[jetpilot]

https://twitter.com/ilSharko/status/1422991958725775363

[jetpilot]

And the dumbest people ever on the planet blame it on Trump when their "leaders" are letting anyone in here illegally with Covid and sending them all over the country. Dumbest people you can ever imagine. Not only dumb but evil.

[jetpilot]

https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1423...36/photo/1

Concert in Chicago but the most brain-dead idiots in history on here call it Trump flu. Nobody has an explanation for how people have become so utterly stupid.

[vector#1]

https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1423...36/photo/1

Concert in Chicago but the most brain-dead idiots in history on here call it Trump flu. Nobody has an explanation for how people have become so utterly stupid.

Jet looks like you are playing in the litter box again

---

https://twitter.com/ilSharko/status/1422991958725775363

Jet instead of your boy going to the Texas border he should do his job in Florida

---

And the dumbest people ever on the planet blame it on Trump when their "leaders" are letting anyone in here illegally with Covid and sending them all over the country. Dumbest people you can ever imagine. Not only dumb but evil.

Jet your Leader is the one who let the Nasty Trump Flu in this country last spring don't blame it on the Border

[jetpilot]

^^^You are too dumb to even talk to.

[vector#1]

^^^You are too dumb to even talk to.

Jet looks like to me your too DUMB to follow your own advice

---

Jet now that's what we call really DUMB

[TheRealThing]

^^LOL Jet. Isn't that the truth!! The administration's requiring people coming here from foreign lands to be provably vaccinated. Staff and all workers associated with the Congress must be vaccinated. The idea of masking up children in their own homes was floated very recently. All the while the federal government are maligning the unvaccinated as being nothing short of criminal.

All travelers are required to be vaccinated. EXCEPT at the southern border. Down there so far, over a million people WITH Covid, from 150 nations have crossed the border and then sent anywhere they want to go across the entire nation. And this barely a half year into the Biden tenure. The tested, the non-tested, the unvaccinated and footloose for any reason or no reason at all, are encouraged to just dance across the border at will. The Border Patrol BTW has more than enough doses of CV-19 vaccine to give all the illegals a shot. But no, according to the Biden administration they don't have to get the shot. Nope. US taxpayers will foot the bill for their illegal entry, plus their air fare to wherever, and award them phones and life's necessities to include food and lodging. And I guess those unfortunate people who fall ill from this super spreader from the south can just lump it.

How's that fundamental transformation working? Gee I hope Obama's big birthday bash goes well.

[vector#1]

^^ Isn't that the truth!! The administration's requiring people coming here from foreign lands to be provably vaccinated. Staff and all workers associated with the Congress must be vaccinated. The idea of masking up children in their own homes was floated very recently. All the while the federal government are maligning the unvaccinated as being nothing short of criminal.

All travelers are required to be vaccinated. EXCEPT at the southern border. Down there people WITH Covid, from 150 nations have crossed the border and then sent anywhere they want to go across the entire nation. The tested, the non-tested, the unvaccinated and footloose for any reason or no reason at all, are encouraged to just dance across the border at will. The Border Patrol BTW has more than enough doses of CV-19 vaccine to give all the illegals a shot. But no, according to the Biden administration they don't have to get the shot. Nope. US taxpayers will foot the bill for their illegal entry, plus their air fare to wherever, and award them phones and life's necessities to include food and lodging. And I guess those unfortunate people who fall ill from this super spreader from the south can just lump it.

How's that fundamental transformation working? Gee I hope Obama's big birthday bash goes well.

TRT Obama has down sized his birthday bash so you can quit worrying about that. The Trumpsters in the red states is the ones who won't get the vaccine it's their choice now they will have to deal with it just a good thing we now know a little more about the Nasty Trump Flu and how to treat it better. If you don't believe me ask Quooter.  And by the way how did the Nasty Trump Flu entered this country last year when your Leader was in charge was it the Southern Border like you are claiming now or did it just dropped out of the sky ? TRT are you sure about ALL TRAVELERS HAVE TO BE VACCINATED ? You do have a reputation of lying a lot.
TRT the cartoon below is the biggest problem for you Trumpsters but they have shifted their views some.

[jamesclay]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

[Hoot Gibson]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

[vector#1]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

Quooter 2012 ? Got to admit you have lost me on this and you call us Dumb Dammm

[ronald reagan]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

[vector#1]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

[ronald reagan]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

[Old School Hound]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

Wow !  An anti-Trump Catholic... awesome.   Also,   an Apologetic Christian who  insults other posters. Am I surprised... hell no!  Congrats... Other than being anti-Trump, you fit right in with the three others who post here regularly.

---

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

Don't you realize your credibility goes to zero when you say in your Catholic-seeking post, how much you love us all, and then you talk down to  and belittle Vector in this ludicrous post?  I want to say you are better than that but, then again, apparently you are supportive of a corrupt , criminal organization that moves priests around the world from place to place so they can continue to rape children.

[ronald reagan]

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

Wow !  An anti-Trump Catholic... awesome.   Also,   an Apologetic Christian who  insults other posters. Am I surprised... hell no!  Congrats... Other than being anti-Trump, you fit right in with the three others who post here regularly.

---

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

Don't you realize your credibility goes to zero when you say in your Catholic-seeking post, how much you love us all, and then you talk down to  and belittle Vector in this ludicrous post?  I want to say you are better than that but, then again, apparently you are supportive of a corrupt , criminal organization that moves priests around the world from place to place so they can continue to rape children.

Talk down and belittle Vector? lol. Thats all it takes to 'belittle' someone?

And yup. I'm proudly catholic. I've heard way worse than your little spill... doesn't bother me, not even a little. You have lots of hate in your heart. I'll pray for you.

[vector#1]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

All right I respect your opinion but just one question. What do you think about what happened on January 6 what led up to Jan 6 and what is still going on since election day. I really believe they want a Leader or a King not a democracy.

[ronald reagan]

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

All right I respect your opinion but just one question. What do you think about what happened on January 6 what led up to Jan 6 and what is still going on since election day. I really believe they want a Leader or a King not a democracy.

I think it was nothing less than a terrorist attack and was orchestrated by each and every single person who EVER mentioned the idea that the election was stolen from them. If I had a magic wand, I would have rounded the entire crowd up.. every single one that crossed the threshold of the capital building that day and punished them to the fullest extent of the law.

I'd also expel each member of congress that voted against certification.

I'd also arrest Trump for inciting a riot, and felony murder.

Next question?

[vector#1]

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

All right I respect your opinion but just one question. What do you think about what happened on January 6 what led up to Jan 6 and what is still going on since election day. I really believe they want a Leader or a King not a democracy.

I think it was nothing less than a terrorist attack and was orchestrated by each and every single person who EVER mentioned the idea that the election was stolen from them. If I had a magic wand, I would have rounded the entire crowd up.. every single one that crossed the threshold of the capital building that day and punished them to the fullest extent of the law.

I'd also expel each member of congress that voted against certification.

I'd also arrest Trump for inciting a riot, and felony murder.

Next question?

You are the First Republican on here that is a American First kudos
Now on to question #2  What do you think about the voting laws being passed today that if the state's legislators don't like the results they can step in and take over the election ?

[TheRealThing]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

James Clay I meant to say that many of those million people crossing the border illegally have CV-19, not all of course.

[vector#1]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

James Clay I meant to say that many of those million people crossing the border illegally have CV-19, not all of course.

TRT millions ? Come on man

[TheRealThing]

The dumbest people on the planet try to turn COVID-19 into a political topic.

I agree with you. Democrats used COVID-19 as an excuse to hide their 2012 president and VP nominees from public view for most of the campaign. Now, they are criticizing the governors of states that managed to deal with the pandemic without destroying their own states' economies.

So..  Not sure if you notice it or not, but thats a really bad argument for trump.

Biden and Harris who basically didn't even campaign in 2020, and stayed in their basements... beat Trump, who campaigned non-stop. And then not only beat him, but destroyed him by 7-8 million votes. And about 75 electoral votes.

Meanwhile Herman Cain is dead. May he rest in peace.

Quooter is consistent on posting dumb arguments for his Leader
The Trumpsters on here still believe there Leader won so not much help from them in that area.
All I can say about Herman and Thousands more they believed the Leader until they died it's really sad.

Ya know, when you constantly disparage the other side as you do -- it instantly lowers your credibility to zero. The same goes for the guys on the conservative side. 
Using funny little plays on names... calling people trumpsters... and talking about their leader.
Grow up pal. I'd really like to think you all are better than that. There's absolutely no policy substance in any of your alls posts. Herman Cain dying was sad, yes. But its not nearly as sad as the state of your ability to have constructive dialogue.
I'm not sure if you know this or not, but I'm not on your team guy. lol. I'm a radical and real conservative that believes Trump was a liberal democrat. Which is why he made more deals with Nancy than he did with Mitch. And why he gave more money to Kamala than he did Rand Paul. And because he spent his entire adult life proclaiming to be a democrat and to the left of most dems. Chuck Rangel. Chuck Schumer. Eliot Sptizer. Ed Rendel. Bloomberg. Kamala. Democrat after democrat... he gave and held fundraisers for. Recently too. Kamala got $10k to her committee in just 2014. Not only did he support her, but he helped make her vice president by helping make her senator.

So quit with the buddy buddy stuff.

I don't want to be your friend. I'm here for the policy debates. And I'm leaving because you have none.

Trump is bad. Dems are good. Got it. 

Its gotta be a pathetic existence to only have that one single idea bouncing around in your head.

Why Ronnie! Maybe there's not enough real estate in his noggin for more than one idea to run around at any given time.

You and I are not light years apart on many things. But I will say that this idea that we ought to go along to get-along (not yours) for the greater part the last century, has resulted in the erosion of the American system of government. You have Mark Levin's new book? The point being, that system derives its strength from the character of those 'the people' send to the Hill.

The liberal scourge is world wide, and most folks are too comfortable to get involved to any meaningful level with this government of the people.

[ronald reagan]

You are the First Republican on here that is a American First kudos
Now on to question #2  What do you think about the voting laws being passed today that if the state's legislators don't like the results they can step in and take over the election ?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I think the question is based on false information.

Under the constitution itself, state legislators have the power to select whomever they so choose as their electors. Look at Colorado and a few other states. They now give their electors to the winner of the national vote, and will 100% ignore their own state's will. So they are basically doing what you're suggesting. They could pick Trump, and Biden win the national vote.. then they award the electors to Biden. Is that fair? I bet not, if you are consistent.

As Gore v Bush noted back in 2000, Scalia (the author) wrote for the majority of 7... there is NO constitutional right to vote for presidential electors. States are free to decide who and how they are chosen. 

So the premise itself, I'm a constitutionalist first and foremost. I believe that states have the absolute right to determine their election laws. Politifact covered the 'don't like the results they can step in and take over" thing and determined it was 'speculative' at best. Most of the states ALREADY have that power. They just don't ever exercise, and likely never will. 2016 was year it would have happened, and no one came remotely close to it. Not even REMOTELY close to it. Just a few outliers here and there that said they should.. mostly Trump saying it. 

That said, I'd like to see things go back to how they worked for 200 years without a problem.

1 election day. You go, you vote, you go home. 4 years later, you repeat.

But I have no problem with more liberal or more conservative laws regarding elections. Its the least of my worries. My focus is on who is running for those elecitons.

[vector#1]

You are the First Republican on here that is a American First kudos
Now on to question #2  What do you think about the voting laws being passed today that if the state's legislators don't like the results they can step in and take over the election ?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I think the question is based on false information.

Under the constitution itself, state legislators have the power to select whomever they so choose as their electors. Look at Colorado and a few other states. They now give their electors to the winner of the national vote, and will 100% ignore their own state's will. So they are basically doing what you're suggesting. They could pick Trump, and Biden win the national vote.. then they award the electors to Biden. Is that fair? I bet not, if you are consistent.

As Gore v Bush noted back in 2000, Scalia (the author) wrote for the majority of 7... there is NO constitutional right to vote for presidential electors. States are free to decide who and how they are chosen. 

So the premise itself, I'm a constitutionalist first and foremost. I believe that states have the absolute right to determine their election laws. Politifact covered the 'don't like the results they can step in and take over" thing and determined it was 'speculative' at best. Most of the states ALREADY have that power. They just don't ever exercise, and likely never will. 2016 was year it would have happened, and no one came remotely close to it. Not even REMOTELY close to it. Just a few outliers here and there that said they should.. mostly Trump saying it. 

That said, I'd like to see things go back to how they worked for 200 years without a problem.

1 election day. You go, you vote, you go home. 4 years later, you repeat.

But I have no problem with more liberal or more conservative laws regarding elections. Its the least of my worries. My focus is on who is running for those elecitons.

So you have NO problem with legislators stepping in and taken over the election either party if they don't like the results ?

---

And what false info you talking about ?

---

Ronald Reagan let me ask you another question did you vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020 and will you vote for him in 2024.

[ronald reagan]

You are the First Republican on here that is a American First kudos
Now on to question #2  What do you think about the voting laws being passed today that if the state's legislators don't like the results they can step in and take over the election ?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I think the question is based on false information.

Under the constitution itself, state legislators have the power to select whomever they so choose as their electors. Look at Colorado and a few other states. They now give their electors to the winner of the national vote, and will 100% ignore their own state's will. So they are basically doing what you're suggesting. They could pick Trump, and Biden win the national vote.. then they award the electors to Biden. Is that fair? I bet not, if you are consistent.

As Gore v Bush noted back in 2000, Scalia (the author) wrote for the majority of 7... there is NO constitutional right to vote for presidential electors. States are free to decide who and how they are chosen. 

So the premise itself, I'm a constitutionalist first and foremost. I believe that states have the absolute right to determine their election laws. Politifact covered the 'don't like the results they can step in and take over" thing and determined it was 'speculative' at best. Most of the states ALREADY have that power. They just don't ever exercise, and likely never will. 2016 was year it would have happened, and no one came remotely close to it. Not even REMOTELY close to it. Just a few outliers here and there that said they should.. mostly Trump saying it. 

That said, I'd like to see things go back to how they worked for 200 years without a problem.

1 election day. You go, you vote, you go home. 4 years later, you repeat.

But I have no problem with more liberal or more conservative laws regarding elections. Its the least of my worries. My focus is on who is running for those elecitons.

So you have NO problem with legislators stepping in and taken over the election either party if they don't like the results ?

---

And what false info you talking about ?

---

Ronald Reagan let me ask you another question did you vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020 and will you vote for him in 2024.

Let me begin with an emphatic no!!!!!!! I did not vote for trump in the primary in 2016. I did not vote for Trump in the general election in 2016. I did not vote for Trump in the general election in 2020. And I would not vote for Trump in the general election of 2024, 2028, 2032... or anyone in his family... or even in his circle.. or someone he endorsed.. or someone he once tweeted about... or someone who donated to his campaign... or someone who tweeted about him... or someone who had dinner with him in 1987.

I warned everyone I know and didn't know about the fraud he is. He's a LIFE LONG democrat. He's reckless. He's pro-choice. He's a liar. He's a con. He's a HORRIBLE businessman. And he's a serial cheater. You wanna know everything you need to know about a man? Ask his golf buddies if he plays fair. And his have told exactly who and how he is.

Don't ever ask me a question like that again. I'm a REAL republican. I've worked for the republican party off and on for 21 years. I've ran campaigns. I've worked uncover. I've ran fundraisers. I've organized walking crews. I don't just get on here and spit out hate and hurt. I love conservatism.. and this guy was NOTHING. He was a joke before the campaign, and a joke once again.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'false info'.

Last question --- "so you have NO problem with" states overturning the election results?

In a single word, Yes. I would have a problem with it. But would it be contrary to the constitution? No. Not even a little bit. So at the end of the day, I defer to the states and the constitution. But listen how unlikely that scenario is... just listen. Assume in Kentucky, they voted 60-40 for Biden. And the state says, "we don't like that." or "we think there was fraud" -- and they give the electors to Trump. Well, whats gonna happen in the next state elections? The 60-40 majority is gonna vote them out of office. So 1)it'd never ever happen. 2)if it would have EVER happened.. it would have happened in 2016. And it didn't even come close to happening in ANY state.

One of the parts that you conveniently glossed over, that highlighted the facts of where i stand: YOU HAVE ZERO RIGHT TO VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. ZERO. A 7-2 MAJORITY OF THE SUPREME COURT MADE THAT PERFECTLY CLEAR IN BUSH V GORE (2000). This included 2 ultra liberal judges. John Paul Stevens I believe was one of them. 

So if a state wants to get rid of presidential elections, they are 100% free to do so. Indeed, colorado didn't hold a presidential election at all in 1876. The legislature just gave the 3 votes to Rutherford Hayes. And starting in 2016.. the winner of the nationwide popular vote, wins ALL of colorado's electoral votes. The state's vote matters ZERO. The state legislature did exactly what you're describing.. their own voters intentions be dammed. They'll give them to what the other 49 states want. So what you're talking about -- is already happening. States are free to make that decision. Do I like it? Not particularly. Thats why its so important to vote for your local reps (who by the way, set up the congressional districts in federal elections!).

Obviously you have some state in mind regarding your comments. Can you point me to the states that you're most concerned about in regards to their new election laws.. and I'll go read the legislation myself, rather than rely on what some left or right wing blog tells me about it.

But back to where I stand on election laws.... again... I'd follow this formula... "you have election day. 1 day. stand in line. vote. go home. repeat every 2 years."

I see no benefit or reason to make election 'day' 2 months long... or otherwise liberalizing the requirements and standards.

[vector#1]

You are the First Republican on here that is a American First kudos
Now on to question #2  What do you think about the voting laws being passed today that if the state's legislators don't like the results they can step in and take over the election ?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I think the question is based on false information.

Under the constitution itself, state legislators have the power to select whomever they so choose as their electors. Look at Colorado and a few other states. They now give their electors to the winner of the national vote, and will 100% ignore their own state's will. So they are basically doing what you're suggesting. They could pick Trump, and Biden win the national vote.. then they award the electors to Biden. Is that fair? I bet not, if you are consistent.

As Gore v Bush noted back in 2000, Scalia (the author) wrote for the majority of 7... there is NO constitutional right to vote for presidential electors. States are free to decide who and how they are chosen. 

So the premise itself, I'm a constitutionalist first and foremost. I believe that states have the absolute right to determine their election laws. Politifact covered the 'don't like the results they can step in and take over" thing and determined it was 'speculative' at best. Most of the states ALREADY have that power. They just don't ever exercise, and likely never will. 2016 was year it would have happened, and no one came remotely close to it. Not even REMOTELY close to it. Just a few outliers here and there that said they should.. mostly Trump saying it. 

That said, I'd like to see things go back to how they worked for 200 years without a problem.

1 election day. You go, you vote, you go home. 4 years later, you repeat.

But I have no problem with more liberal or more conservative laws regarding elections. Its the least of my worries. My focus is on who is running for those elecitons.

So you have NO problem with legislators stepping in and taken over the election either party if they don't like the results ?

---

And what false info you talking about ?

---

Ronald Reagan let me ask you another question did you vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020 and will you vote for him in 2024.

Let me begin with an emphatic no!!!!!!! I did not vote for trump in the primary in 2016. I did not vote for Trump in the general election in 2016. I did not vote for Trump in the general election in 2020. And I would not vote for Trump in the general election of 2024, 2028, 2032... or anyone in his family... or even in his circle.. or someone he endorsed.. or someone he once tweeted about... or someone who donated to his campaign... or someone who tweeted about him... or someone who had dinner with him in 1987.

I warned everyone I know and didn't know about the fraud he is. He's a LIFE LONG democrat. He's reckless. He's pro-choice. He's a liar. He's a con. He's a HORRIBLE businessman. And he's a serial cheater. You wanna know everything you need to know about a man? Ask his golf buddies if he plays fair. And his have told exactly who and how he is.

Don't ever ask me a question like that again. I'm a REAL republican. I've worked for the republican party off and on for 21 years. I've ran campaigns. I've worked uncover. I've ran fundraisers. I've organized walking crews. I don't just get on here and spit out hate and hurt. I love conservatism.. and this guy was NOTHING. He was a joke before the campaign, and a joke once again.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'false info'.

Last question --- "so you have NO problem with" states overturning the election results?

In a single word, Yes. I would have a problem with it. But would it be contrary to the constitution? No. Not even a little bit. So at the end of the day, I defer to the states and the constitution. But listen how unlikely that scenario is... just listen. Assume in Kentucky, they voted 60-40 for Biden. And the state says, "we don't like that." or "we think there was fraud" -- and they give the electors to Trump. Well, whats gonna happen in the next state elections? The 60-40 majority is gonna vote them out of office. So 1)it'd never ever happen. 2)if it would have EVER happened.. it would have happened in 2016. And it didn't even come close to happening in ANY state.

One of the parts that you conveniently glossed over, that highlighted the facts of where i stand: YOU HAVE ZERO RIGHT TO VOTE FOR PRESIDENT. ZERO. A 7-2 MAJORITY OF THE SUPREME COURT MADE THAT PERFECTLY CLEAR IN BUSH V GORE (2000). This included 2 ultra liberal judges. John Paul Stevens I believe was one of them. 

So if a state wants to get rid of presidential elections, they are 100% free to do so. Indeed, colorado didn't hold a presidential election at all in 1876. The legislature just gave the 3 votes to Rutherford Hayes. And starting in 2016.. the winner of the nationwide popular vote, wins ALL of colorado's electoral votes. The state's vote matters ZERO. The state legislature did exactly what you're describing.. their own voters intentions be dammed. They'll give them to what the other 49 states want. So what you're talking about -- is already happening. States are free to make that decision. Do I like it? Not particularly. Thats why its so important to vote for your local reps (who by the way, set up the congressional districts in federal elections!).

Obviously you have some state in mind regarding your comments. Can you point me to the states that you're most concerned about in regards to their new election laws.. and I'll go read the legislation myself, rather than rely on what some left or right wing blog tells me about it.

But back to where I stand on election laws.... again... I'd follow this formula... "you have election day. 1 day. stand in line. vote. go home. repeat every 2 years."

I see no benefit or reason to make election 'day' 2 months long... or otherwise liberalizing the requirements and standards.

But would you stand in line 8 hours to vote ? In those metro areas they do why ?
Now if they had the laws they passed in 2021 Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Penn. would step in and change the results. Leave the elections up to the locals like we have always done.
Could you imagine what happened in 2016 if Trump was the loser his people would kill for him. He's got them believing the election was stolen and it's about 30 to 35% of the voters maybe higher.
Now I believe the states have the right to pass there own election laws up to a certain point not to step in and change the results if they don't like them that's why they are doing this in just the states that was close and lost. By your ways I think the blacks or even women would still be not allowed to vote in certain parts of the country without the federal government stepping in.

[ronald reagan]

But would you stand in line 8 hours to vote ? In those metro areas they do why ?
Now if they had the laws they passed in 2021 Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Penn. would step in and change the results. Leave the elections up to the locals like we have always done.
Could you imagine what happened in 2016 if Trump was the loser his people would kill for him. He's got them believing the election was stolen and it's about 30 to 35% of the voters maybe higher.
Now I believe the states have the right to pass there own election laws up to a certain point not to step in and change the results if they don't like them that's why they are doing this in just the states that was close and lost. By your ways I think the blacks or even women would still be not allowed to vote in certain parts of the country without the federal government stepping in.

Then increase the number of precincts. Thats a state problem, not an election problem.

Can you point me to the legislation you keep talking about, please. I want to see that Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, and Penn changed their election laws to allow the states to override it as you say. Don't send me a news article or a partisan piece. Send me the link to the legislation you're talking about so that I can read the legalese behind it. Or give me a bill number in the legislature.

So, do you support the voting reforms in congress right now? Yes or no. Because you just shot yourself in the foot, if so. You said, "leave the elections up to the locals like.. always". So you can't possibly support a federal takeover of it, especially after such a clear and concise position as that. Thank god.

As far as blacks and women, that was a federal constitutional amendment that made those things happen -- in the 1860s and the early 1900's. So its moot in this dialogue.

Now, provide me the legislation please so I can confirm what you're talking about. And I beg of you.. don't even think about sending me a news article, a think tank study, or a partisan talking point. Lets see the legislation.

[vector#1]

But would you stand in line 8 hours to vote ? In those metro areas they do why ?
Now if they had the laws they passed in 2021 Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Penn. would step in and change the results. Leave the elections up to the locals like we have always done.
Could you imagine what happened in 2016 if Trump was the loser his people would kill for him. He's got them believing the election was stolen and it's about 30 to 35% of the voters maybe higher.
Now I believe the states have the right to pass there own election laws up to a certain point not to step in and change the results if they don't like them that's why they are doing this in just the states that was close and lost. By your ways I think the blacks or even women would still be not allowed to vote in certain parts of the country without the federal government stepping in.

Then increase the number of precincts. Thats a state problem, not an election problem.

Can you point me to the legislation you keep talking about, please. I want to see that Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, and Penn changed their election laws to allow the states to override it as you say. Don't send me a news article or a partisan piece. Send me the link to the legislation you're talking about so that I can read the legalese behind it. Or give me a bill number in the legislature.

So, do you support the voting reforms in congress right now? Yes or no. Because you just shot yourself in the foot, if so. You said, "leave the elections up to the locals like.. always". So you can't possibly support a federal takeover of it, especially after such a clear and concise position as that. Thank god.

As far as blacks and women, that was a federal constitutional amendment that made those things happen -- in the 1860s and the early 1900's. So its moot in this dialogue.

Now, provide me the legislation please so I can confirm what you're talking about. And I beg of you.. don't even think about sending me a news article, a think tank study, or a partisan talking point. Lets see the legislation.

Georgia's
line#183 
full.pdf (nyt.com)

---

I really have not been following the federal bill but why did they change there voting laws in just the states Trump lost and the close ones

---

My fault Georgia is the only one where the state legislators can step in and take over the election but it's a start.

[ronald reagan]

But would you stand in line 8 hours to vote ? In those metro areas they do why ?
Now if they had the laws they passed in 2021 Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Penn. would step in and change the results. Leave the elections up to the locals like we have always done.
Could you imagine what happened in 2016 if Trump was the loser his people would kill for him. He's got them believing the election was stolen and it's about 30 to 35% of the voters maybe higher.
Now I believe the states have the right to pass there own election laws up to a certain point not to step in and change the results if they don't like them that's why they are doing this in just the states that was close and lost. By your ways I think the blacks or even women would still be not allowed to vote in certain parts of the country without the federal government stepping in.

Then increase the number of precincts. Thats a state problem, not an election problem.

Can you point me to the legislation you keep talking about, please. I want to see that Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, and Penn changed their election laws to allow the states to override it as you say. Don't send me a news article or a partisan piece. Send me the link to the legislation you're talking about so that I can read the legalese behind it. Or give me a bill number in the legislature.

So, do you support the voting reforms in congress right now? Yes or no. Because you just shot yourself in the foot, if so. You said, "leave the elections up to the locals like.. always". So you can't possibly support a federal takeover of it, especially after such a clear and concise position as that. Thank god.

As far as blacks and women, that was a federal constitutional amendment that made those things happen -- in the 1860s and the early 1900's. So its moot in this dialogue.

Now, provide me the legislation please so I can confirm what you're talking about. And I beg of you.. don't even think about sending me a news article, a think tank study, or a partisan talking point. Lets see the legislation.

Georgia's
line#183 
full.pdf (nyt.com)

---

I really have not been following the federal bill but why did they change there voting laws in just the states Trump lost and the close ones

---

My fault Georgia is the only one where the state legislators can step in and take over the election but it's a start.

See how quickly your previous posts lost all relevance? You went from 4-5 states, down to 1. And then you give me line #183.. which literally has ZERO to do with electors in the electoral college. Its a state election board with a member from the senate (a bona fide and proven nonpartisan, the house, both a democratic and republican party get to select a member too). Just because the section talks about 'electors'... its not the electors we're talking about. This is for a state election board that oversees the elections. The same as every other state. A generally non-partisan board that settles disputes and oversees the non-partisan aspects of the election.

Go back and find the section that you meant to find. And don't waste my time with nonsense like that.

---

There is created a state board to be known as the StateElectionBoard, to be composed
185 of the Secretary of State a chairperson elected by the General Assembly, an elector to be
186 electedby a majority vote of the Senate of the GeneralAssembly at its regular session held
187 in each odd-numbered year, an elector to be elected by a majority vote of the House of
188 Representatives of the GeneralAssembly at its regular session held in each odd-numbered
189 year, and a member of each political party to be nominated and appointed in the manner
190 provided in this Code section. No person while a member of the General Assembly shall
191 serve as a member of the board.

There's the section you pointed me to. This is NOT the electors that you and i are talking about. Not even close buddy. This is a nonpartisan election board.

I don't even know what to think about you now....

[vector#1]

But would you stand in line 8 hours to vote ? In those metro areas they do why ?
Now if they had the laws they passed in 2021 Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Penn. would step in and change the results. Leave the elections up to the locals like we have always done.
Could you imagine what happened in 2016 if Trump was the loser his people would kill for him. He's got them believing the election was stolen and it's about 30 to 35% of the voters maybe higher.
Now I believe the states have the right to pass there own election laws up to a certain point not to step in and change the results if they don't like them that's why they are doing this in just the states that was close and lost. By your ways I think the blacks or even women would still be not allowed to vote in certain parts of the country without the federal government stepping in.

Then increase the number of precincts. Thats a state problem, not an election problem.

Can you point me to the legislation you keep talking about, please. I want to see that Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, and Penn changed their election laws to allow the states to override it as you say. Don't send me a news article or a partisan piece. Send me the link to the legislation you're talking about so that I can read the legalese behind it. Or give me a bill number in the legislature.

So, do you support the voting reforms in congress right now? Yes or no. Because you just shot yourself in the foot, if so. You said, "leave the elections up to the locals like.. always". So you can't possibly support a federal takeover of it, especially after such a clear and concise position as that. Thank god.

As far as blacks and women, that was a federal constitutional amendment that made those things happen -- in the 1860s and the early 1900's. So its moot in this dialogue.

Now, provide me the legislation please so I can confirm what you're talking about. And I beg of you.. don't even think about sending me a news article, a think tank study, or a partisan talking point. Lets see the legislation.

Georgia's
line#183 
full.pdf (nyt.com)

---

I really have not been following the federal bill but why did they change there voting laws in just the states Trump lost and the close ones

---

My fault Georgia is the only one where the state legislators can step in and take over the election but it's a start.

See how quickly your previous posts lost all relevance? You went from 4-5 states, down to 1. And then you give me line #183.. which literally has ZERO to do with electors in the electoral college. Its a state election board with a member from the senate (a bona fide and proven nonpartisan, the house, both a democratic and republican party get to select a member too). Just because the section talks about 'electors'... its not the electors we're talking about. This is for a state election board that oversees the elections. The same as every other state. A generally non-partisan board that settles disputes and oversees the non-partisan aspects of the election.

Go back and find the section that you meant to find. And don't waste my time with nonsense like that.

---

There is created a state board to be known as the StateElectionBoard, to be composed
185 of the Secretary of State a chairperson elected by the General Assembly, an elector to be
186 electedby a majority vote of the Senate of the GeneralAssembly at its regular session held
187 in each odd-numbered year, an elector to be elected by a majority vote of the House of
188 Representatives of the GeneralAssembly at its regular session held in each odd-numbered
189 year, and a member of each political party to be nominated and appointed in the manner
190 provided in this Code section. No person while a member of the General Assembly shall
191 serve as a member of the board.

There's the section you pointed me to. This is NOT the electors that you and i are talking about. Not even close buddy. This is a nonpartisan election board. 

I don't even know what to think about you now....

"CAN THE STATE TAKE OVER LOCAL ELECTION OFFICES?

Much of the work administering elections in Georgia is handled by the state’s 159 counties.
The law gives the State Election Board new powers to intervene in county election offices
and to remove and replace local election officials. That has led to concerns that the
Republican-controlled state board could exert more influence over the administration of elections, including the certification of county results.

EXPLAINER: What does Georgia's new GOP election law do? (apnews.com)