I want as much information on vote fraud 2020 as I can get...

[ESay]

I don't completely agree with you. The theme here is "stolen elections" so there can be no denying that such things exist, right? I mean, we know that elections can and are "stolen" by corrupt powers. The only question is which ones are stolen and which ones are won "fair and square". The fact that Trump won, at all, amidst so much against him has to be proof that he won the election by "popular vote". Don't you agree? But then we have the case of Bush Baby Junior. That man was a dupe. He never knew what he was doing from one minute to the next. He sent NATO to war on a lie of WMD's. He (his government) made false accusations, made up fake incidents, and sent CIA agents (in THE FIRST inspection team) to plant false evidence of WMD's in Irak. The man was a dunce. A puppet. So how could a man like that have been democratically elected by popular vote to be the leader of such a nation? One word: STOLEN.

Well, maybe I don't quite understand your logic. If a person makes some promises in the course of a campaign, promotes their agenda, and then gets elected on the basis of this agenda and after that 'betrays' the people who voted for them, then such elections are stolen.

If in the time of campaign some mass media and 'political experts' create some image of the candidate that is far from reality, and that candidate wins, then such elections are stolen.

 

[GLASNOST]

Well, maybe I don't quite understand your logic. If a person makes some promises in the course of a campaign, promotes their agenda, and then gets elected on the basis of this agenda and after that 'betrays' the people who voted for them, then such elections are stolen.

You're right. Our logic differs. I think of a "stolen election" as being won by cheating. Post-election "betrayal" of promises I think of as something else, ie. just a bad president either by his own rotten deeds or by allowing himself to be manipulated by big business and/or the so-called illuminati. This is the Bush Baby category who I don't believe made a single decision of his own and I think that was the plan from the beginning. "We'll see to it you get into the White House but only if you do exactly what we tell you to do." Had Hillary Clinton managed to wedge her fat ass into the White House it would have been an identical situation. She's just as dumb as Bush.

If in the time of campaign some mass media and 'political experts' create some image of the candidate that is far from reality, and that candidate wins, then such elections are stolen.

This I agree with and it is the Joe Biden category by "creating some" false "image" (as you say) of either Biden's capabilities or false image of Trump's lack of abilities.

So, with all of that in mind, I see Trump as having won by popular vote but Biden winning (presumably) by cheating/stolen election.

 

[ESay]

You're right. Our logic differs. I think of a "stolen election" as being won by cheating. Post-election "betrayal" of promises I think of as something else, ie. just a bad president either by his own rotten deeds or by allowing himself to be manipulated by big business and/or the so-called illuminati. This is the Bush Baby category who I don't believe made a single decision of his own and I think that was the plan from the beginning. "We'll see to it you get into the White House but only if you do exactly what we tell you to do." Had Hillary Clinton managed to wedge her fat ass into the White House it would have been an identical situation. She's just as dumb as Bush.

This I agree with and it is the Joe Biden category by "creating some" false "image" (as you say) of either Biden's capabilities or false image of Trump's lack of abilities.

So, with all of that in mind, I see Trump as having won by popular vote but Biden winning (presumably) by cheating/stolen election.

If we are talking about the American presidential candidates of the recent past, I think they all relied upon a false image in their political struggle.

Trump? Maybe he stays somewhere outside, because he wasn't endorsed by establishment. But I am not sure how this leads to a conclusion that he won by the popular vote. That those who gave his vote for him chose a real person rather than an image from TV as was the case with Biden? Maybe.

 

[GLASNOST]

If we are talking about the American presidential candidates of the recent past, I think they all relied upon a false image in their political struggle.

More than likely.

Trump? Maybe he stays somewhere outside, because he wasn't endorsed by establishment. But I am not sure how this leads to a conclusion that he won by the popular vote. That those who gave his vote for him chose a real person rather than an image from TV as was the case with Biden? Maybe.

I don't think Trump had enough influence to cheat his way into the White House. I think the American people saw something in him they wanted or ..... it was simply "the less of two evils".

I don't believe Biden is "a real person" and I don't believe the American people think so either.

 

[ESay]

More than likely.


I don't think Trump had enough influence to cheat his way into the White House. I think the American people saw something in him they wanted or ..... it was simply "the less of two evils".

I don't believe Biden is "a real person" and I don't believe the American people think so either.

I cant speak for the Americans. But from my point of view, having to choose between Biden and Trump is embarrassment for American political system.

 

[GLASNOST]

I cant speak for the Americans. But from my point of view, having to choose between Biden and Trump is embarrassment for American political system.

I'm not sure how you mean that so I'll guess. Personally, I like Trump and I thoroughly dislike Hillary Clinton. Biden seems to me to be just as stupid as Hillary sans the mouth. When I first saw Trump on TV I thought he was a clown but I eventually began to warm up to him and he turned out (as far as I can see) to be a decent guy. He's got brains and he's smart which are attributes neither Hillary nor Biden possesses. So I initially shared your view about the embarrassment of having to choose between Trump and Hillary but I soon changed my attitude and that applies to Trump-Biden as well because I do not see Biden has being able to hold a candle up to Donald Trump. In the end, I guess I do not agree with you.

 

[ESay]

I'm not sure how you mean that so I'll guess. Personally, I like Trump and I thoroughly dislike Hillary Clinton. Biden seems to me to be just as stupid as Hillary sans the mouth. When I first saw Trump on TV I thought he was a clown but I eventually began to warm up to him and he turned out (as far as I can see) to be a decent guy. He's got brains and he's smart which are attributes neither Hillary nor Biden possesses. So I initially shared your view about the embarrassment of having to choose between Trump and Hillary but I soon changed my attitude and that applies to Trump-Biden as well because I do not see Biden has being able to hold a candle up to Donald Trump. In the end, I guess I do not agree with you.

Well, maybe. I won't argue about that, everyone has the right on own opinion, after all. What I can add, though, is that the current political system in the US has reached its limits and harms the American society more than it does good.

It seems that extremes have become ok in political life. Just look at the debates between the conservatives and liberals here. And the current two-party system only fuels this division.

This system should be reformed. I always cite Nebraska as an example of what should be applied on a federal level and in the other States.

 

[GLASNOST]

Well, maybe. I won't argue about that, everyone has the right on own opinion, after all. What I can add, though, is that the current political system in the US has reached its limits and harms the American society more than it does good.

It seems that extremes have become ok in political life. Just look at the debates between the conservatives and liberals here. And the current two-party system only fuels this division.

This system should be reformed. I always cite Nebraska as an example of what should be applied on a federal level and in the other States.

As far as the "two-party system" and the need for "reform", well my body would have to develop more cells in order to agree with you more than I already do.

The US might be reaching its self-destruct point soon. It's been heading that way since the end of WW II and although there was a bright glimmer of hope and reformation during the late 1960s any Democratic principles the nation might have accumulated have all been extinguished.

I lived in West Berlin during the Cold War and I was fairly close to seeing the developments in the USSR on a daily basis. As early as 1979 I had an odd and increasing premonition that "the east" was going to surpass "the west" in freedom and Democracy. I'd say that in political terms it's already happened and the "west" (particularly the US) is turning into a blue scourge, the sort that we (in the west) once feared about the red scourage from the "east".

 

[ESay]

As far as the "two-party system" and the need for "reform", well my body would have to develop more cells in order to agree with you more than I already do.

The US might be reaching its self-destruct point soon. It's been heading that way since the end of WW II and although there was a bright glimmer of hope and reformation during the late 1960s any Democratic principles the nation might have accumulated have all been extinguished.

I lived in West Berlin during the Cold War and I was fairly close to seeing the developments in the USSR on a daily basis. As early as 1979 I had an odd and increasing premonition that "the east" was going to surpass "the west" in freedom and Democracy. I'd say that in political terms it's already happened and the "west" (particularly the US) is turning into a blue scourge, the sort that we (in the west) once feared about the red scourage from the "east".

What do you mean about the East surpassing the West in freedoms? Can you give some examples?

 

[GLASNOST]

What do you mean about the East surpassing the West in freedoms? Can you give some examples?

Can I give some examples? I'm not sure. I know that Americans are forbidden - by their own government - from travelling to certain countries, punishable by fines, imprisonment, and even loss of citizenship. That includes working for another government or serving in their armed forces. As far as I know, Russia doesn't forbid its citizens from free travel.

 

[ESay]

Can I give some examples? I'm not sure. I know that Americans are forbidden - by their own government - from travelling to certain countries, punishable by fines, imprisonment, and even loss of citizenship. That includes working for another government or serving in their armed forces. As far as I know, Russia doesn't forbid its citizens from free travel.

Well, yes, that is some kind of curbing of free travel. I know that Cuba has been a forbidden country for the Americans for a long time. It may well be that there is a number of other countries with similar restrictions.

But for me that isn't a great deal. Especially when comparing freedoms in various parts of the world.

 

[GLASNOST]

But for me that isn't a great deal.

Yes, I sense that.

 

[rightnow909]

Well, maybe. I won't argue about that, everyone has the right on own opinion, after all. What I can add, though, is that the current political system in the US has reached its limits and harms the American society more than it does good.

It seems that extremes have become ok in political life. Just look at the debates between the conservatives and liberals here. And the current two-party system only fuels this division.

This system should be reformed. I always cite Nebraska as an example of what should be applied on a federal level and in the other States.

NE?

how?

 

[francoHFW]

If we are talking about the American presidential candidates of the recent past, I think they all relied upon a false image in their political struggle.

Trump? Maybe he stays somewhere outside, because he wasn't endorsed by establishment. But I am not sure how this leads to a conclusion that he won by the popular vote. That those who gave his vote for him chose a real person rather than an image from TV as was the case with Biden? Maybe.

The greedy GOP establishment certainly went along with him. What are you talking about? Trump is known as the biggest con man of his last 40 years. The GOP establishment loves him for his tax cuts and giveaway to the rich just like theirs of the last 40 years. Change the channel.

 

[GLASNOST]

...... Trump is known as the biggest con man of his last 40 years ........

"Is known" by whom? You people just make this stuff up.

 

[ESay]

NE?

how?

By formally adopting the principle of no party affiliation.

 

[GLASNOST]

By formally adopting the principle of no party affiliation.

Sounds good but on what level is this "adoption"?

 

[ESay]

Sounds good but on what level is this "adoption"?

Don't understand your question properly. What does it mean 'on what level'? Both the House and the Senate should adopt that, as well as the States' legislatures.

At the time of elections, every candidate should be registered as an independent. And while in the legislature body, they would be forbidden to create factions based on political affiliations. Every representative should represent only their constituencies and the voters.

 

[Colin norris]

NO election fraud?

geez... People who say that are totally delusional... self-deluded..

Perhaps if you were to produce the evidence that the SC would believe it might be different. You personally have nothing other than fox news propaganda.
It's the idiots who believe there was are delusional because of the fact, you gave no evidence.
Can't you get that through your thick skull. 12 months after the election and still nothing. Christ will return before the election gets overturned and he's another myth.

 

[GLASNOST]

Don't understand your question properly. What does it mean 'on what level'?

I mean, as an individual I am non-politically biased that is to say that I have my preferences in theory but I don't vote "straight ticket" because I may like portions of one party's platform but not another part. I don't vote for the same party every election if "my party" doesn't represent my view any longer. I cannot be called a "rightest" or a "leftist" because I lean in favour of what I feel is best on a specific issue only.

Both the House and the Senate should adopt that, as well as the States' legislatures.

At the time of elections, every candidate should be registered as an independent. And while in the legislature body, they would be forbidden to create factions based on political affiliations. Every representative should represent only their constituencies and the voters.

Is that even possible?