Just so I know, Election fraud claims are acceptable if they come from the left?

So calling out a hypocrite makes me a hypocrite? Wow! That's slick! You get 3 out of 5 stars for that nonsense.
I'm actually NOT the hypocrite here because I don't care about her beliefs on elections. I care that she is demeaning people over the SAME thing that she did. No where in any dictionary does anything I did define hypocrisy.
This thread is working way better than I thought. I knew you guys would be scrambling but I didn't know you would be making up false concepts out of desperation.
Reply ASAP and keep this bumped!
Good job!

 

Yes, you have that correct.

 

Are you sure no one at all has made any comments on how the leftist talking heads are wrong for asserting they’re a threat to democracy and this country?

 

when one wins the popular vote, and loses the electoral vote, that is a legitimate beef, the same when Florida voting is "stopped" prematurely, this is different than instructing your people to find ways to change or invalidate election results

 

Trump lost, he was a sore loser, he knew there was no fraud... he was just being a sore loser

 

Thanks! but what does that have to do with the OP? please stay on topic
If you make a thread about Pizza, do I come in there and start talking about burgers?

 

We endured 4 years of a Repub prez who fits that description perfectly. We recently found out he still feels that way. But there you are, peering through the looking glass, making as yet unsubstantiated generalizations about Dems.

 

Why isn't there ever a notion of self reflection, always a deflection. Biden certainly doesn't feel like he has to live within the law. Lots of examples. Try it. It might make your head explode, but, you know... risk...

 

I'm not married.

 

please stop, my goodness, that is what this thread was about, get real

 

He gave you examples within his OP... did you even read it?

 

I hope you still have someone to love. BTW, my part of our discussion is not meant to be personal.

 

His true love is taken by a lovely lady named Jill! Stop trying to be a home wrecker.

 

So, you're "anti-purge", eh?

So this guy, name is Ho Chi Minh, says here he wants his ballot in Vietnamese, and the math says he's about 140, yet he's voted in every election since... hey, the early 70s! Send him one! And this guy... George Windsor III. He's 275, and lives in a Kingly estate in the most expensive neighborhood in the city. Says he needs one for him, one for his wife, seventeen children, 112 grand-children, 457 great-grandchildren and about 1,200 great-great-grandkids, all over 18, and all living at the same place.

Send 'em!

Then this other guy. Name is written in some sort of oriental language, might be Chinese? Occupation says spy, and he's from Loredo, TX. Yup, he gets one, too! Hell, affirmative action, send him two!!

What we need is more purges, not less. It needs to be routine, and it needs to happen just long enough before election day, for every year in which there is an election day, at a time that is just long enough beforehand to ensure all the proper applications, with signed and notarized certifications of citizenship, which the State will either pay for or provide at no cost, attached to every single one, and after the elections, enough need to be audited to ensure that broader compliance is within a statistically tiny percentage.

That last part, by the way, about notarized proof of Citizenship... That's the most important.

I've spoken about this until I'm blue in the face, but nobody seems to give a rat's ass. Fact is, in 48 out of 50 States, all it takes to get a Voter ID card is a utility bill with your name on it. That's it. Yes, a few ask for the last 4 of your SSN, but "none" is, according to the instructions, an acceptable answer. And since there are only 10,000 possible combinations of 4 digits, they are certainly not unique to any individual anyway, so making one up is likely just as effective as writing "none", which itself is effective. Demanding proof of citizenship is, sadly, something that it's not politically correct to do, so it's all done on the "honor system". Illegal aliens who want to suckle at the gubmint teat have no honor to begin with... so there is that.

But that's not all.

People do die. All of us, sooner or later. I already have once, and that's just in this lifetime. They move. Some of us do that frequently. Sometimes just from neighborhood to neighborhood, but sometimes from one corner of the country to another. I knew of a guy where I used to live in Washington State who registered his dog. He ratted himself out, as he was only doing it to make a point about how ridiculously easy it was to do, else his now long deceased dog might have been voting for decades at this point.

I wonder how many are?

All this republican said this and democrat said that... Bullshit. Until we clean up our corrupt (or at least, easily corruptable) system, that's just noise. Possibly very intentional noise, to distract from some of the very real issues like what I have just brought up.

But f it, this will be yet another one of those posts that nobody pays attention to, or they read it and ignore it, simply not believing what I say is true. Or not caring. Perhaps, even cheering it on.

Somehow, the Social Security Administration found out my father had died practically before I even knew about it, as his ass got cut off so fast it would make your head spin. But since it isn't about money (even though it very much is), cleaning voting records is chastised, berated, shamed, and politicized as racist, sexist, or whatever ist is the latest fad. Maybe someone is pissed they used the wrong pronoun.

Hell, we've got entire jurisdictions, up to and including entire States that either want to or already are allowing people whose mere presence here is evidence of a crime, who do not belong, who do not deserve to even be here, to vote. On purpose! Until the entire system is cleaned up, and by that I mean hardened, almost to the point that all applicants are assumed to be ineligible until proven otherwise, the whole system is just one big joke.

 

Just so you know, very very doubtful. Maybe the OP don't know squat.
Fraud is fraud.
Just need to prove it. and just not say it is so.

 

I guess R's are toooooo stuuupid.
4 yrs, trump, prez, DoJ, no investigations.

 

Sure ... Ask Al Franken if Democrats ignore allegations of impropriety. Hell, if Franken had been a Republican, he would have been celebrated
like Trump and Gaetz.

 

There is, however Darth, a difference between founded and unfounded claims of malfeasance. As to her claims about 2016, the article was not very clear: it said that she had been making the claim while addressing the January 6th rioters (so, obviously, though the quote referred back to 2016, it could not have been made in 2016, as you wrote). Nonetheless, I do not agree, and did not follow suit, with those who called Trump illegitimate, or who would not accept him as President. He had won, fair & square (as far as these things go), and I adopted a "wait & see" attitude, while hoping for the best.

As to Ms. Jean-Pierre's tweet about Brian Kemp-- you do know that he ran as Georgia's Secretary of State, in charge of the election, and that an awful lot of dark- skinned people were having their registrations invalidated that year, right? There was certainly some cause for complaint, in that case; this is nothing at all, like someone theorizing that, since Trump had been ahead, when they'd gone to sleep, but was losing by morning, therefore the Democrats must have cheated. That is not a partisan difference, but a difference of rationality.

 

When lefties storm the capitol to stop an electoral count, let me know.

 

And Hillary was wrong to kind of do the same(she did concede, 48 hours later dressed in purple like a funeral and it is still, to this day the greatest political moment of my life.). This all stemmed back in 2016 when then-President Obama told us to be confident in the election results, but then oh wait, the queen lost her coronation. And all hell opened from there.

Democrats don't believe in election integrity anymore than Republicans do, at best they selectively believe in election integrity. Let's bring it back to the present:

Only a select few races have been called, most of them state governorships or seats. The mid-terms are just starting to get under way, but for the last two years Biden has attacked the election integrity before a vote has even been cast! President Nero has Trump beat by two years.

So he, and that entire party can miss me with the 'threat to democracy' BS. "Oh, we didn't storm the capitol though." Hurray *sarcastic claps*

 

I will actually, against my better judgment revisit 2020. So you basically oversimplified what happened, and why people were upset. Why did people go to sleep? And what did they go to sleep to? Well, we were all following the elections and it looked like Trump was going to win Ohio, it looked like he was going to win Michigan. The margin of error was well within 5 points, normally these are safe wins. But then the pause of the count, and this lasted for several hours into the morning.

By comparison, 2016 was called by 2 AM(actually more like 1:30-ish but whos counting.). Now, remember what I said: The margin of error was well within five for most of these states(and then the real controversy in Nevada and Arizona where it was called before a single vote was even counted.). Imagine waking up and seeing that massive lead in Michigan vanish. He had a 5 point lead in Pennsylvania at the time of the pause, he lost the State by a few thousand votes.

This has been explained to us via the mail-in ballots where Democrats voted in a 3-to-1 margin. Even now, today, I accept it but I don't necessarily believe it.(3-to-1, really?). But that 3-to-1 margin is PRECISELY what it took, any less and Trump possibly would still have won those states and likely, either a narrow win or an electoral tie.

I called hax in real time in 2020, and I admit a very narrow part of me still believes that election was not on the up-and-up with the coronavirus as a convenient excuse. By the way, it's interesting that the vote went so overwhelmingly Democratic, yet we were told by the Speaker that there was an supposed attempt of sabotage. Well, either 'Trump's henchmen' is incompetent or such claims were false.

Considering the mail reforms that were passed earlier this year, clearly the concerns were legitimate and I'm still waiting for the hack Nancy Pelosi to apologize to the post general master. I suspect we'll be waiting until we pass onto the next life or realm.

 

And I didn't really rob that bank. I said "please' after I told them to put the money in the sack. Context has SOME effect on meaning.

 

So wait....now the fact that you have the worst case in the history of cases means there's a "coordinated effort" against you? Maybe the cases were all dismissed because YOU DIDN"T HAVE ONE.

 

The big shift in the vote totals, only seems odd to someone not considering the effect of the pandemic, which led to states liberalizing their acceptance of mail- in ballots (from people who wanted to avoid exposure to the virus, standing among large crowds). What part of this seems dubious, or suspicious, or anything but completely sensible, to you?

Your other, potentially smoking, gun, the 3 to 1 margin-- once more-- only appears questionably large, to one who selectively forgets that, for months, Trump was telling his voters NOT to vote by mail, but to do so, in person...And they listened to him! This explains, perfectly logically, why Trump's "same day" vote totals were so much better than Biden's, whose voters, in much greater numbers than the Trump voters, opted to vote by mail, instead (thereby explaining the loss of that edge Trump had gained, by his voters choosing predominantly to vote on election day).


EDIT: There is nothing at all difficult to fathom about the way this played out; in fact, it seems as if Trump (from his internal polling) could predict that he would lose, and so based his strategy upon this foreseeable fact: maximizing his same day vote totals, at the expense of his mail in vote, just to achieve this effect, of there being a large swing between the two, which he might point to, in claiming vote fraud (which he had begun suggesting, I'll remind you, even before the election). I'll even admit that, while malevolently intentioned, Trump's pulling it off, was fairly impressive.

 

I understand it, and everyone has since(including Bill Barr) certified it, so I have no choice but to believe and accept that it is true. I just find it completely coincidental that the one thing that had to happen to erase the margins that existed in Michigan, Wyoming and Pennyslvania(I think he still carried Wyoming though if memory serves.) happened. Like if HRC complains about the margins in 2016, this was more incredibly insane. 5-7 point leads just don't vanish like that through the law of averages. It's as if there were two separate elections, the in-person elections and the mail-in elections.

The courts found there was no admissible evidence, so I have to accept that. Yet at the same time, it's a very happy coincidence. At that time in the forums(if we still have it saved) Liberals were going nuts about the possible 2nd Trump term, because of how heavy those margins are. So it wasn't just conservatives thinking as they went to bed that the election will conclude differently.

Also, as an explanation: Well Trump told them not to vote through mail and democrats did(and oh they did alright, I still remember VP Harris going "go vote early" in that absolutely corny DNC campaign commercial.). I also think that's a pretty convenient coincidence and the idea that Trump has all of these people lock in-step with him, instead of making their own health choices was pretty hilarious at the time and even moreso now in hindsight with the virus.

TLDR: I accept it, i'm not necessarily happy about it and there will always be a thorn of suspicion(whether founded or not, is besides the point. Remember Russiegate? Karma's a you know what. Now Biden has to govern with the same cloud Trump did, and in fact this cloud is more shrouded in either mystery or refusal to accept, so he's **** out of luck.)

I guess Dems shouldn't elect a tin can for President.