- Banned
- #21
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No, you have it backwards. The office of president was left blank.Millions of ballots counted with ONLY the president checked. Derp!
And I bet it was Biden on 99.9% of 'em. Until there's an investigation, we'll never know.
This is Maryland not PA. The proof is all there.A registered Independent, the 73-year-old from the suburbs of Philadelphia had voted for candidates on both sides of the ticket, leaning slightly to the right. She quickly went down the list, filling in her favorites for Congress, state and local races.
Then, Robertshaw left without casting a vote for either of the presidential candidates headlining the ballot.
[snip]
The thought may be inconceivable to many Americans who participated in the hotly contested 2020 race. But Robertshaw is among tens of thousands of voters who cast ballots in the general election yet left their choice for president blank – a phenomenon known in political circles as an “undervote.”
A USA TODAY analysis of unofficial results in Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada and Michigan found up to 40,000 voters in each of these highly competitive states opted for none of the candidates listed on the presidential ballot by name.
Tens of thousands left the president option blank, though 'undervotes' were down from 2016
The article backs up the claims. Fraud is massively organized through non profit groups and officials in the right places. They have been caught, again.On a national level, that seems ... quite expected. Why would you think otherwise?
You're not being logical. It's just as easy to mark the "Vote party line" box, so why wouldn't a fraudster do that?
It's almost always Republicans who get caught comitting vote fraud, so the logical conclusion would say the opposite.
Democrats say "Vote fraud is always wrong. Period. No exceptions. No one should ever do it."
Republicans say "Well, the other side is doing it, so ... well, you know what to do <winkwinknudgenudge>"
That's why almost all the fraud comes from the Republican side. Democrats condemn fraud, Republicans encourage it.
The OP makes no sense. The conclusion in no way follows from the premise. Even if we assume their data is correct -- and being that these are conservatives, that's highly unlikey, since conservatives see LyingForTheParty as a good and holy thing -- it still doesn't show any fraud.
And ... Maryland? Why would the Democrats even bother?
Can any Trump cultists actually back up any claims? For example, prove the machines were connected to the internet. No, quoting someone who said that is not proving it. Heresay from unreliable partisan sources is not evidence.
Where are the "no fraud people" at?
I have never seen anyone claim there is zero fraud.over in another thread, all of them saying no Election Fraud ever.
Nobody asked you you filthy sack of used toilet paper// get off the boards you dumb OX.I have never seen anyone claim there is zero fraud.
I have plenty of evidence of Republican fraud in the 2020 election if you would like to see it.
In fact, in all the cases of voter fraud that the right wing Heritage Foundation found going back years, whenever the political affiliation of the fraudsters could be determined, it was Republicans/Trump supporters. Just Republicans being Republicans, I guess...
Like I said, just say the word and I will provide you pages of evidence of Republican fraud.
I can hear you slapping your hands over your eyes and ears from here.Nobody asked you you filthy sack of used toilet paper// get off the boards you dumb OX.
No, it doesn't. At best, the article showed a technical problem. Zero evidence of any fraud was presented.The article backs up the claims.
In your own words, explain how "fraud" was proven.Fraud is massively organized through non profit groups and officials in the right places. They have been caught, again.
No, that's just a piece of paper. We don't know where it came from, or what it says.Here is the proof they were connected to the internet.
The article tells you where it comes from. There was massive fraud and this is just another way of doing it. Admit it or stay stupid.No, it doesn't. At best, the article showed a technical problem. Zero evidence of any fraud was presented.
In your own words, explain how "fraud" was proven.
This should be funny.
No, that's just a piece of paper. We don't know where it came from, or what it says.
I didn't ask you to deflect and run again. I asked you to explain what the fraud supposedly was, in your own words.The article tells you
I am not deflecting you are panicking because fraud has been proven everywhere but in a court of law. That is the result of corrupt judges and politicians. The people know it happened and know it will happen again.I didn't ask you to deflect and run again. I asked you to explain what the fraud supposedly was, in your own words.
You didn't, because you can't. You have no idea what the article says. Your masters told you to parrot a dumb headline, so you obeyed.