16 thoughts on “Facts about Mail-in Voting

    1. Moderated? For being honest about Trump supporters who only believe the alternative facts from Trump himself or the conspiracy world?

      No reason for moderation. But perhaps for those who may be offended to start paying attention and stop blindly following the bad orange man

      Liked by 2 people

        1. So, it is okay to constantly spew egregious insults aimed at Democrats – which includes “members of this forum” but “Trump supporters” are too delicate to take a gentle jibe such as my “insult” that has you finally doing some “moderating.”

          As I said, I have been warned. You are the host. Feel free to banish me from your site any time the spirit moves you.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. I don’t see his comment as an insult; it is a statement of observation that facts are anathema to Trump and many of his supporters. If you are offended by that, then your skin is thinner that trump’s.


  1. Well, here we are again. Scurrilous and deeply personal attacks on me over and over again and not a peep about being “moderated.” Non-Trump supporters being called “Libtards”, “sick people”, “Commies” and worse and not a peep about being “moderated.” Myself in particular and Democrats in general have been on the receiving end of far more “insulting” jabs than this over and over and over again and complete silence on your part. And now, you respond to this very mild tongue in cheek comment with this? What did you say the other day about not being able to laugh at yourself?

    Well, I stand by it and believe it is entirely appropriate given the way Trump supporters speak to us from a world of “alternative facts” and who spread his egregious lies on this VITAL subject as if they were Holy Writ. But, okay, I have been warned.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Those were insults? I just thought the people who wrote those were just idiots who could spell correctly. But then, if they are Trump supporters it could explain it.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Different level of moderation depending on publication versus comment. Obviously, comments are designed to be snarky, otherwise they would be labeled “Presidential Debate Rebuttals”.

      Liked by 2 people

    3. RE: “Non-Trump supporters being called “Libtards”…

      A quick search reveals that you are the first ever to use that term in this forum.

      Your umbrage is noted, but if you have a justifiable complaint, please try to be accurate in your accusations.


      1. Thanks for noting my umbrage! And, yes, there is some umbrage. I do not like being accused of uncivil posting by moderators who are quite so selective in whom they choose to “moderate.”

        When I search for “Libtard” in the search box on the home page it finds nothing even though the word is out there. But, based on your surely diligent research – which I cannot verify – it must be that I dreamed up the term “Libtard.” Funny, it has a ring of familiarity. Did you also check on “Commies” or “sick man?” Was I dreaming those slurs as well?

        Liked by 1 person

        1. RE: “I do not like being accused of uncivil posting by moderators who are quite so selective in whom they choose to “moderate.””.

          If I could give you some advice, it would be that no one cares what you like. Ir is not a factor in whether you will be “moderated” or not.


          1. “No one cares what you like”

            Undoubtedly true.

            I was simply trying to be agreeable by confirming that your use of “umbrage” was not wrong.

            In my mind, the real issue around this is the absolutely uneven “moderation.” Is this a place for civil discussion of the issues of the day or is it a Trump cheerleader site? Let me know, because I am not going to change my comments out of fear that I will be banned by some Trump cheerleader who has no answer to the substance of my comments except the threat of being “moderated.”

            In case you missed it, the substance of my little “insulting” jest is that Trump and his supporters trade in “alternative facts.” All the time. And on issues of vital importance.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Smith has been egregious is his insults. OK, maybe “Libtards” was not the actual word from that troll, but an honest look at his posts and they insult both individuals and entire segments of society.

    And the other post from NIVLAC directly calling Paul a “sick man” because of his positions was overlooked and accepted by both you and Don.

    If we cannot allow some sarcasm or wink, wink sly jabs then this blog is done for.

    I admitted just the other day that my response to your “dishonest” assertion of my view was a bit “snowflaky”, and I so much as said so.

    Short of personal, direct insults we need to quit running to moderation threats for perceived slights.

    This election is rubbing national nerves raw. Both the left and the right, in a poll, said that violence if your side loses is justified. In just about the same percentages of 1 in 3 or 4.

    I don’t care what anyone’s beliefs are, this is very upsetting. And more than that, it is a sign that the grand experiment is starting to fall apart. Are Americans that immature that politics is violence today? I am afraid the answer is yes.

    I doubt that his is acceptable to anyone on this forum.

    That is my opinion.

    But Don is the boss. I am just a foot soldier.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Here is a link to an earlier study:


      “Also concerning is that just over 20 percent of both Democratic and Republican respondents believe violence is at least somewhat justified if their side loses the election. That’s up from the 5 to 15 percent open to political violence in an earlier study by Nathan Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason, who also participate in the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group.”

      That was almost 2 months ago. I can’t find the most recent, but the numbers were higher.

      Honestly, this is a serious problem. This is Third Word.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. RE: “Short of personal, direct insults we need to quit running to moderation threats for perceived slights.”

      I agree that “moderation threats” can be inappropriate, but I don’t think any inappropriate moderation threats have been made.


      1. …”I don’t think any inappropriate moderation threats have been made.”

        Of course you don’t. The majority of moderation threats have been made to primarily one individual. Adn it wasn’t anyone that agreed with your viewpoint.

        I could call it ironic, but in irony there tends to be just a touch of humor.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s