GOP can’t win elections without cheating

[Unforgiven]

   While some of us know that this post is pure projection,

the victims on the left claim they don't  cheat

and if that's the case why try and block an investigation

into cheating? Isn't that what a cheater would do?

You would think victims would want exoneration.

 

Maricopa County Continues To Block Ariz. Senate

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 6:16 AM PT – Tuesday, February 16, 2021

Maricopa County and the Arizona state Senate remain at a stalemate over the election audit in Arizona. The county is now requesting an injunction to try to block the Senate from investigating claims of election fraud.

[Big Gun]

2 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree with all of the above.  it is frightening how few voters give a damn, and how few actually educate themselves about policies.  I know too many that pull a lever just because it has an R or a D next to it.

So you actually thought Bidens policies are/were better than Trumps policies? and thus far think Biden is doing a tremendous job?

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Big Gun said:

So you actually thought Bidens policies are/were better than Trumps policies? and thus far think Biden is doing a tremendous job?

Some are better yes.  Some policies of Trump's I was OK with, some not.  Some of Biden's policies I will be OK with, some not.  That is how rational people behave. 

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

21 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Some are better yes.  Some policies of Trump's I was OK with, some not.  Some of Biden's policies I will be OK with, some not.  That is how rational people behave. 

 

Respect what you trust in man. Wonderful thing free speech.  Lots of people have different viewing on things.  But for me choose to respect there views. 

[SoCal Deek]

23 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree with all of the above.  it is frightening how few voters give a damn, and how few actually educate themselves about policies.  I know too many that pull a lever just because it has an R or a D next to it.

Oldman....everyone cannot possibly care about everything. I actually respect those who go about their lives and leave voting to those who pay more attention.  Do I wish more people paid attention? Of course.  But I have a bigger problem with uninformed people make uninformed choices in the ballot box because they feel they're  'supposed to' do their civic duty.  Watch any of the typical Man on the Street videos and you'll see how little many know about anything to do with history or political issues/policies. 

Edited February 17, 2021 by SoCal Deek

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Oldman....everyone cannot possibly care about everything. I actually respect those who go about their lives and leave voting to those who pay more attention.  Do I wish more people paid attention? Of course.  But I have a bigger problem with uninformed people make uninformed choices in the ballot box because they feel they're  'supposed to' do their civic duty.  Watch any of the typical Man on the Street videos and you'll see how little many know about anything to do with history or political issues/policies. 

I know.  It's frightening.  Or depressing.  Not sure which would be worse.

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

I know.  It's frightening.  Or depressing.  Not sure which would be worse.

It is indeed frightening.....which is one reason why voting should not be as easy as some people are trying to make it. It needs to be accessible and intentional, but not easy.

[BillStime]

 

[Unforgiven]

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/23/why-do-the-elections-defenders-require-my-agreement/

 

--snip

The 2020 election came down to a narrower margin than the 2016 contest: fewer than 43,000 rather than 77,000 votes in just three states. In 2016, nothing fishy in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin—the states on which 2016 turned—was detected. Certainly nothing like:

 

Counting shutdowns in five states, in which one candidate was ahead, only to lose after the counting resumed;

“Found” tranches of ballots going overwhelmingly—sometimes exclusively—to one candidate, the eventual “winner”;

Sworn affidavits alleging the backdating of ballots;

Historically low rejection rates—as in, orders of magnitude lower—of mail-in ballots, suggesting that many obviously invalid ballots were accepted as genuine;

Mail-in and absentee ballots appearing without creases, raising the question of how they got into the envelopes required for their being mailed in;

Thousands upon thousands of ballots all marked for one presidential candidate without a single choice marked for any down-ballot candidate.

The absolute refusal to conduct signature audits—indeed, the discarding of many envelopes which alone make such audits possible—i.e., of the kind of recounts which are performed not merely to get the math right but to evaluate the validity of ballots;

Other statistical and historical anomalies too numerous to mention here.

--snip

 

All these anomalies in favor of democrats. Any one of these would be fishy to some extent.

All of them - in favor of democrats is pretty close to a statistical impossibility imho.

Most definitely NOT baseless.

But yeah, like Saul Alinsky says, scream the other side is doing what you're doing.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Unforgiven

[BillStime]

3 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/23/why-do-the-elections-defenders-require-my-agreement/

 

--snip

The 2020 election came down to a narrower margin than the 2016 contest: fewer than 43,000 rather than 77,000 votes in just three states. In 2016, nothing fishy in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin—the states on which 2016 turned—was detected. Certainly nothing like:

 

Counting shutdowns in five states, in which one candidate was ahead, only to lose after the counting resumed;

“Found” tranches of ballots going overwhelmingly—sometimes exclusively—to one candidate, the eventual “winner”;

Sworn affidavits alleging the backdating of ballots;

Historically low rejection rates—as in, orders of magnitude lower—of mail-in ballots, suggesting that many obviously invalid ballots were accepted as genuine;

Mail-in and absentee ballots appearing without creases, raising the question of how they got into the envelopes required for their being mailed in;

Thousands upon thousands of ballots all marked for one presidential candidate without a single choice marked for any down-ballot candidate.

The absolute refusal to conduct signature audits—indeed, the discarding of many envelopes which alone make such audits possible—i.e., of the kind of recounts which are performed not merely to get the math right but to evaluate the validity of ballots;

Other statistical and historical anomalies too numerous to mention here.

--snip

 

All these anomalies in favor of democrats. Any one of these would be fishy to some extent.

All of them - in favor of democrats is pretty close to a statistical impossibility imho.

Most definitely NOT baseless.

But yeah, like Saul Alinsky says, scream the other side is doing what you're doing.

 

Wrong website.  You know where this schitt goes.

[daz28]

1 hour ago, Unforgiven said:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/23/why-do-the-elections-defenders-require-my-agreement/

 

--snip

The 2020 election came down to a narrower margin than the 2016 contest: fewer than 43,000 rather than 77,000 votes in just three states. In 2016, nothing fishy in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin—the states on which 2016 turned—was detected. Certainly nothing like:

 

Counting shutdowns in five states, in which one candidate was ahead, only to lose after the counting resumed;

“Found” tranches of ballots going overwhelmingly—sometimes exclusively—to one candidate, the eventual “winner”;

Sworn affidavits alleging the backdating of ballots;

Historically low rejection rates—as in, orders of magnitude lower—of mail-in ballots, suggesting that many obviously invalid ballots were accepted as genuine;

Mail-in and absentee ballots appearing without creases, raising the question of how they got into the envelopes required for their being mailed in;

Thousands upon thousands of ballots all marked for one presidential candidate without a single choice marked for any down-ballot candidate.

The absolute refusal to conduct signature audits—indeed, the discarding of many envelopes which alone make such audits possible—i.e., of the kind of recounts which are performed not merely to get the math right but to evaluate the validity of ballots;

Other statistical and historical anomalies too numerous to mention here.

--snip

 

All these anomalies in favor of democrats. Any one of these would be fishy to some extent.

All of them - in favor of democrats is pretty close to a statistical impossibility imho.

Most definitely NOT baseless.

But yeah, like Saul Alinsky says, scream the other side is doing what you're doing.

The only thing that was in favor of Democrats was large dumps from metropolitan areas.  You're not going to get large dumps in rural areas.  Surely you can understand that.  Everything else you listed has no bias to either candidate whatsoever.  Now, who in 2020 said, "stop counting the ballots", because he saw that the large cities where it took longer to report(due to sheer amount of tabulations)were closing the gap??  That would be Donald J. t-rump.  What could possibly be FISHIER than that, besides maybe him claiming it was rigged before it even started.  He tried everything in his power to subvert the election, and you have NO issue with that at all.  Sad!

[BillStime]

 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

On 2/24/2021 at 7:42 PM, Unforgiven said:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/23/why-do-the-elections-defenders-require-my-agreement/

 

--snip

The 2020 election came down to a narrower margin than the 2016 contest: fewer than 43,000 rather than 77,000 votes in just three states. In 2016, nothing fishy in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin—the states on which 2016 turned—was detected. Certainly nothing like:

 

Counting shutdowns in five states, in which one candidate was ahead, only to lose after the counting resumed;

“Found” tranches of ballots going overwhelmingly—sometimes exclusively—to one candidate, the eventual “winner”;

Sworn affidavits alleging the backdating of ballots;

Historically low rejection rates—as in, orders of magnitude lower—of mail-in ballots, suggesting that many obviously invalid ballots were accepted as genuine;

Mail-in and absentee ballots appearing without creases, raising the question of how they got into the envelopes required for their being mailed in;

Thousands upon thousands of ballots all marked for one presidential candidate without a single choice marked for any down-ballot candidate.

The absolute refusal to conduct signature audits—indeed, the discarding of many envelopes which alone make such audits possible—i.e., of the kind of recounts which are performed not merely to get the math right but to evaluate the validity of ballots;

Other statistical and historical anomalies too numerous to mention here.

--snip

 

All these anomalies in favor of democrats. Any one of these would be fishy to some extent.

All of them - in favor of democrats is pretty close to a statistical impossibility imho.

Most definitely NOT baseless.

But yeah, like Saul Alinsky says, scream the other side is doing what you're doing.

My extremely unpopular opinion here is maybe there was fraud, so what? One side was dumb enough not to figure it out or to do it themselves too? They deserved to lose. 
 

No one is stopping republicans from renting some buses, going to homeless shelters and shipping people to targeted districts feeding and paying them cast their vote, as many times as they can get away with. In this case with mail in’s you wouldn’t even need the bus. It’s not rocket science, and it’s been happening for a very long time. 
 

As an aside why anyone would argue associating identification with a vote is disenfranchising, but then assert it’s a mandate when exercising other constitutional rights, like second amendment rights. And vice versa.  Hypocrisy everywhere.

Edited March 2, 2021 by Over 29 years of fanhood

[Unforgiven]

https://www.theblaze.com/news/texas-judge-others-arrrested-voter-fraud

 

A south Texas justice of the peace was arrested along with three other individuals who face 150 charges of voter fraud altogether.

POLL: What scares you the most?

Medina County Justice of the Peace Tomas Ramirez was arrested on Feb. 11 and is charged on one count of organized election fraud, one count of "assisting voter voting ballot by mail," and 17 counts of unlawful possession of a ballot or ballot envelope, KABB reports.

 

BASELESS

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

6 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

https://www.theblaze.com/news/texas-judge-others-arrrested-voter-fraud

 

A south Texas justice of the peace was arrested along with three other individuals who face 150 charges of voter fraud altogether.

POLL: What scares you the most?

Medina County Justice of the Peace Tomas Ramirez was arrested on Feb. 11 and is charged on one count of organized election fraud, one count of "assisting voter voting ballot by mail," and 17 counts of unlawful possession of a ballot or ballot envelope, KABB reports.

 

BASELESS

While I generally understand where you are coming from, you’re not going to like how this one turns out, based on his party affiliation. 

[Unforgiven]

6 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

While I generally understand where you are coming from, you’re not going to like how this one turns out, based on his party affiliation. 

Fraud is fraud. If it happened it needs to be fixed across the board.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Just now, Unforgiven said:

Fraud is fraud. If it happened it needs to be fixed across the board.

Fair enough.  Substantiates the thread title then. Based on the results in that district seems like a dumb place to attempt it. 

[Scraps]

On 2/24/2021 at 7:42 PM, Unforgiven said:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/23/why-do-the-elections-defenders-require-my-agreement/

 

--snip

The 2020 election came down to a narrower margin than the 2016 contest: fewer than 43,000 rather than 77,000 votes in just three states. In 2016, nothing fishy in Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin—the states on which 2016 turned—was detected. Certainly nothing like:

 

Counting shutdowns in five states, in which one candidate was ahead, only to lose after the counting resumed;

“Found” tranches of ballots going overwhelmingly—sometimes exclusively—to one candidate, the eventual “winner”;

Sworn affidavits alleging the backdating of ballots;

Historically low rejection rates—as in, orders of magnitude lower—of mail-in ballots, suggesting that many obviously invalid ballots were accepted as genuine;

Mail-in and absentee ballots appearing without creases, raising the question of how they got into the envelopes required for their being mailed in;

Thousands upon thousands of ballots all marked for one presidential candidate without a single choice marked for any down-ballot candidate.

The absolute refusal to conduct signature audits—indeed, the discarding of many envelopes which alone make such audits possible—i.e., of the kind of recounts which are performed not merely to get the math right but to evaluate the validity of ballots;

Other statistical and historical anomalies too numerous to mention here.

--snip

 

All these anomalies in favor of democrats. Any one of these would be fishy to some extent.

All of them - in favor of democrats is pretty close to a statistical impossibility imho.

Most definitely NOT baseless.

But yeah, like Saul Alinsky says, scream the other side is doing what you're doing.

Who is paying for all this?  The county has performed the mandatory audits prior to certification and found nothing.  Since then they've had 2 companies audit the Dominion voting machines which both concluded the machines worked as expected.

[BillStime]

Pathetic

 

 

[BillStime]

GQP excellence