Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)
- Thread starter Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)
- Start date
- Status
That's not how this works. They were the ones who accused the poll workers of doing illegal things. They were the ones who published a story and a video alleging voter fraud and setting a narrative without providing any evidence. Their story was debunked. So now they're the ones who should prove that they weren't blatantly lying and manipulating. Which they can't and they won't, because they're nothing more than a fake news factory. If that's not obvious to you by now, after everything that they've said and done, then you've got more serious problems to deal with.
Total 2020 election spending to hit nearly $14 billion, more than double 2016's sum
The 2020 election is set to finish with $14 billion in spending, smashing records as Trump and Biden battle for the White House.
Just saying.
And yes, you are supposed to speculate in advance. Indeed, within the last two weeks you yourself were arguing precisely that election security should be predicted and worked on in advance with eventualities catered for. Well, the same applies to politicians who are concerned - they should put their money and resources where their alleged fears are. We all know that there would be deathly silence about fraud from Trump had he won.
They weren't genuinely afraid of fraud. Trump was constructing a narrative about fraud to excuse his almost certain defeat because he was 8 points down in the polls. And now he's hammering for all his worth, not least because (as we also know) all those dollars pouring in from the faithful are actually paying off his campaign debt and restocking the Republican Party's bank account rather than paying for legal action.
No, in many places it'll be the usual farce where the legislators will grandstand before their voters making stupid comments for popularity, and use the excuse to finagle laws beneficial to them rather than general election security.
Honestly, I would be inclined to strip them from politicians entirely and hand it over to a neutral committee, except that I don't trust them not to stack the committee with the usual cronies and special interest groups that they can rely on to come out with the answer that they want.
How does this even compare to a school-shooting? At least when people ask for change after a shooting the shooting actually happened with definitive proof. Here Team Trump has yet to prove there was a shooting to begin with...
Trump wants his followers to believe he lost due to fraud because he cannot accept people believe he lost. He wants to appear as a winner regardless of the situation. That's all he cares about. What this has inspired is a bunch of useless hearings and lawsuits.
And no, the problem this time wasn't covid-related measures. It was all about a sore loser losing and convincing his entire camp he couldn't have lost legitimately and therefor his supporters started to consider everything suspicious. You talk about "suspicious ballots" but that's not what this is all about, it's also about alleged rigged software, people using USB sticks to change votes and many other accusations. Let's not pretend this is about one specific thing which occured due to todays context. You have spent enough time posting tweets with all kinds of accusations.
And again, no speculation was needed. Trump already considered last election fraudulent and claimed this one would be even more. If he believed his own words this election was well worth taking preemptive measures.
No it wasn't. Take a look at post #3,003
You'd cry "disenfranchisement! Poor black people can't afford to hire lawyers to preemptively fight fraud"
"Sandy Hook was staged, crisis actors!"
Yes.
All would require speculation to preempt.
Last edited:
I mean, I guess dead bodies have some similarities to the Trump campaign.
They can't control their bowels and their brains don't work anymore?
I wonder how much of the election has to be overturned for people like Houseman to be satisfied. Is it enough if it is show that there was some fraud in favour of Biden but not enough to overturn his win? Does it have to be just enough for Trump to win? Must it be enough for a decisive Trump victory?
And how about the senate races, is it fraud unless every senate seat goes to the republicans.
What will it take for the republicans to stop contesting the results of the election?
The man of the past thinks OAN is a reliable news source and they have Trump at 410 and Biden at 128.
So...a lot of the election would have to be overturned. And yes Trump retweeted the reporting.
Last edited:
A hardcore conservative friend posted that on Facebook. I replied with basically, they could at least try to make it believable because no way California is red.The man of the past thinks OAN is a reliable news source and they have Trump at 401 and Biden at 128.
So...a lot of the election would have to be overturned. And yes Trump retweeted the reporting.
Actually, no I wouldn't. I have confidence that political parties themselves (or activist donors, PACs, etc.) would take the case where relevant, and then after that numerous non-partisan bodies (e.g. ACLU) would do so.
Any of these are free and able to go to court to argue the intended electoral process is illegal, unfair or unsafe in good time, so that the state has the opportunity to rectify any identified flaws.
They can't be satisfied. All these pages of debate are for fun, they're an exercise in futility for changing anyone's mind.
I will absolutely bet you, however, if SCOTUS did decide to scrap the results and let the Republican legislatures pick electors who then voted for Trump, you would be able to hear a gnat's fart louder than any noises of disquiet these Republicans would make that the popular vote in these states had been summarily erased. That's how much interest they really have in the sanctity of democratic elections. There's no point in democracy if it means the other side win.
Secondly, part of the long-term strategy here is widespread voting reform: this fraud myth raises pressure to justify measures which don't necessarily tackle electoral security so much as lock in as much benefit to themselves as possible. Even if Trump did win, they'd still be complaining about fraud for this reason - just much less forcefully.
But that's the issue. If they're already living in a fantasy world where hundreds of thousands of fraudulent ballots were put into the system, pizza vans carrying fake ballots, innocuous video of people counting ballots is now proof of counting illegal ballots, fake hearing with fake witnesses in front of fake committees(still waiting for the fake judges) and faked numbers from The_Donald in exile. Why bother keeping it close to reality? When Russia holds """elections""" Putin gets like 92% of the vote, and he even runs unopposed. North Korea believes Kim Jun il invented the hamburger, algebra, was walking at 6 months and talking in full sentences by a year and cured like 3 diseases before he was 12.
The wilder the claim, the stronger the cult. Its a matter of faith that Trump won and the election was stolen, faith being the denial of reality in favor of what you believe/hope to be true. They already accept the unbelievable and factually untrue as true. What could be unbelievable once you cross that line? Once you cross into LaLa land everything is fair game.
None, you'd just have to convince me that the election was as safe and secure as the Twitter "fact checkers" say it is.
You'd have to answer to the thousand affidavits Rudy has, things like republicans being kept from doing their jobs, being selectively ejected from the tabulation rooms, ballots being missing, ballots being brought in, ballots with signatures that all look the same, ballots that look like they were never folded, ballots run through the machine multiple times, etc.
So you'd just need a full forensic audit, but apparently that's too much to ask because our elections aren't that important after all, which reveals that the "nooo, you can't require voter ID, that would disenfranchise people!" is not a genuine complaint.
Oh, so you do see the problem with media lies and propaganda? You just don't think it ever happens here, is that it?
HUGE - "We Have Serious, Serious Foreign Influence with Dominion Voting Machines" - General Flynn Says "We Have Conclusive Evidence of Foreign Influence in US Election Right Now" | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft
General Flynn joined Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures this morning.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
You're trying to address the issue. I commend you.1) This column by a gay man:
2) Gay people are people. They need a good economy. They need a POTUS that isn't trying to get them killed in other people's wars. They need a POTUS willing to condemn White Supremacy and the rioters who burn down cities like ANTIFA, all of which DOMA Biden opposes, including really condemning white supremacy. Actually, I've got to think about that last one. If he's selling out the US to China, I'd think him OK with Asian supremacy, as long as he gets his.
5 Big Misconceptions About The Trump Administration’s LGBTQ Record
If you cut through the false narratives peddled by the media, you’ll find Trump has been one of the greatest presidents for LGBTQ Americans in history.thefederalist.com
And in fairness, you aren't necessarily FOR Biden. But the positions you're taking helped make him POTUS over Trump. I don't think you're going to find anyone but the top 1% better off for it.
However.
What good is a good economy if you're not allowed to take part of it? Via maintaining gainful employment OR spending the money you accrued?
Trump's adminstration went out of their way to write a 36 page brief supporting the firing of a 19 year veteran teacher because he was gay.
Trump Wants to Allow This Catholic School to Fire Gay Teachers
The Catholic Church is at it again.
Who remembers how Trump backed the bakers that didn't want to serve gays? That was just one bakery. Just recently as two days ago, A Michigan Judge ruled that companies do not have to serve the LGBTQ community.
A Michigan judge rules companies don't have to serve gay customers. The attorney general says she'll appeal | CNN
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said she will appeal a Michigan Claims Court judge's ruling that allows discrimination against a same-sex couple on religious grounds.
www.cnn.com
From the Glad website
09.10.20 Pres. Trump reveals additions to his list of potential Supreme Court appointees, which include Republican senators who have campaigned against marriage equality, a Trump-appointed federal judge with ties to an anti-LGBTQ organization identified as a hate group, and Trump's former Solicitor General who has filed briefs and argued before the Court to allow organizations to discriminate against LGBTQ people. Axios reports the list was motivated by the Court's ruling in June 2020 to expand LGBTQ protections in the workplace.
08.19.20 The Department of Health and Human Services has been systematically discriminating against LGBTQ+ families in federally supported foster care programs, according to a new report from the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee. The committee found that federally-funded agencies were granted a waiver to allow discrimination based on religion and sexual orientation, intentionally harming LGBTQ children, adults, and families.
07.22.20 Jenna Ellis, senior legal advisor to Donald Trump, retweets an article that promotes conversion therapy. Psychologists worldwide confirm LGBTQ people cannot change their gender identity or sexual orientation through conversion therapy. The American Psychiatric Association condemns such treatment and describes any attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation as unethical. Ellis has a long record of racist and homophobic rhetoric, including criticizing her own Republican party for any attempt to embrace LGBTQ rights after the Pulse massacre killed 49 people, many of whom were LGBTQ.
It takes a special kind of fucked up to attempt to square the idea of Trump and his cronies who go "Listen, I don't hate you because you're gay. But I am going to make sure businesses have the ability to fire you if they don't like something about you that you can't change, I will back the thought of some of those same business not wanting to serve you, I will take away the few rights you just recently got, and I'm going to bolster the rights of those who intrinsically hate you. But hey, I'm going to say some nice words about you in an assembly, so barring my actions... you'll give me your support, right?"
Or, let me put it to you like this.
What if the Seculars took over America completely?
They said "Hey, we appreciate you worshiping your religion. We're just going to start taxing the Church, we're not going to allow you to use your religion to excuse your actions. We're going to actually allow jobs and schools to declare you unfit to have as apart of their number, so they can fire you for that without any recourse. We consider religion tantamount to child abuse, so if you are caught practicing your religion, we're taking your kids away and putting them in a home full of science for their benefit. And any establishment is allowed to say 'We don't serve the faithful' at any time. But hey, good news. We're back on top in the world stage! With all that science, we've beaten back China and Russia and we are getting closer to a fossil fuel replacement that will continue to bring jobs to the US forever and we'll only get better from here. Also, we talked about how Religion freedom is important in other places in the world. Also, don't mind the large number of people in our ranks that openly seems to revile you because of your faith. Over look those guys.
We have your support, right?"
From a Catholic school. Whoops, you conveniently (intentionally) left that part out.
You don't think that Catholic schools, private, religious institutions, shouldn't be able to govern themselves? So you hate freedom of religion?
See, every one of your examples is like this. The important details are left out and the facts are tortured to make Trump look bad. It's been this every day for the past 5 years. It's all just propaganda.
A critical-thinking exercise for the reader: try and find out the left-out details and tortured facts from this next quote:
If you can find out what's wrong with this statement, good job, you're not just someone who gulps down whatever the media tells them to!
---
In other news:
Statistical Evidence of Dominion Election Fraud? Time to Audit the Machines. - FraudSpotters
This article provides statistical analysis of Dominion's possible effect on election results. The results are significant, with some caveats, and suggest an audit of Dominion machines should occur to assure the public.
fraudspotters.com
Last edited:
Oh man of the past, for whom thinking is just too complicated, fear not! We of the future have evolved to be able to reason, process, calculate and understand and in a way that doesn't make our brains overheat and our bowels quiver.
For in Russia and North Korea they have what is called "state approved media" and no freedom of the press. To go to the example you quoted during a brain shutdown moment, when Putin wins 92% of the vote and its reported the people reporting are government approved mouth pieces who have been selected to lie on behalf of the administration. So their press secretary, masquerading as an independent journalist.
So here in the states the equivalent of a state controlled media would be Fox news, and to a rising degree OAN. You see they aren't news sources, they are government approved mouth pieces. Which is why Trump is calling Fox disloyal for reporting he lost the election - that's not what he ordered. And given the reports Trump often calls Tucker Carlson to tell him what to say, I can understand why Trump is angry.
So in response to you, oh unthinking man of the past, yes I do have a problem with propaganda and lies. And you fell for it. You fell for the lies, you fell for the propaganda. You are the type of person who would believe Putin wins 92% of the vote, or King Jun il invented the hamburger. Lies and propaganda work because of past people like you.
How exactly does one address things like, "ballots with signatures that all look the same", or "ballots that look like they were never folded"? These are just extraordinarily vague statements that people came out with during the hearings; there're no actual ballots they presented to point to, nothing solid or demonstrable that can be refuted. How has the burden of proof shifted onto us, to refute something that hasn't been demonstrated in the first place?
But whenever there is an audit, like the full hand audit in Georgia, you dismiss it.
As soon as anybody reconfirms that the result is accurate, the Trumpets merely add them to the list of supposed conspirators.
It is genuinely not physically possible to satisfy the ludicrous standard you're demanding.
Hah, you think the only threat of propaganda and lies is if the government controls the mouthpieces? You don't see any threat to a party controlling a mouthpiece?
Go back to page 179 and catch up.
That's what challengers are SUPPOSED to manually do, with their eyes, but they COULDN'T, because they were kicked out or otherwise kept at a distance. That's why they're legally required to be there. If you care about democracy at all, you should, at least, be outraged just by these allegations alone.
But besides that, forensic auditing can detect all that. Scanning can be done to detect whether the signatures were hand-written or printed, or if there's a crease in the paper or not.
Do you expect them to have any?
Do you expect them to actually steal a real ballot and present it as evidence?
Come on. You're expecting them to have evidence that only law enforcement would be able to gather.
It's like expecting a person with a bullet wound to prove who it was that shot them.
You're the one with ludicrous demands of evidence.
It hasn't. They're just asking for a proper investigation to be done. Actually, they know that there's not enough time for a proper investigation because there's a time limit.
But I don't know why anyone would be against such an investigation, other than A) they don't want their result overturned B) they don't actually care about democracy and having safe and secure elections.
But that was apparent in 2016, nobody cared about democracy because the democratic process elected a President that they didn't like.
This is the result of that, resorting to crimes in order to oust him from office.
What you're calling an audit wasn't an audit, it's a recount.
You can count the same fraudulent votes over and over again, but that won't prove that they were counterfeit.
Last edited:
At least you are in a very tricky area. I believe in freedom of association. A private organization should be able to hire and fire whoever they want for any reason they want.
But a baker refuses you service for religious reason is tougher. You're in the service business. But you tell someone you will not do what you advertise you do (where I am from, a shop can get in trouble just for not being open when the posted hours say they should be).
Would a devout Muslim refuse to sell me a rum cake? (I think they're against alcohol.) This Jew was lucky enough *sarcasm* that a Catholic all boys High School allowed him to go. They held out a service and did not refuse me for being the wrong type of customer.
But because this is a tricky area, I do not believe animus motivates the Trump team. Republicans do still have a Christian wing they at least try to pay lip service to, sort of like how the Dems talk about Medicare for all.
At this point though, I think Trump is toast. It's time to start looking at Team Biden. Bit off topic but I pray Trump does not try again in 2024. He will be far too ancient. This super old candidate thing has to stop. Pelosi has not business being in office. Nor Feinstein.. nearing 90. 1) I have to think someone that old is not at the top of their game. I've a lot of mileage on me. While other may do better, I'm sure those miles have taken their tole. I could not beat a ten year younger version of myself. 2) The young, with a future, deserve a chance to have their voices heard.
So, election results. Things have developed. When are those last Senate run offs? If Republican lose, what can we predict to happen in Washington?
- Status