U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

[glass_houses]

View attachment 1431051
Well, thanks!

I'm not murikun. Can you explain this for me? Thanks.

 

[tampax pearl]

I'm not murikun. Can you explain this for me? Thanks.

If I understand this properly, the electors (folks that are supposed to represent the people of the States) MUST vote for what the people want.

"State election officials feared that if the Supreme Court ruled that electors were free to defy the state, it could trigger enough defections to potentially upset the outcome in a very close race. During the argument in May, several justices said they feared it could create “chaos” in November if electors were not bound by their state or its laws."

Here is the paper where the Supreme Court states you gotta follow the rules, electoral college.

 

[Calandrino]

Did Snopes always outright lie and stretch the truth?

Evidently. Their article about the myth that people swallow 8 spiders a year dates back to 2001, way before they dipped their toes in politics too much, and they apparently just made up all their references. There doesn't seem to be any sinister motivation behind it and I presume people don't swallow 8 spiders a year, but it's a gentle reminder that they are and always were "just a website" and they can write whatever the hell they want.

The article: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/swallow-spiders/
Random search result I found about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Unresolved...o_is_lisa_holst_a_tale_of_spiders_trolls_and/

Their modern, politically-motivated style is a little different: they seek out the weakest version of an argument, then "debunk" insubstantial parts of it. If Biden were caught taking bribes from little green men from Mars, their take would be: "Fact Check - false, the Martians are of average size and more of a teal hue."

One last thing, sharing my favorite Snopes article: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/i-have-a-what/

 

[Meat Target]

Did Snopes always outright lie and stretch the truth? I'm not sure when I noticed, probably years back when they were using Adam Ruins Everything arguments about Alpha males not existing because wolves or whatever retarded concept he used. Either way, that site is fucking horrible and has people brainwashed outright, especially on articles where it says things like "mostly true, but wrongly attributed" or something else vague.

It's the equivalent of a newspaper headline saying one thing in the headline, then clarifying the exact opposite in the article.

They're so unctuous that they feel the need to fact-check the Babylon Bee.

 

[core_go7]

View attachment 1430983o

"Alleges". It was literally a garage pull-down rope you retards. Anyone who honestly believes Bubba never saw the rope is an absolutely gullible moron.

Honestly, Trump shouldn't have even brought him up. The dude didn't deserve 5 more minutes of fame before returning to being a subpar NASCAR driver. Although I'm sure we'll have a story where a fan will allegedly call him the N-word or spit on him within the next 12 months. Gotta keep in that limelight.

Honestly, I'm starting to believe this is just NASCAR screeching for attention and jumping on the BLM bandwagon before it falls into obscurity again.

 

[Return of the Freaker]

View attachment 1431051
Well, thanks!

So if this ruling had been made in 2015 or 16 would Hillary have won?

 

[Gustav Schuchardt]

Their modern, politically-motivated style is a little different: they seek out the weakest version of an argument, then "debunk" insubstantial parts of it. If Biden were caught taking bribes from little green men from Mars, their take would be: "Fact Check - false, the Martians are of average size and more of a teal hue."

Yep. "False: The Terrorist drove a Honda" always summed their debunkings pretty well.

 

[Banditotron]

So if this ruling had been made in 2015 or 16 would Hillary have won?

Lolno

 

[stupidpieceofshit]

If I understand this properly, the electors (folks that are supposed to represent the people of the States) MUST vote for what the people want.

"State election officials feared that if the Supreme Court ruled that electors were free to defy the state, it could trigger enough defections to potentially upset the outcome in a very close race. During the argument in May, several justices said they feared it could create “chaos” in November if electors were not bound by their state or its laws."

Here is the paper where the Supreme Court states you gotta follow the rules, electoral college.

I haven't read the paper, [edit: I thought it was the SC opinion not just the order/decision] but I suspect this should kill the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which is a leftist's plan to have the EC vote for the national popular vote winner and not what the individual state voted for.

 

[Kane Lives]

Here's a little more stuff on the situation in queens and the ongoing pro-nypd marches that have been occurring there.
View attachment 1430992
This video is from the original march on June 22nd But there was also one just on Friday. Looks like mostly cop families, business owners and the local Chinese immigrant population.
View attachment 1430999
https://archive.ph/BnsYz
I am not sure if there are plans for more marches or not but Red Canary Song seems proper shook.
View attachment 1431004
Video from a Chinese lanuage news site. go to about 2:09 for coverage of the counter-protest.
Sauce: https://archive.ph/UKPjL

The cops guarding the "rally" seemed amused as fuck by all this.

I'm glad they're at least deriving some small measure of entertainment from this ongoing lunacy.

 

[Meat Target]

I haven't read the paper, but I suspect this should kill the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which is a leftist's plan to have the EC vote for the national popular vote winner and not what the individual state voted for.

Honestly, state governments should have their own electoral college systems as well. Maybe then California wouldn't be run like South Africa.

 

[LaxerBRO]

PolitiFact is even worse than Snopes:

 

[stupidpieceofshit]

Honestly, state governments should have their own electoral college systems as well. Maybe then California wouldn't be run like South Africa.

Before this decision, the members of the EC could vote any way they wanted, unless state law said other wise (i.e. state laws that said "the winner of the popular vote gets all EC votes" or "The EC votes will be distributed among voting %" [i.e. some one with 50% of the popular vote gets 50% of the states EC votes]}, which is why the NPVCI was a thing, it wasn't active yet because not enough states agreed to it, but it was getting close IIRC.

 

[Rich Evans Apologist]

If I understand this properly, the electors (folks that are supposed to represent the people of the States) MUST vote for what the people want.

"State election officials feared that if the Supreme Court ruled that electors were free to defy the state, it could trigger enough defections to potentially upset the outcome in a very close race. During the argument in May, several justices said they feared it could create “chaos” in November if electors were not bound by their state or its laws."

Here is the paper where the Supreme Court states you gotta follow the rules, electoral college.

sounds like the ruling allows states to mandate that their electors vote in concordance with the overall vote, not necessarily that it mandates that. More that a state is allowed to pass a law requiring it, and that such a law is not unconstitutional.

Such laws likely don't matter in states that split their electors based on what % is won by given candidates (IE getting 51% in a state just gets you 51% of the state's electoral vote, not 100%), but they're obviously important in purely first past the post states (where what is supposed to happen is that the candidate which first passes the bar receives all of the state's votes). I don't believe that there is much of an ideological bend here, though I've not read the court opinion yet - liberal states are paranoid of secret nazis everywhere, and conservative states believe that at any moment there will be a coup against orange leader so both are likely to hamstring their electors

 

[ErrForceOnez]

Lolno

No it just refers to the electoral college, not the national popular vote.
The states all get a certain amount of electoral votes, and whatever candidate wins each state is supposed to receive all of that state's electoral votes (outside of like maine and nebraska, but thats a different thing), but the votes are actually cast by people, 1 elector per vote. There have been times where they just decide to vote for whoever they want to for whatever reason and ignore the actual general public's vote, and this ruling says that the state can decide that they are not allowed to do this

 

[stupidpieceofshit]

My optimism on this ruling may be misplaced, the ruling was on enforcing state law which still allows an entry for the bullshit National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to happen, which is just insane as members of the compact basically say "fuck our state's citizens and their wishes, and our own interest, we just follow CA and NY [well that is what the people who press for the NPVCI want, if the naitonal popular vote is GOP they be pissed off]"

 

[Rich Evans Apologist]

My optimism on this ruling may be misplaced, the ruling was on enforcing state law which still allows an entry for the bullshit National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to happen, which is just insane as members of the compact basically say "fuck our state's citizens and their wishes, and our own interest, we just follow CA and NY"

states can choose to let it happen, or states can bar it outright. The ruling allows states to bar participation in things like this, which largely means that states which would have gone in one direction in the first place... continue to go in that direction. All it functionally seems to change is that it thwarts a singular group making efforts to become the whole of their state's electors and voting for whatever they want... by allowing the legislature more means to rebuke them. If this ever becomes a thing, I would guess the next-up question is "can an elector refuse to cast their vote?" which has already been answered afaik but these retards will dredge the question up again and likely use some activist circuits to waste the legal system's time

 

[2lolis1cup]

PolitiFact is even worse than Snopes:
View attachment 1431073

This picture will never not be used as long as they keep up their lies.

 

[John McAfee]

In the spirit of "Cops kill black people", "genocide", "systemic racism", "few bad apples" etc. I was interested to see how this countries capital for gun violence was doing. Chicago!

Currently, as of writing, for just 2020: There have been 330 individuals shot and killed, 1506 shot and wounded, totaling 1836. Of these figures, only 3 of these deaths were by police. 258 of the victims were black, and only 24 of the assailants were classified as black - however 294 assailants weren't classified at all - these stats are gathered by what's reported by MSM and updated as more information comes out. Which explains them not disclosing the assailants (lol optics).

Upon skimming the top crime riddled cities, the racial makeup is:

Austin, IL. - 84% black
Englewood, IL. - 95% black
Garfield Park, IL. - 90% black
North Lawndale - IL. - 88% black

Either the small percentages of whites and asians in these cities are hyper violent offenders, or there might be some black-on-black shenanigans going on. Either way, the small number of police related killings is pretty impressive.

Source

 

[BiggerChungus]

PolitiFact is even worse than Snopes:
View attachment 1431073

I've found pretty much any "factcheck" or media bias report site swings hard to the left.