Bro

Project Veritas is very similar to infowars, where the information they present isn't fictional but is recontextualized or misrepresented to fit an agenda (i.e. the infamous "gay frogs" video from infowars was a dumb misunderstanding of how the pesticide Atrazine works made to fit a certain agenda). This, of course, does not mean there is not a talking point to be made out of the information presented in terms of the topic being in the public conscious. Like, yeah, "gay frogs" is stupid and is presented in a homophobic fasion; that doesnt mean the existence of atrazine harming the environment because of companies dumping it in the wild shouldn't be talked about just because Alex Jones made a dumb comment on it. Similarly, ballot harvesting is now in the public conscious. Should laws against ballot harvesting not be made? Ballot harvesting was considered a republic ploy largely in the early 2000s, dead grandmas voting for Bush or McCain. I don't care who brings the topic into the conversation. It doesn't invalidate the existence of the topic in a vacuum separate from its source which has historically been a problem regardless.

None of what you stated negates the fact that Project Veritas shouldn't be given any credibility, which is exactly what Tulsi did by referencing them.

so just to be clear you don't want ballot harvesting banned just because the source is bad?

No. You can introduce legislation on that issue w/o giving credibility to that specific source, especially since they aren't the first to ever bring issues surrounding this topic up. I'm specifically attacking her judgement or lack there of.

Damn, two polls today have Biden up by 3 in Georgia.

I still wouldn't sink too much funding there. Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin are the must wins, with Arizona, NC, Iowa, Ohio and Florida on the periphery. If he steals any of those alongside PA/MI/WI, it's over.

If Biden somehow wins Georgia (he won't), it's an ass beating.

I understand why it might bother people but I do not think it is a big deal. If she was citing a nazi organization I would probably agree but attempting to use a conservative source to force more bipartisan discussion while it's hot in the public eye I don't think is that much of a sin. The DNC has absolutely f***ed her repeatedly and I don't think she owes it to them to use their list of approved sources, especially since she isn't running for re-election anyway.

Veritas does not merit being described as 'a conservative source', they're asbolute trash, this should not need pointing out.

Consistently have created false narratives, used deceptive edits, and been sued for these falsehoods and lost multiple times. No stance stemming from their time and time again proven misinformation should hold any legitimacy. The fact that Tulsi gives them any traction shows what a piece of s*** grifter she is.

And surprise surprise researchers have already called out the video on Ilhan Omar as another coordinated disinformation campaign, for which there is no evidence of the claims made.
nytimes.com/2020/09/29/us/politics/project-veritas-ilhan-omar.html

Your judgement on this is beyond impaired given the fact you even give weight to ballot harvesting as an issue. Ballot tampering during ballot harvesting procedures is near non-existent, and those rare times it does occur it gets caught.

I know I’m the resident trump guy but if the next two debates are this bad or worse I’m considering going 3rd party 🤷‍♀️ I still can’t see myself voting Biden in any way.

Lol I don't buy it.

Whats changed all of a sudden just cause of the debate?

I could understand 16' but why vote trump in 2020

North Americans going out sad, damb

Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Vice-Chair Katherine Clark (D-MA) hold press conference.

So even though I personally would have loved to see Bernie debate Trump (and would have loved to see Bernie as the nominee period), I don't think the debate would have gone better for the Democratic nominee (it would have probably gone worse in most voters' eyes).

If you watched the Dem debates you know that Bernie has a tendency to get loud and rambly himself, so the framing this morning that Trump was destroying the debate would probably not be the same. Because chances are Bernie would have been just as loud and rambly as Trump and it would have been even more of a fiasco.

That "debate" might have been the tipping point in any faith I had in humanity.

feel like i got multiple a week of those lol

"Nah I gotta persevere, and keep going, this can't stop m-another occurrence of utter despair and hopelessness happens me..."

Vibes

This is such a dishonest response it doesn’t warrant further debate

The only dishonesty is you deeming the junk that is Project Veritas worthy of being a 'source'.

so, just to be clear, you think the ballot harvesting is okay just because a jank conservative website said its bad?
you do realize, again, that historically ballot harvesting was a conservative tactic and it was not until recently that this swapped to be a "actually its the democrats doing it". voter suppression and ballot issues almost exclusively hurt left wing candidates. the narrative that its hurting trump or republicans is bullshit, but its a real problem, and its one that media complained about for years under bush (just like mail in voter fraud) until somehow this swapped to become conservatives complaining about it. Do you want me to dig up articles from the early 00s to show you?
i don't give a f*** who is citing who. It doesn't matter. i literally don't care. The propoesd policy doesn't exist because of veritas nor was it introduced originally because of veritas. She's not running for re-election. It's a non-issue. You either agree with the policy or you don't. Veritas didn't influence it.