I agree the votes don’t count. I just said his comment, that he was fulfilling a dying man’s wish was accurate, not that it was moral, legal, or smart. I mean, Republicans are pretty much all stupid assholes now, so they only do moral, legal, or smart stuff by accident at this point.
It wasn’t accurate: dead is different than dying. Dying people are still alive and thus may vote. Dead people aren’t even people anymore and non-people can’t vote.
No; I’m not at all inclined to indulge any alternate facts here. I don’t feel lenient, like he deserves sympathy or the benefit of the doubt.
I didn’t say he deserves sympathy or the benefit of the doubt.
You can fulfil a dying man’s wishes after he’s dead.
If someone makes a wish while they’re dying, it becomes a, “dying man’s wish” even if he subsequently dies. Like if on your deathbed you say you want your ashes mixed into a brick and that brick to be thrown at Trump’s bedroom window, and I do it, I feel like I can fairly say, “I fulfilled a dying man’s wish.”
That’s semantics; and it’s being used to obfuscate. Dead people are dead. What they wanted while they were alive doesn’t matter, unless they wrote a will.
Well yeah, of course it doesn’t matter. If a dying man’s wish is that I rob a bank, it doesn’t make it okay.
I’m just taking issue with your issue of the wording.
I hope the dude goes to jail.
The thing is that once he’s dead, there is no “dying man’s wish”; there is no dying man. He’s twisted the time-line to try and justify his actions. Maybe there was a dying man’s wish but now all there is a corpse.
I don’t see a need to help him try and justify his actions or excuse his culpability.
And I don’t see any need to let you get away with twisting ordinary, everyday English to make a point. When the people who are otherwise agreeing with you down the line think that your objection makes no logical or semantic sense, maybe you should listen carefully to them.
Where would we be here on the SDMB without semantic nit-picking?
I agrere, and I dopn’t want this board to be anti-semantic.
How about hyper-pedantic? Can we be that?
Can we? We perfected it.
May we. 
I didn’t know you were French.
They dying man may have wished to vote for Trump, but the living guy didn’t send the ballot in until after he was dead, therefore the living guy committed voter fraud.
Now, now, you’re both right. Not only are we allowed to be, we are capable of doing it.
How about the chaos caused by a special election in his district because he
has been recalled by the voters?
The voters in his district probably agree with him. Seems most Republicans are willing to burn the whole thing down if they can’t be in charge.
Oh, there’s no “seems” about it.
He’s just been caught saying out loud Republican strategy since the 90’s.