is disingenuous.