The remarkably bizarre narrative that Dems rigged the election.

Except trump gained votes. He didn’t lose them lol

But it doesn’t matter. That election is over now. When trump wins in 2024 it will be the Dems turn to scream fraud and it’ll be our turn to stonewall any and all attempts by them to verify it.

 

Yes. Both sides were extremely motivated to vote. The left thought Trump was Satan, the right thought he was Jesus.

 

And if the 'proof' presented is as threadbare as this time, I would totally support the refusal of an investigation. You're still welcome to critique the debunking I posted, or present other issues to support the claim of fraud. But so far all you have is a theoretical route for fraud with nothing to support it.

 

You keep ignoring the fact that people voted AGAINST trump, NOT for Biden

 

That is not remotely what happened this time. Yesterday, Raffensberg or Kemp testified that in Georgia they chased down every rabbithole, checking out all of the allegations. All were found to be without foundation. The DoJ checked out the fraud claims presented to them and similarly found them baseless. Ask yourself why you (inadvertently I assume) misrepresent this.

 

Maybe,but I think this is an unusual case here. The Republicans are almost ENTIRELY controlled by their most radical side, and I think that can skew the polls even when they try to include moderates and independents.
Dems are not Republicans, we aren't making LITERAL GOLDEN IDOLS of our main leader and not every single member of our Party leadership isn't slavishly defending that same leader in his attempt to violently overthrow our most sacred practice.
Dems also don't have several members who seem seriously misinformed in regard to some basic issues as well as egregiously disordered as to their basic thought processes. Our most radical member is trying to populate our roads with electric cars and our houses with good insulation. She is not chasing after underaged paramours or littering our skies with Jewish Space Lasers.

I think voters will carry these concerns into the voting booths with them, and the booths may confound the pollsters.

 

No actually that’s not what happened. The left and these clowns Kemp and Raff (who btw are only there because the democrats voted in the Republican primary in Georgia) tout the “signature verification audit” they did in Georgia as their proof that there wasn’t fraud.

You know how that was conducted? They looked at 15,000 envelopes (in a county with hundreds of thousands) and compared them with voter registration records. Ignoring for a moment that a random sampling doesn’t identify the type of fraud being described, Kemp allowed the DEMOCRAT county to provide the state the “random sampling” of ballots. And then goes around parading the results as proof of there not being fraud.

That’s tantamount to the democrats saying there’s fraud in Trumps taxes and then a democrat governor demanding a randomized sampling from Trump that TRUMPS team gets to provide them and then when they don’t find any fraud in that “random” sampling, that democrat governor then goes around loudly declaring that his investigation means definitively that Trump has no fraud in his taxes.

It’s so preposterous that if it wasn’t being used to usurp our constitution it would be funny.

 

I think you sell your party short.

 

You talked of stonewalling any and all attempts to verify fraud. In Georgia they went down an awful lot of rabbit holes examining possible fraud. So you are clearly misrepresenting the reality. In a post to someone else you said "Here is how the dems did it [fraud]". That suggests to me that you're really not interested in examining whether your claims are true or not. You have no real evidence but your mind is made up. Let's say you're correct about deficiencies in the Georgia audit; you still have no evidence to suggest that such an audit is likely to turn up fraud. This is as far down the rabbit-hole I want to go, sorry. At some point, you have to recognise when someone is determined to believe something regardless.

 

For the most part, people that respond to the polls are the same people that vote.

People are tiring of the January 6th Investigation. The democrats have worn out that old horse. That is why the networks do not carry them.

 

And you think Zuckerberg's $400,000,000 was spent on balloons and bumperstickers?

 

I hope we will have at least SOME actual UNEXPLAINABLE forensic evidence to back up our explainable evidence, otherwise you'll be right.
INALB aren't actual courtroom cases often determined that way? You can have a literal mountain of circumstantial evidence, (and it may win the case if it's really convincing) but you don't have a really solidly locked prosecution without at least some actual evidence that admits of no other elucidation than the guilt of your defendant

 

I think people have made up their minds and the polls here are in my favor. Most people think Trump is guilty and should be charged.

 

So, you believe the polls that say that they believe Trump is guilty, but not the ones that say they favor the republicans. Don't you see anything wrong with that logic?

 

Most of the polls I see seem to be making the statement that disapproving Biden is supporting Republicans, in particular Trump. I think what I already posted is a reasonable argument against that conclusion.

 

Dems exploited the virus and changed the rules. They won fair and square under those rules. Nothing was stolen.

 

The pollsters occasionally try to slap some sense into the DP party bosses when they know The Party is cruising for a bruising.

 

The generic congressional polls favor republicans.

 

Some (even many) claims were less than 100% precise and accurate. So what? That does not refute the overall claim of evidence and reasonable suspicion. The highly questionable and suspicious actions in many places would be sufficient for law enforcement to formally investigate as reasonable suspicion, but it normally isn't sufficient for a court to hear. That takes much more time to ferret out even if a court or two was willing to hear the case on an exigency basis.

I had to look up florid! Good word.

 

How do I know the Democrat operatives took advantage of COVID to push their agenda??? Surely you jest. The same way I know horses don't climb trees. How often did you hear COVID, COVID, COVID from the Democrats in their push for mail-in balloting, ballot harvesting, drop boxes, etc. from the late spring of 2020 on? That was a present from heaven which they understandably took great advantage of -- because there was a fair amount of rationale to it. They were not getting very far since the fall of 2019 until COVID showed up. Then their successes started piling up, very notably in NY, PA, GA, WIS, Mich, CA, and AZ, 5 of which were election determining swing states.

 

I will believe you guys care about election integrity when your guys wins an election and you subject him to the same thing as now.

 

So you are claiming the Democrats started their effort because of the pandemic even though COVID didn't show up for many months later!! Nice trick. Good googley.

 

I cannot think of any election Republicans won when there was reasonable suspicion of wrong doing. The only other presidential election where fraud was involved (as understood by both sides) was JFK's win in 1960. Nixon chose not to pursue that "to not put the country through a constitutional crises." There have been three presidential elections won by Republicans since 2000 that did not have any reasonable fraudulent suspicion but the Democrats chose to try to alter the electoral college vote anyway just because they did not like the outcome. If there is ever an election where the Democratic is way ahead at midnight on election night but loses big by 5am I will readily accept that as reasonably suspicious.

 

Oh good, we can audit Ohio from the past election. By your definition, that was "reasonably suspicious".