1 2

I am in favor of a recount. Some quality checking so to speak.

Should Trump or Biden ask for a recount with some of the polling offices being suspect.?

  • 14 votes
  • 2 votes
Skkaarj 6 Nov 4

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


I want a do over, and a None-of-the-above box on the ballot.

If no one wins: do over.


You write as if you are informed, confident, and can speak with authority.

Did I respond in a way that you can accept?


No offense.

I am not one of the "informed" who buy into the con game. I've done my homework.

"The judiciary of the United States is so constructed and extended, as to absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several states; thereby rendering laws as tedious, intricate, and expensive, and justice as unattainable by a great part of the community, as in England; and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor."
George Mason, 1787

The Summary JustUS Courts are there for "their" President, from the start.

The internal battle between Globalists and Nationalists is the classic lesser of two evils false choice.

If the Globalists "win" it is my hope that the National Despotic Government imposing Tyranny in these Consolidated States implodes rapidly on schedule, leaving Americans hopefully taking back their moral conscience individually and collectively sooner, rather than never.

If the Nationalists "win" my hope is that the side that opposes the Globalists include enough moral people to then return the Nation-State back to a Federation of Independent States, or one step further down from Global Tyranny of all Nation-States, to a free market of many Nation-States World Wide (Germany, Russia, China, U.S.A.).

That is the bright side as I see it, in either case.

The Athenian Constitution:
Government by Jury and Referendum
by Roderick T. Long

"The practice of selecting government officials randomly (and the Athenians developed some fairly sophisticated mechanical gadgets to ensure that the selection really was random, and to make cheating extremely difficult) is one of the most distinctive features of the Athenian constitution. We think of electoral politics as the hallmark of democracy; but elections were almost unknown at Athens, because they were considered paradigmatically anti-democratic. Proposals to replace sortition with election were always condemned as moves in the direction of oligarchy.

"Why? Well, as the Athenians saw it, under an electoral system no one can obtain political office unless he is already famous: this gives prominent politicians an unfair advantage over the average person. Elections, they thought, favor those wealthy enough to bribe the voters, powerful enough to intimidate the voters, flashy enough to impress the voters, or clever enough to deceive the voters. The most influential political leaders were usually Horsemen anyway, thanks to their social prominence and the political following they could obtain by dispensing largesse among the masses. (One politician, Kimon, won the loyalty of the poor by leaving his fields and orchards unfenced, inviting anyone who was hungry to take whatever he needed.) If seats on the Council had been filled by popular vote, the Horsemen would have disproportionately dominated it — just as, today, Congress is dominated by those who can afford expensive campaigns, either through their own resources or through wealthy cronies. Or, to take a similar example, in the United States women have had the vote for over half a century, and yet, despite being a majority of the population, they represent only a tiny minority of elected officials. Obviously, the persistence of male dominance in the economic and social sphere has translated into women mostly voting for male candidates. The Athenians guessed, probably rightly, that the analogous prestige of the upper classes would lead to commoners mostly voting for aristocrats.

"That is why the Athenians saw elections as an oligarchical rather than a democratic phenomenon. Above all, the Athenians feared the prospect of government officials forming a privileged class with separate interests of their own. Through reliance on sortition, random selection by lot, the Council could be guaranteed to represent a fair cross-section of the Athenian people — a kind of proportional representation, as it were. Random selection ensured that those selected would be representatives of the people as a whole, whereas selection by vote made those selected into mere representatives of the majority."

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:146956
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.