Serious thread about election fraud

[quote]highhoppingworm wrote:

[

1) You said "the voter fraud that has occurred". How are you so sure it has occurred? You and your ilk have acknowledged you don't actually have any proven cases of fraud.

Of course fraud has occurred. It always does. And if you have been watching anything but the Dem stations, you would be aware of several instances that have already been exposed.

No fraud?

What are you five years old?

george c wrote:

Agingrunner wrote:

Go back and look at the piece that you posted. The FEC officer per your article is Ellen Weintraub, Democeat, not Republican. Next

The commission of 6, 4 appointed by Trump, made the claim. Weintraub communicated the finding.

In Pennsylvania?

Agingrunner wrote:

In Pennsylvania?

Fed. That would include PA.

Other guy wrote:

States in which Trump had healthy margins as election day closed, including a seemingly insurmountable lead in PA.

In fact, per Glenn Greenwald, the NY Times put the chances of a Trump win at 80% at that point.

In the wee hours of Wednesday morning, the number began to move dramatically toward Biden and the media began telling us a Biden win was all but inevitable.

But nothing suspicious at all.

WTF can we stop with the "insurmountable lead" BS.

Everyone knew PA mail ballots would be counted last. Everyone knew they would skew heavy Dem. Trump asked his voters to vote in person! That is not surprising if you were paying any attention at all.

Other guy wrote:

States in which Trump had healthy margins as election day closed, including a seemingly insurmountable lead in PA.

In fact, per Glenn Greenwald, the NY Times put the chances of a Trump win at 80% at that point.

In the wee hours of Wednesday morning, the number began to move dramatically toward Biden and the media began telling us a Biden win was all but inevitable.

But nothing suspicious at all.

Why do you think it's odd that Biden caught up in PA, when it was recorded (before the election) that 1.7 million Democrats had cast mail-in ballots as opposed to about 620k Republicans?

I think Trump was up about 850k after all the on the ballots had been counted.

Surely you have to admit that, once the mail-in ballots started getting counted (remember the GOP made sure they couldn't be counted until after to polls were closed) Biden was going to close the gap and probably win.

I know you won't answer because you know I'm right, and this angle you're taking is just tearful desperation.

If the election happened in the exact opposite order- Biden jumps out to a big lead and then Trump almost closes the gap, would you yell conspiracy?

If they had counted the mail in ballots first, that’s exactly what would have happened.

Maybe democrats should complain about the head start Trump was given- it makes as much sense as complaining about Biden’s votes coming later.

What the eff are you talking about?

I am responding to this quote:

"I can guarantee you that the liberal/conservative split among scientists is about 50/50 trending towards more conservatives. Liberalism in recent years has done so much damage to the name of science and scientific progress it is disgusting that you actually think that. You don't know what you are talking about; that is not up for debate." - Agingrunner (page 20)

Seems like a pretty straightforward claim to me no?

Oh man even Tucker Carlson admits there isn't enough evidence of fraud to support the argument.

It's over folks. Pack it in

alternate opinion wrote:

We know why the DNC is refusing to recognize the outcome - because Hillary is refusing to recognize the outcome. If she was a gracious loser I think we'd all be moving on by now, but she's not. I shared above that Sanders made the same stolen election and fraud claims when he lost the DNC presidential nomination. This partyjust cries wolf.

Fixed that for you. Want me to do it for Al Gore in 2000?

38 days after the 2000 election, Gore finally conceded - how many advanced-degree millennials that are yelling about Trump needing to concede know about Gore in 2000?

Up until a few weeks ago, Hillary was still claiming that Trump was an illegitimate president and telling Biden not to concede under any circumstances.

It's not a stretch to ask why can't GOP/republicans can't question the legitimacy of this election and be happy Trump hasn't conceded until investigations take place and it goes before the courts.

Hilary conceded after like 3 days buddy. Kinda hurts your argument.

I think most agree that voter fraud has occurred. Unfortunately, according to the masses here it is not deemed as egregious as running in a carbon plated stack of foam right after sticking a hypo in your A*!

Lol. Hillary conceded within days. You know that Bush v Gore came down to a 537 vote difference in Florida. Why would either man concede with a margin that small?

No one would suggest Trump or Biden concede anything if the difference were that small. Everyone recognizes that recounts can change the count by hundreds of votes, maybe even low thousands (like under 2,000). So I don't know where you're going with this.

Any response to the claim that Trump is a whiny baby who claims fraud when he loses a vote?

Another cheater busted, working for the GOP but cheating for the Democrats:

https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1326252765245530120

Harambe wrote:

krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:

Fixed that for you. Want me to do it for Al Gore in 2000?

38 days after the 2000 election, Gore finally conceded - how many advanced-degree millennials that are yelling about Trump needing to concede know about Gore in 2000?

Up until a few weeks ago, Hillary was still claiming that Trump was an illegitimate president and telling Biden not to concede under any circumstances.

It's not a stretch to ask why can't GOP/republicans can't question the legitimacy of this election and be happy Trump hasn't conceded until investigations take place and it goes before the courts.

Hilary conceded after like 3 days buddy. Kinda hurts your argument.

Gore didn't (so 1 out of 2) and Hillary said "do not concede under any circumstances" when addressing Joe.

Mosby wrote:

If the election happened in the exact opposite order- Biden jumps out to a big lead and then Trump almost closes the gap, would you yell conspiracy?

If they had counted the mail in ballots first, that’s exactly what would have happened.

Maybe democrats should complain about the head start Trump was given- it makes as much sense as complaining about Biden’s votes coming later.

This same exact scenario played out in Florida, Ohio, and other states where mail-in ballots were processed first. Try harder.

Agingrunner wrote:

Hilary conceded after like 3 days buddy. Kinda hurts your argument.

Gore didn't (so 1 out of 2) and Hillary said "do not concede under any circumstances" when addressing Joe.[/quote]

Remind me what the vote difference between Bush and Gore was in FL they day after the election?

Agingrunner wrote:

Gore didn't (so 1 out of 2) and Hillary said "do not concede under any circumstances" when addressing Joe.

The Clintons are like the right's bogeymen. Bro, no one gives a sh*t about what Hillary Clinton has to say in 2020. Why didn't Trump lock her up again?

But you know that Biden had a huge lead in mail/absentee ballots, that Democrats planned to vote that way, and that Trump's voters were much more likely to vote in person on the day of the election, so it was expected that Biden would make a very big move as those votes were counted. Republicans in PA literally passed a law prohibiting counting of those ballots prior to election day, so they had to count them afterwards. PA stats had 64% of mail ballots from registered Democrats to only 23% from Republicans and 10% independents. A higher percentage of Dems returned them. You had enormous totals still outstanding from the most populous counties in the state, in and around Phil and Pitt, so it was absolutely expected and the papers were full of predictions precisely to this effect, that Trump'd be ahead on election day but lose his lead as the votes were counted.

In Florida in 2000, there were irregularities in the form of the ballots, which were misleading, and in the different judgments about voter intent with the chads--did you have to punch them entirely out, make a hole, make a big hole with only some hanging on? The butterfly ballots in Palm Beach County made it look like you were voting for Gore when you were actually voting for Buchanan--who got a lot more votes in the county than expected. The proper thing to do, which the Florida Supreme Court ruled was to be done, was to do a hand recount of all ballots for clear voter intent. That was taking place until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such a project would harm irreparably the plaintiff, W., as if he had already won. But you can't call a 537 vote margin election in a state the size of Florida until you do a hand recount. No precedent, they said, embarrassed of their own 'reasoning.'