The voters don't decide elections any more. The counters do.
Why I doubt the election results
- Thread starter Truth Detector
- Start date
The voters don't decide elections any more. The counters do.
Into the Night
Verified User
Nope. RQAA means Repetitive Question Already Answered. The evidence has been given to you by multiple users. The precincts with the bad counts has been discussed ad nauseum in the news. That you obstinately refuse to pay attention to any of it is YOUR problem.
Into the Night
Verified User
He said the dead didn't vote, then provided two examples where they did. It was done in the same post. He is very confused. He is still trying to argue both sides of that paradox.
He's locked into another paradox as well. 1) the Russians manipulated the elections, and 2) the election system is clean. Hes continues to argue both sides of that paradox as well.
Arguing both sides of any paradox is irrational.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
True. It's like saying "There wasn't any voter fraud..." then pointing out cases of voter fraud...
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
First off, you little ditty actually talked of one "request", not a counted vote. And if you look closely, how many of those "frauds" actually got counted as a vote, not just a fake registration that was caught?
And for the record, why aren't folk like you screaming bloody murder about the following?: https://atlantadailyworld.com/2020/10/21/georgians-witness-surge-in-over-198000-voter-purges/
https://www.democracynow.org/2021/1/5/greg_palast_georgia
Please don't say something stupid like, "fake news". Just give an honest answer.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Yep, but the truth is they always did.
LOL, CNN and MSNBC are not news, they are left wing propaganda outlets. The evidence of vote fraud is massive and real. But the cheaters won this round, the fight has just begun. Truth will win out in the end, it always does.
In many cities, yes. But with the software thing it has infected several states.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
You're asking for proof of a negative. We don't know how many fraudulent votes got counted. If they were known to be fraudulent they'd have been rejected, or so I think we'd hope. But because many states, particularly blue ones, don't have voter ID laws, allow ballot harvesting (eg., anyone to handle ballots between the voter and being officially counted), use extremely lax signature verification--in Nevada the automatic verification system was set to just 40% match and few ballots rejected by that system and then hand inspected were subsequently rejected meaning that almost any signature on the ballot whatsoever was accepted--means we have no idea how many ballots were fraudulent.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Okay, the opinion of a couple of people at the Annenberg Foundation say it didn't happen. So? That's their opinion. Their putting "Fact Check" at the top of the column doesn't increase its credibility.
From your article:
Again, it's pretty clear a small number of such votes did occur. That they didn't change the outcome isn't the point. That they occurred at all is. We should strive to improve the system, not excuse it for its failures as you are trying so hard to do.
"Discussed in the news" means false allegations that were debunked.
One poster said Pennsylvania had more votes than registered voters and I proved to him that was false from official Pennsylvania sources. It was simply an allegation from right-wing false news sites.
No poster has offered any other examples since it is so easy to prove wrong. Anybody who thinks they have evidence of jurisdictions with more votes than registered voters should be anxious to present the evidence if they really had any.
Trump claimed Georgia had 5,000 dead people voting and they found 2. Of course it can happen and great effort has been made to improve the system, but it can't be perfect. The cases of dead people voting is from an absentee ballot being requested by a person who later died and their spouse, child, or relative attempted to vote on their behalf. It is not from people wandering the cemeteries looking for names.
The fact that some of these cases could not have changed the election outcome was a major point by some of the courts that heard the election challenges.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
No, great effort has been made to undermine the system. Purging voter rolls regularly and continuously is loudly and strongly protested by Democrats. Eliminating ballot harvesting is protested by Democrats. Making voters show ID is protested by Democrats. Use of unsupervised ballot drop off boxes is championed by Democrats. In fact, the Democrats now want to legalize all of that nationwide and are pushing a bill or bills through the House to do so.
If the Democrats really wanted to ensure open, corruption-, and fraud-free elections they wouldn't have the positions they do take on voting. Instead, they call opposition to these commonsense things "voter suppression." They are full of shit. They want fraudulent elections by the very positions they take on voting.
Because Democrats want more people to vote and Republicans want less. So, they support election practices to further their goal.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
I want the people who have a right to vote to vote and I want safeguards on our elections that ensure that happens. Thus I am for voter ID, against ballot harvesting, against all mail-in elections, against ballot drop boxes. If voting is so important as the Democrats keep saying, then shouldn't it be something a person is willing to invest more than a few minutes in doing?
No. But thanks for admitting that your goal is voter suppression. We already knew that.
I spend a few minutes requesting my ballot, then when it’s received I complete it, sign it and take it to the mailbox! I then track it online. I really like voting by mail.
I doubt I'll ever do it again in person. Safe, secure and you KNOW your vote was counted. I have no idea why it makes the Trump cult quiver with fear and hide in the corner.