Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 49
| visibility 1,993

I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:16 AM

How many of y'all still think that voter fraud actually cost Trump the election ?


If you answer yes, can you show me one piece of evidence that supports your position ?


Have you made an honest effort to fact check your evidence ?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:22 AM

How exactly is one supposed to fact check? By factcheck, do you mean rely on the media? There are things posted on social media that would indicate cheating has taken place. Do you believe the media, personal accounts from non-media, both or neither?

Message was edited by: RC Tiger®


2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I don't visit the conspiracy sites


Nov 9, 2020, 10:27 AM

What's social media saying, and have the claims been validated or lawyers/judges been able to prove it? I would consider a judge's opinion as fact.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It would appear that the media has mostly been reporting


Nov 9, 2020, 10:29 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

on judges repeatedly tossing baseless litigation out of courts for the past week. Media reporting that these cases are being tossed doesn't indicate bias against Trump. That's now how this works.

Got an actual case of fraud that warrants a deeper look? Same media will report that, too.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-19b.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

This is the problem. Maybe you can't fact check.


Nov 9, 2020, 10:33 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

As such, one should avoid posting about it, if we don't know it's true. It's a simple concept.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This is the problem. Maybe you can't fact check.


Nov 9, 2020, 10:37 AM

In order to fact check, you need to start with a meaningful assertion being made.

"I heard a bunch of things from my friends on social media, and it sounds like widespread voter fraud to me" cannot be fact-checked.

"Observers are being unlawfully banned from watching the ballots being counted," is a meaningful assertion. And it can be (and has been) proven false.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: This is the problem. Maybe you can't fact check.


Nov 9, 2020, 11:27 AM [ in reply to This is the problem. Maybe you can't fact check. ]

Prodigal,

I have always thought that if something is important enough to get upset about, it should be important enough to double check the facts on.

This goes for retweets too.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You fact check by getting off the internet


Nov 9, 2020, 10:37 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

ALWAYS step #1.

GOING to a place, watching votes, talking to officials running the vote, Sec. of State offices, things like that.

It used to be called journalism, and it takes hard work.

Like when Trump's campaign manager tweets a fake pic of a newspaper headline. You fact check that by going to the newspaper shown in the pic. The newspaper than announces they never ran that headline, and it's fake.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


haha, that's doable for 0.0000001% of us***


Nov 9, 2020, 10:57 AM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:58 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

RC,

First of all, I appreciate skepticism, so I am looking for evidence. So claims of fraud need to be supported by evidence. If there is no evidence of fraud, I am going to believe in the integrity of the election process. This is not to say, I cannot be persuaded otherwise, but it WILL take evidence (and not innuendo) to do so.

Secondly,
I think it is an unreasonable position to distrust ALL media sources, especially in fact checking. Here are some sites that I (& national librarians) think are trustworthy, especially when they clearly lay out the facts or lay out the flaws in a bad story.

FactCheck.org
Annenberg Political Factcheck - a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center. 'Monitors the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players.'

FactChecker (Washington Post)
Weekly blog from the Washington Post.

PolitiFact.com
From the St. Petersburg Times and Congressional Quarterly. Has a 'Truth-O-Meter' scorecard checking the attacks on the candidates (includes explanations). Also see their Punditfact page.

Snopes.com
"Oldest and largest fact-checking site on the Internet".

PunditFact
"Dedicated to checking the accuracy of claims by pundits, columnists, bloggers, political analysts, the hosts and guests of talk shows, and other members of the media."

Thirdly, I don't have a real problem being alerted to something on social media - I don't think we can get that cat back in the bag - but I ALWAYS check that stuff out through more reputable sources. Social media is pure gossip. That doesn't mean everything on there is false - just that i want to be skeptical and check it out from other angles.

Finally, I think we ALL could use some practice in reserving judgement for a time - instead of feeling the need to come to a quick conclusion with too little information. It is a human tendency that we, in an age of voluminous (& questionable) information, would do well to consciously attempt to temper.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

^^ There's the worse part about this Trump Presidency


Nov 9, 2020, 10:58 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

if you can't attack the facts, you attack the people telling you the facts.

It's a dangerous slope.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I like your funny words magic man


Re: ^^ There's the worse part about this Trump Presidency


Nov 9, 2020, 11:29 AM

Coach,

Agreed, but many of us are guilty of the ad hominem attacks as well.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 8:37 PM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

If you can't fact check it to see if it's true, why do you believe it's true? Because it's what you want to be true.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


Here's an egregious example, just one of many


Nov 9, 2020, 10:29 AM

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/09/us/politics/west-Virginia-election-fraud.html


Wait, it was GOP fraud, and in a state that doesn't matter. Hang on...

Here's another....oh wait....

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/election-2020/2020/09/30/9-discarded-military-ballots-werent-fraud-pennsylvania-election-chief-says/

Here's another horrendous example:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/some-fairfax-county-voters-received-2-mail-in-ballots/2427435/


Then there's Sharpiegate, potentially the worst example:
https://apnews.com/article/claim-sharpie-pens-ruin-arizona-ballots-f5287df8fdb2be101b2cdf9edd007746


2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:35 AM

I don’t know how many votes will change, but I do think there was a significant amount of fraud in this election. If we just let it slide the whole system will turn into a huge cheating battle. So I would like for these issues to be investigated for the sole purpose of upholding the faith in our “free and fair” election system.... not necessarily to overturn an election result. Just saying some cheating happened- but that’s ok is not the right answer.

I have researched. Some claims seem more credible than others to me.

Claims I think have some validity:
-unobserved ballot counting
-dead people voting
-out of state residents voting
-programs installed to skew elections
-a great deal of curious activity between 3-6am with unchecked containers, boxes, and coolers being wheeled into counting centers that coincide with nearly impossible jumps in the count for Biden
-a curious number of adverse events at polling stations
-the obvious mail in debacle
-multiple blue counties with more votes than registered voters
-key cities where Biden got a higher percentage of the black vote than Obama ever did
-and not one of these things seem to go against Biden.

Again- not saying Trump won... I certainly don’t know, but I do think there were significant abnormalities that need to be cleaned up to restore faith in the system.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You realize most of those have already been disproven***


Nov 9, 2020, 10:41 AM



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I think it's pretty clear..


Nov 9, 2020, 10:43 AM

there are AT LEAST 4,510,248 illegally cast votes AND that's BEFORE we even show the evidence.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I think it's pretty clear..


Nov 9, 2020, 10:45 AM

Laughable. I should add. I know you don't believe that, but is that what some sources are saying?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I made it up...


Nov 9, 2020, 10:47 AM

satire...

Take the current vote difference and double down

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I think it's pretty clear..


Nov 9, 2020, 11:18 AM [ in reply to I think it's pretty clear.. ]

I usually appreciate satire, but a lot of the so-called humor on here serves to deflect from any serious conversation/compromise.

Maybe I am just on the wrong board or maybe I am just getting too old and am no fun anymore, but I am truly concerned that if we can't find some factual base from which to speak with each other, that our country faces problems that we cannot overcome.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I don't meet the requirements...


Nov 9, 2020, 11:20 AM

you laid out to answer the question.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I don't meet the requirements...


Nov 9, 2020, 11:31 AM

franc,

OK, so don't.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The serious answer to your question is...


Nov 9, 2020, 11:42 AM

first remove the scoks and the trolls.

The amount of people who believe that there is enough fraud to change the election is very small.

Do I think there was any fraud? IDK. But as I have said before, if there is the massive amount of fraud required to throw this election, we will experience a crisis like we have never seen.

Do I think the POTUS has a right to bring challenges? Yes. I wish he would handle it differently. I think there is a difference between the people who believe there is massive fraud and people who believe there may have been fraud.

So let's ask another question. If there was any fraud, is it okay to expose it even if it doesn't change this election?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: The serious answer to your question is...


Nov 9, 2020, 4:39 PM

franc,

I would say yes. Expose it, fix it, and restore faith in the election system.

OTOH, maybe we could ensure the peaceable transfer of power first.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Oh thank goodness.


Nov 9, 2020, 10:44 AM [ in reply to You realize most of those have already been disproven*** ]

My faith has been restored now. Thank You Dave!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

On the black vote comment....


Nov 9, 2020, 10:44 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

can you please explain how that would be known at this point? Doesn't that data normally come from exit polls? How would an exit poll be used to prove any kind of fraud?? And how are exit polls conducted with such a high mail-in voter percentage?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:53 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

There are irregularities in every election. But fraud is extremely rare and in those cases where it's been prosecuted it usually involves only a handful of ballots.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 11:22 AM

Felix,

I think you are correct, but I also think that we have to address people's concerns about the integrity of the election process to their satisfaction or our society suffers.

I am asking for evidence so that Americans (liberal & conservative) can attempt to come to some agreement as to what the facts are. I think we all need to grind our way through this factually in order to be able to move forward together.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 11:14 AM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

elwyn,

First of all, let me say thanks for a reasonable and serious response.

I have a couple of questions:

1. I certainly take your point that we don't want to encourage fraud by taking it less than seriously, but is there a small percentage at which we might say - it is not worth pursuing further. If it looked like .1% of the vote, could we sort of move on ? I am not making such an argument, just wondering how deep we go.

2. You list a number of researched claims, but they seem a bit general to me. Could you pick one or two and show me your evidence for believing them to be credible ? I would like to treat your concerns with the seriousness that they deserve, but i need some evidence to do so.

Finally, I agree that legitimate cases of fraud need to be investigated to ensure faith in the system. Our democracy depends on that. And I would like to see the system become a bit more structured and standardized (and protected from hacking), but many conservatives are strong supporters of states' rights and are somewhat resistant to this modifications. I am not sure how we address this.

Thanks again for a reasonable conversation and not the typical devolution into the muck.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 12:53 PM

Appreciate the response. I appreciate a good discussion based on logic and sans the name calling.

1. It’s a fair question to ask if >.1% of a vote change is it ok to just let it slide. I would just follow it up with a couple of questions myself: Do we really know it was >.1%? Is it only cheating if you get caught?

2.https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/8/matt-schlapp-says-whistleblower-saw-biden-harris-v/


I think you (More so than others) understand I’m not saying any or all of the claims are fact. But what I do find to be disconcerting is the media. There are bits and pieces of info, but no major MSM or social media outlets will talk about these issues. If you google anything relating to voting concerns there are pages and pages and pages of disproven claims, but nothing on claims that have yet to be disproven by the media. Twitter does it’s thing...
I’m curious to see what Giuliani has with his “thousands” of affidavits, just think it should be investigated. Not claiming guilt or innocence.


This is also very curious. When have we ever just stopped count votes on election night? And then the first reports are these huge jumps in Biden votes? Also accounts of poll counting stations claiming to close for the night and witness find them counting in the middle of the night.

To your last point about Pubs standing in the way of cleaning up our system: pubs want ID checks and legit verification at the polls. Dems claim that measure is racist. I’m not sure of a better way... and I don’t think you need one.

*que your friends replying with tons of nyTimes, nbc, abc etc posts about how no claims are true out of the pubs.

Message was edited by: elwyn07®


2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 5:06 PM

elwyn,

1. I have no idea how large or small the fraud might be. I was only trying to make the point that given 150+ million votes to be cast, collected, and counted, there are bound to be mistakes, errors, and even a little bit of fraud. I just wanted to establish that at some low level of discrepencies we are really straining at gnats.

I think that what conservatives are railing about is large scale fraud. I am very skeptical about this and I have yet to see evidence of it. I remain open to evidence and I take the accuracy of our voting system seriously.

2. As to the whistleblower story, I am going to be the one to present evidence that seems to contradict pictures of wrongdoing. The whistleblower post started on social media and SPECULATED that the white van was a Biden/Harris van and the box in the wagon was full of ballots. If you will watch the video below you will see a reporter from the local TV station identifying the man with the wagon as one of their photographers and identifying the wagon and the box (of camera equipment) as theirs and showing it on camera.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-video-journalist-detroit-ba/fact-check-video-shows-journalists-filming-gear-in-red-wagon-not-ballots-idUSKBN27L2UN

This is how this lousy game of telephone works. Somebody tweets a story based on speculation without checking the facts. Then it gets twisted, sensationalized, and amplified across millions of viewers, each seemingly less likely to bother to question its veracity because it confirms their bias and makes them feel righteous.

You and I can discuss whether and how much of a media bias may or may not exist, but I don't think I can find a reasonable way to give random sources on facebook and twitter more credence than I give professional reporters. They DO report on these stories, but when they find bad evidence or no evidence, then they say so and move on to real stories.

And I am not saying that none of these stories has any validity. But I am saying that they have no validity until I see some kind of supporting evidence. So far I am having trouble finding any such evidence. Do you have some of which I am unaware.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 6:08 PM

I think most of your response is very reasonable and I agree with.

For example- your skepticism. I’m skeptical as well- just probably lean the other way. I can appreciate you are looking for hard data before you come down on one side or another. I am in the same boat- I don’t KNOW there is widespread fraud... but I do THINK there’s more out there than innocent counting errors. Therefore I am depending on the authorities (courts) to see it through.

We certainly have some differences and I think a lot of it stems from our respective learned behaviors of dependence on media source as a reliable source of info. That is not a slight. Just saying you can depend on almost all media to report on all things from your point of view. Conservatives have VERY few choices or sources (opened myself up for a joke here!). The point here being I wouldn’t even think to look for “proof” on the internet to prove my points. I am content waiting to see how it plays out in court.

I would be curious to hear your objections to requiring an ID to vote.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 7:55 PM

elwyn,



I can understand one's frustration from the confusion among media sources. I would urge everyone to find four or five different ones that are factual and unbiased (or less biased). We can wait on the courts to sift through t=all of these claims and misrepresentations on this election, but what do we do with all of the other issues concerning our society ?

Attached is a chart ranking news sources from left to right based on biases and from top to bottom based on factual accuracy. Perhaps this can help us find some balance of trustworthy information outlets.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 8:03 PM

Oh I’ve seen that.

Just because your in the middle of the chart doesn’t mean you’re neutral....

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Please cite proven cases.***


Nov 9, 2020, 8:37 PM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


this needs to be last election...


Nov 9, 2020, 10:38 AM

we allow illegal votes to be counted

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:42 AM

No. It's equivalent to believing we attacked ourselves on 9/11 or that Sandy Hook was a hoax.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Or the Russians rigged the last election


Nov 9, 2020, 10:45 AM

Am I doing this right?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Or the Russians rigged the last election


Nov 9, 2020, 10:48 AM

Youre doing it wrong.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I figured.


Nov 9, 2020, 10:58 AM

Funny though!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Or the Russians rigged the last election


Nov 9, 2020, 11:23 AM [ in reply to Or the Russians rigged the last election ]

elwyn,

I think the intelligence agencies have plenty of real evidence for the Russian interference.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It will take some time ... something will


Nov 9, 2020, 10:46 AM

Eventually leak and some Dem pawns will go to jail ...

Check back in 2022

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

l don’t. I think Trump cost Trump the election.


Nov 9, 2020, 10:47 AM

But I don’t at all mind intense scrutiny on the process.

Ideally once he has exhausted that he would concede in some constructive manner. I don’t see that happening, unfortunately.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 10:49 AM

There are irregularities in any election, but so far there is no evidence of widespread fraud.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 11:46 AM

80+ million ballots distributed, collected and (supposedly)delivered by the unionized postal service. Same folks who lost two of my mortgage payments in 2 years. Of course there's widespread fraud. Joe is about as legitimate as a three dollar bill.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 11:48 AM

I believe the one-sided completely liberal MSM and social media cost Trump the election. The whole situation was/is inappropriate, and some of the actions taken by some of these essentially monopolies should be illegal.

Whether or not laws were broken in states where they changed their vote counting and mail-in ballot processes is unknown to me. That should be infinitely easier to find ground truth about compared to ballot fraud.

I have chosen not to watch the "news" to keep my sanity, so I'm not up on recent fraud claims.

The one thing you need to realize is that the democrats have a history of unethical behavior at levels far beyond that of conservatives. And, the level of corruption is much greater than you are aware of based on my reading of your posts.

Off the top of my head, I will remind you about:

- HRC's DIY email server. She got/sent classified email and lied about it. Plenty of tangible (non hearsay) evidence exists. She also collected 100s of millions in her Clinton Foundation - look up Form 990s online and see for yourself. But here is an essential point, if you cannot extrapolate a clearly unethical/illegal situation such as 10s of millions of donations to the CF while she was Sec of State, then no point in having a discussion with you because your objectivity is blinded.
- AG Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton on the tarmac days before Comey made his speech. Can anything be proven? Nothing. In my mind, I am 100% confident it was unethical. This is where I have major problems with democrats - if you cannot admit this situation was a problem, then my point is proven the democrats have lower moral/ethical standards.
- Peter Strzok. Having a major, senior role in HRC and Russia investigation. Texting on gov't phones about keeping Trump from being elected. With his mistress - i.e., CHEATING on his wife also. Ditto on his mistress - an attorney for the FBI. This is horsechit and a small view into the corruption of the FBI.
- Steele Dossier. If you have not read it, please download it. The single document that formed the impeachment of Trump is a hoax. It is fake, and a reasonable, objective person reading it can easily make that conclusion. And listen to what Adam Schiff said. He's a liar - a complete zero-moral, zero-ethical liar; and an a-hole to boot. He want on national TV and outright lied to the American people by faking reading of Trump's convo with Ukraine.

And plain, old-fashioned poor judgment and lack of self-control:

- Katie Hill (D). A sitting CA House member has a threesome with another woman and her husband or boyfriend, while also smoking a bong, and memorialized in photos. You can find them online.
- Andrew Weiner (D) - sexting from the House gym.
- John Edwards (D) - local guy, but you know about him.

And the list goes on and on and on. The top list are serious, high-level issues that have major, national-level impacts.

I firmly believe these large, urban democrat cities that have been democrat for decades are majorly corrupt. Whether or not they have the balls to push 10s of thousands of ballets through the system or to add a zero onto results is TBD. We saw one of the states said someone added a zero to a result figure that went all the way up the counting chain - if this is true then it tells me there are opportunities for fraud. Proving it is another thing...just like we cannot prove AG Lynch and Bill Clinton talked about Hillary's case when they met privately on an airport tarmac a day or two before her case was closed by Comey.

Your team is the one that essentially legalized heroin in Oregon - are you ready for that to happen where your kids live (if you have them). Your team wants marijuana legal everywhere. Your team allows riots with destruction of private property to continue unabated. Your team wants to kill cops and has killed cops in ambushes. Mothers and fathers have lost their lives and left their kids without parents thanks to calls for violence against law enforcement from your team.

Face it, law and order is not important to democrats. Everyone knows dems are more than capable of election fraud.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


If Trump had approached...


Nov 9, 2020, 12:00 PM

the first debate the way he did the last and had not gotten COVID, he wouldn't have lost 3 weeks of momentum.

Still might not have been enough though.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-franc1968.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


When did poor judgment and self-control become important?


Nov 9, 2020, 12:46 PM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

If that's your barometer, there's no way you'd vote for the Trumpster.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 5:13 PM [ in reply to Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really) ]

NC,

You have a deeply conservative bias. That bias seems to lead you to make many conclusions without any hard evidence. Perhaps some of the conclusions that you jump to have some basis in fact, but you don't get to convince me without some actual supporting evidence. I do not trust your opinions on their own.

BTW, have you take any time to examine some of the actions of Trump and the Republicans. When you claim that the Dems are morally & ethically inferior, you have to look for supporting evidence on both sides.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I have a couple of serious question for y'all (really)


Nov 9, 2020, 8:36 PM

So, you ask for facts, but present zero yourself. Makes sense to find bias in others.

What your problem is that you get your news, information, points of reference from one source.

Have you not seen Strzok's emails? Do know what position he was in while he was fcking the FBI attorney and not going home to his wife?

You didn't watch Comey's speech on HRC? You believe HRC created a DIY email server, right? Or are you not informed about that either?

I have looked up the Clinton Foundations federal filings and read the Steele Dossier. Go ahead and bury your head in the sand.

Apparently you, Mr. Un Biased, have not looked at any of this. You are a typical democrat living in your echo chamber so satisfied with you superior intellectual ability because everyone agrees with you.

Give me a break and go back to your MSNBC.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 49
| visibility 1,993
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic