JW

Gay Christian man in Oakland with my husband and our dog. Proud Californian. Proud Democrat (usually). ❤🤎🧡💛💚💙💜

[JW @jimwillows]

Insurance companies' primary business model is how to not pay bills

[JW @jimwillows]

@HadrianHarker @CameronGenao @gatorgar Right, its so obvious. I dont trust anyone who thinks our elections are insecure or "rigged." It's clear that it's about pushing a narrative that will serve to disenfranchise legitimate voters.

[JW @jimwillows]

@CameronGenao @gatorgar You're literally seeing proof right here in the post that election officials are EXTREMELY careful about matching signatures. I don't see how you can see this as anything other than confirmation that California elections are secure.

[JW @jimwillows]

@Hotshot_Movie @drterrysimpson You still dont understand. Democrat voters dont define ourselves by our political affiliation. We arent willing to go to prison to give a Democrat candidate extra votes.

[JW @jimwillows]

@g8orshan @TerryMoran @jprokc Exactly. I dont really have faith in people but I have faith in my knowledge that people will do self-serving things and are relatively predictable because of that.

[JW @jimwillows]

@TerryMoran @jprokc Another fact is this country cannot keep a secret. Whether it's whostleblowing to protect oneself from prosecution for being complicit in something, or journalists trying to be the next Bob Woodward, or a social media influencer, everyone wants to be the one to expose secrets.

[JW @jimwillows]

@SoCalRuss1983 So much for the narrative that California makes it so easy to mail-in vote that it can allow cheating to occur. Thank you for sharing this.

[JW @jimwillows]

@Wahofann95 You've obviously never had to fill out a ballot for a disabled parent. It's clearly properly signed by the person who filled it out for them.

[JW @jimwillows]

@TCS110472092984 @KellyScaletta You live in Europe according to your profile. Why are you even commenting on this? Your opinion is irrelevant.

[JW @jimwillows]

@IDoDeclare83 @Suedehead19 @Susan_Shelley Republicans appear to be damaged. They hear "86" and think "kill" and they hear "plan" and think "cheat." I would pity them if that mentality wasn't so common amongst them that it makes them collectively dangerous.

[Viral Reel Addict @ViralReelAddict]

Republicans are already setting the stage to question the legitimacy of California’s election results if they don’t produce the outcome they want, and Megyn Kelly essentially said the quiet part out loud. Suggesting that “no one is going to trust the outcome” if candidates like Steve Hilton or Spencer Pratt don’t advance to the general election isn’t about protecting democracy it reads as pre-emptive doubt meant to delegitimize the process.

This fits into a broader pattern in GOP rhetoric: accepting election results only when they win. They had no issue with slow vote counts, mail-in ballots, or late-reporting results when those systems benefited them in conservative-leaning states, and they fully accepted outcomes when Republicans came out on top. Yet when the same processes produce Democratic gains as commonly happens in California due to the heavy volume of mail ballots counted after Election Day the narrative quickly shifts to claims of fraud, manipulation, or conspiracies.

Rather than accepting the normal mechanics of election administration, the response often turns into attempts to undermine confidence in the system as a whole. This includes recycling allegations that have repeatedly failed in court and promoting claims of widespread wrongdoing without evidence.

Critics argue this approach reflects a broader strategy: if winning through broad voter appeal is difficult, then casting doubt on the legitimacy of the process becomes a political tool. In that view, tactics like aggressive gerrymandering and restrictive voting laws are seen as attempts to shape the electorate rather than compete within it.

The core issue, they say, is the normalization of conditional trust in elections where results are only considered valid if they produce the “right” winner. Supporters of electoral integrity emphasize the opposite principle: that every lawful vote must be counted, and that confidence in democracy depends on accepting outcomes even when they are unfavorable.

[JW @jimwillows]

@brianeskow Thats the opposite of help. If theyre counted before election day, that info could leak and then the other side could dump money into areas where they dont expect a high turnout to try to turn out votes last minute.

[JW @jimwillows]

@FreemanMikal @acnewsitics @RepLuna If that were true we'd be taking more than we contribute. Duh!

[JW @jimwillows]

@FreemanMikal @acnewsitics @RepLuna Well then why do most red states take more from the Federal government than they contribute to it, and the bluest states of all give a lot more than they get back? If anything, California is funding red states' failed policies.

[JW @jimwillows]

@tedlieu @DisgracedProp Maybe MAGA organized a mass fake vote campaign for Pratt, and that's why they're upset that he may not win.

[JW @jimwillows]

@Marcela252016 Everyone had a computer by 1995. I had one in my bedroom.

[JW @jimwillows]

@Suedehead19 @Susan_Shelley @IDoDeclare83 No you can't. Read it again. Unless it's delivered by the Post Office/FedEx/UPS/etc, it wont be accepted after Election Day. It's not like a person can self-date the envelope and then slip it into the mail carrier's bag for delivery. That's a HUGE felony for even attempting that.

[JW @jimwillows]

@acnewsitics Trump precluded all that by using the term "Deep state" to refer to anyone who works for government but doesnt support him. Another tactic his ghost wroter wrote about in Art of the Deal: Attack pre-emptively. I think Hitler wrote about that too.

[JW @jimwillows]

@Suedehead19 @Susan_Shelley @IDoDeclare83 If they're confirmed to be from the Post Office then what is the problem? I thought you were talking about ballots that were dropped off and not confirmed to have been delivered by an official post office mailman (or mailwoman).

[Gene Trevino @GenoVeno73]

🚨 THIS IS SOME BULLSHIT

On May 31, 2026, Brooke Skyes, in Fayetteville, Georgia, was fired from @olivegarden the day after receiving a large $700 tip on a $30–$32 check, and reports indicate she became emotional/crying during the incident.

Management at @olivegarden flagged her $700 tip for review citing "fraud concerns" and instructed her to enter $0 on the tip line until verified. They reportedly told Brooke Skyes that it could take up to 120 days to process.

She became upset and emotional (crying). Accounts say she asked a coworker to cover her next table, and management told her to work or go home. She finished her shift but was fired the next morning, on June 1st, for her behavior.

@olivegarden stated the $700 tip was ultimately declined due to insufficient funds on the customer's card, but the customer reportedly disputed/froze the card after learning of the firing — which explains the decline.

So, not only did they attempt to steal her tip, she is now out of a job with a 4 year old autistic child. So much for "when you're here, you're family," huh, @olivegarden

THAT'S SOME BULLSHIT!!

[JW @jimwillows]

@BasedMikeLee You actually believe the story that one of Jesus's original followers traveled to the future-US and left writings behind? Lol