PA House Introduces a Resolution: The Election Process Shall Be Declared Improper.

[Coyote]

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.
But but but Russia!
Deflection.

No one expects a set of Dimborcrap court judges to honestly evaluate evidence THAT THEY REFUSE TO ALLOW TO BE PRESENTED.

Huh, how the hell does that work Coyote? You say that they laughed the evidence out of court when they refused to even hear it.

They weren't laughing at the evidence, they were laughing at you stupid Dims for not having the presence of mind to stop allowing voting machines to be hackable and open to the internet, to include China, Russia, the Norks and anydamendbody else.

If you are going to resort to retarded slurs, don’t expect to be taken seriously.

And do your research Jim. It is going to be tricky to stuff all those judges into your spandex conspiracy, some were Trump and Bush appointees.

 

[Coyote]

No they must not be removed. They do not change the outcome.

Yes they should be removed because they didn't get there by the end of election day. That's what the PA law states.

So...what role does Trump’s attempt to dismantle the post office just prior to an election expected to have huge numbers of absentee ballots, play in this?

 

[protectionist]

I'm irrelevant, Trumptard

What matters are the courts.

And the courts are looking at this and saying "Where's the evidence?"

They are NOT saying that at all. They are ignoring evidence, and not allowing it to be shown.

The state legislatures are not ignoring it though. They are holding hearings, and hearing the testimonies of many eyewitnesses to the frauds. First Pennsylvania, then Arizona.. more coming up.

And these are to the state legislators. You know - the guys who select the electors for the electoral college, who decide who the president will be.

 

[Coyote]

That's not "evidence presented in court" Einstein

Anyone can say shit on the Internet

We know for an absolute fact that in heavily democrat counties they were allowed to "cure" their ballots. In the major republican strongholds they were NOT allowed to do so. This is factual and indisputable. This is also not fair or legal.

There is nothing illegal about curing.

The Republicans could just as easily done it. It was THEIR choice not to.

 

[iceberg]

get pretty tired of this "will of the people" when neither extreme viewpoint seems to give a damn about "the will of the people" - it's simply a phrase they use to try and gain sympathy for THEIR viewpoint.

When we have a record turn out election, with both candidates getting a record number of votes, EVER in our history, and an interesting mixture of results that send out some pretty strong messages, then yes, I think we can honestly call this a reflection of the electorate’s feelings.

What did they say?

1. This isn’t a referendum on either party’s platform. It is a referendum on Trump personally with strong feelings for and against.

2. Take away for the Dems: you still aren’t getting it right.

3. Take away for the Republicans: Trump May control your base, but your base isn’t enough to win a Presidential election.

The people could not have been more clear.

this is not a legitimate election. the entire mail out ballot scenario were never tested, never secured, and so on. your assuming all is well. how come you're OK with totally redoing our voting process in favor of YOUR candidate yet suddenly are worried about THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

It absolutely was legitimate and your claims are false.

1. It was never tested.

Yes, it has been tested. A number of states have had no-excuse absentee ballots and mail in ballots for years as have members of the military.

2. “Never secured”
Also untrue. States utilize a number of procedures (varying by state) to secure the integrity of the ballot. These include signature verification, ballot tracking procedures, etc.

3. How come...blah blah blah. I never questioned the results of the 2016 election when “your guy won”, despite it totally upending the polls, with Trump winning some states with even more narrow margins than Biden and Trump, and, when he thought he might lose, seeding the field with allegations of rigging and fraud, just like he did this time. “How come” you never questioned the results?

Conclusion: we have a system for adjudicating election disputes. Each candidate has every right to dispute it, ask for recounts, apply to the courts. As we have seen, Trump has done that,and over and over, NO EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD FRAUD has materialized. The election is only illegitimate because “your guy” lost, and is taking it to the Court of Public Opinion, since he lacks the evidence to win in court. His own lawyers even had to admit they couldn’t show fraud.

My opinion: Trump and his supporters are hoping to run out the clock on the certification through endless lawsuits, and have electors chosen by (the mostly Republican) state legislatures who would, of course vote Trump.

My question to you: is the above acceptable to you?

My claims are not false, you just don't like them.

And since 5his is YOUR OPINION, what difference does it make if I find it acceptable?

The left spent 3 years chasing RUSSIA when they created most of the evidence. They felt it valid to look into.

Great. Now the right finds this worth looking into and should be given the opportunity.

I want to make sure our elections and TRUE will of the people isn't being danced around cause you really really really really hate Trump.

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.

But but but Russia!

Deflection.

here we go again.

no point in talking to you because you do this *every single time*. i try to establish what we're talking about and your clear opinion and you tell me i'm trolling and choose to ignore me for a week.

"deflection"? not at all. in 2016, "precedent" was set that if you question an election you can go nuts to attack the winner and make accusations. you can't allow 1 side to do something and the other NOT to do it as well. this is where we get our divides. different sets of rules for people based on "feelz".

i've tried to take out the "but whatever" and for a brief moment, we BOTH agreed to not do that anymore. you went right back to doing it and got mad at me for calling you on it.

now i try to do it and you again get mad.

in fact, i reply, you get mad. maybe it's not me.

Oh good grief Iceberg. You are an intelligent man. I just don’t get why you keep resorting to these type highly personal arguments. Get over it. I'm trying to. Can you?

You and I have some very distinct and different perspectives. You see Trump as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one. I don’t. I see Obama as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one (and on throughout Trump’s presidency). We do not agree here. That should be ok. I am ok with it.

When I answered your post I made a real effort to address the claims (not get personal) you made about legitimacy. From my perspective, 2016 was legitimate. Yes, the Russians attempted and did interfere, but they did not alter voting machines and there is no way to quantify what effect their disinformation might have had on the electorate. Fast forward to 2020. Trump starts seeding fraud claims as soon as it starts to look like he really might lose. None of those claims hold up in our courts. The fact that you, and others continue to push those claims is, IMO, disturbing.

We have a process of settling election disputes. And that is through our courts. But what I seem to be hearing is...the courts are wrong.

When you involve the judiciary in those evergrowing conspiracy...where does it stop Iceberg? You have a populist president, unwilling to accept defeat, slowly but surely destroying public trust in our very institutions of democracy.

In my view, even though it is highly unlikely, I find it incredibly disturbing that Trump and other Republicans would even attempt to have state legislatures override the vote and pick electors favorable to Trump hugely disturbing. Don’t you? This time it is Republican...next time it could be Dems. Precedents are set.

I've found a lot of things odd about our entire gov and the bullshit way both sides try and get things done.

I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected. I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper.

I seldom fight for "Trump" per se, but more the process by which people get so emotional they are willing to lie about what he says and who he is and get very upset if you don't agree.

ie, trump never said to drink bleach. yet the left swears he did.
biden can say flat out they have an elaborate voting fraud scheme but somehow that's not what he meant.

speculate what was said by one side and deny what the other flat out says.

names and people here don't matter. sides don't matter.

when you make up evidence to frame someone in a RUSSIA attack and look the other way cause you hate Trump, how can I think you are being objective to an election you feel you won?

you simply refuse to give the idea the dems are trying to pull a fast one but would rather believe someone who couldn't pull 20 people to a rally got more. votes than Obama.

I find that odd. yet if I question it, I'm a troll or being stupid.

or defending Trump.

I want to define what we are talking about not jump around constantly on the attack.

I'd rather talk issues, not people.

but we can't do that these days in identity politics.

 

[Coyote]

get pretty tired of this "will of the people" when neither extreme viewpoint seems to give a damn about "the will of the people" - it's simply a phrase they use to try and gain sympathy for THEIR viewpoint.

When we have a record turn out election, with both candidates getting a record number of votes, EVER in our history, and an interesting mixture of results that send out some pretty strong messages, then yes, I think we can honestly call this a reflection of the electorate’s feelings.

What did they say?

1. This isn’t a referendum on either party’s platform. It is a referendum on Trump personally with strong feelings for and against.

2. Take away for the Dems: you still aren’t getting it right.

3. Take away for the Republicans: Trump May control your base, but your base isn’t enough to win a Presidential election.

The people could not have been more clear.

this is not a legitimate election. the entire mail out ballot scenario were never tested, never secured, and so on. your assuming all is well. how come you're OK with totally redoing our voting process in favor of YOUR candidate yet suddenly are worried about THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

It absolutely was legitimate and your claims are false.

1. It was never tested.

Yes, it has been tested. A number of states have had no-excuse absentee ballots and mail in ballots for years as have members of the military.

2. “Never secured”
Also untrue. States utilize a number of procedures (varying by state) to secure the integrity of the ballot. These include signature verification, ballot tracking procedures, etc.

3. How come...blah blah blah. I never questioned the results of the 2016 election when “your guy won”, despite it totally upending the polls, with Trump winning some states with even more narrow margins than Biden and Trump, and, when he thought he might lose, seeding the field with allegations of rigging and fraud, just like he did this time. “How come” you never questioned the results?

Conclusion: we have a system for adjudicating election disputes. Each candidate has every right to dispute it, ask for recounts, apply to the courts. As we have seen, Trump has done that,and over and over, NO EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD FRAUD has materialized. The election is only illegitimate because “your guy” lost, and is taking it to the Court of Public Opinion, since he lacks the evidence to win in court. His own lawyers even had to admit they couldn’t show fraud.

My opinion: Trump and his supporters are hoping to run out the clock on the certification through endless lawsuits, and have electors chosen by (the mostly Republican) state legislatures who would, of course vote Trump.

My question to you: is the above acceptable to you?

My claims are not false, you just don't like them.

And since 5his is YOUR OPINION, what difference does it make if I find it acceptable?

The left spent 3 years chasing RUSSIA when they created most of the evidence. They felt it valid to look into.

Great. Now the right finds this worth looking into and should be given the opportunity.

I want to make sure our elections and TRUE will of the people isn't being danced around cause you really really really really hate Trump.

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.

But but but Russia!

Deflection.

here we go again.

no point in talking to you because you do this *every single time*. i try to establish what we're talking about and your clear opinion and you tell me i'm trolling and choose to ignore me for a week.

"deflection"? not at all. in 2016, "precedent" was set that if you question an election you can go nuts to attack the winner and make accusations. you can't allow 1 side to do something and the other NOT to do it as well. this is where we get our divides. different sets of rules for people based on "feelz".

i've tried to take out the "but whatever" and for a brief moment, we BOTH agreed to not do that anymore. you went right back to doing it and got mad at me for calling you on it.

now i try to do it and you again get mad.

in fact, i reply, you get mad. maybe it's not me.

Oh good grief Iceberg. You are an intelligent man. I just don’t get why you keep resorting to these type highly personal arguments. Get over it. I'm trying to. Can you?

You and I have some very distinct and different perspectives. You see Trump as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one. I don’t. I see Obama as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one (and on throughout Trump’s presidency). We do not agree here. That should be ok. I am ok with it.

When I answered your post I made a real effort to address the claims (not get personal) you made about legitimacy. From my perspective, 2016 was legitimate. Yes, the Russians attempted and did interfere, but they did not alter voting machines and there is no way to quantify what effect their disinformation might have had on the electorate. Fast forward to 2020. Trump starts seeding fraud claims as soon as it starts to look like he really might lose. None of those claims hold up in our courts. The fact that you, and others continue to push those claims is, IMO, disturbing.

We have a process of settling election disputes. And that is through our courts. But what I seem to be hearing is...the courts are wrong.

When you involve the judiciary in those evergrowing conspiracy...where does it stop Iceberg? You have a populist president, unwilling to accept defeat, slowly but surely destroying public trust in our very institutions of democracy.

In my view, even though it is highly unlikely, I find it incredibly disturbing that Trump and other Republicans would even attempt to have state legislatures override the vote and pick electors favorable to Trump hugely disturbing. Don’t you? This time it is Republican...next time it could be Dems. Precedents are set.

I've found a lot of things odd about our entire gov and the bullshit way both sides try and get things done.

I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected. I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper.

I seldom fight for "Trump" per se, but more the process by which people get so emotional they are willing to lie about what he says and who he is and get very upset if you don't agree.

ie, trump never said to drink bleach. yet the left swears he did.
biden can say flat out they have an elaborate voting fraud scheme but somehow that's not what he meant.

speculate what was said by one side and deny what the other flat out says.

names and people here don't matter. sides don't matter.

when you make up evidence to frame someone in a RUSSIA attack and look the other way cause you hate Trump, how can I think you are being objective to an election you feel you won?

you simply refuse to give the idea the dems are trying to pull a fast one but would rather believe someone who couldn't pull 20 people to a rally got more. votes than Obama.

I find that odd. yet if I question it, I'm a troll or being stupid.

or defending Trump.

I want to define what we are talking about not jump around constantly on the attack.

I'd rather talk issues, not people.

but we can't do that these days in identity politics.

I brought up issues.

 

[Faun]

I'm irrelevant, Trumptard

What matters are the courts.

And the courts are looking at this and saying "Where's the evidence?"

They are NOT saying that at all. They are ignoring evidence, and not allowing it to be shown.

The state legislatures are not ignoring it though. They are holding hearings, and hearing the testimonies of many eyewitnesses to the frauds. First Pennsylvania, then Arizona.. more coming up.

And these are to the state legislators. You know - the guys who select the electors for the electoral college, who decide who the president will be.

You do know that many states whose faithless electors cast votes against the will of the people of their respective states will have their deviant votes reversed back to the rightful winner, right?

 

[The Original Tree]

get pretty tired of this "will of the people" when neither extreme viewpoint seems to give a damn about "the will of the people" - it's simply a phrase they use to try and gain sympathy for THEIR viewpoint.

When we have a record turn out election, with both candidates getting a record number of votes, EVER in our history, and an interesting mixture of results that send out some pretty strong messages, then yes, I think we can honestly call this a reflection of the electorate’s feelings.

What did they say?

1. This isn’t a referendum on either party’s platform. It is a referendum on Trump personally with strong feelings for and against.

2. Take away for the Dems: you still aren’t getting it right.

3. Take away for the Republicans: Trump May control your base, but your base isn’t enough to win a Presidential election.

The people could not have been more clear.

this is not a legitimate election. the entire mail out ballot scenario were never tested, never secured, and so on. your assuming all is well. how come you're OK with totally redoing our voting process in favor of YOUR candidate yet suddenly are worried about THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

It absolutely was legitimate and your claims are false.

1. It was never tested.

Yes, it has been tested. A number of states have had no-excuse absentee ballots and mail in ballots for years as have members of the military.

2. “Never secured”
Also untrue. States utilize a number of procedures (varying by state) to secure the integrity of the ballot. These include signature verification, ballot tracking procedures, etc.

3. How come...blah blah blah. I never questioned the results of the 2016 election when “your guy won”, despite it totally upending the polls, with Trump winning some states with even more narrow margins than Biden and Trump, and, when he thought he might lose, seeding the field with allegations of rigging and fraud, just like he did this time. “How come” you never questioned the results?

Conclusion: we have a system for adjudicating election disputes. Each candidate has every right to dispute it, ask for recounts, apply to the courts. As we have seen, Trump has done that,and over and over, NO EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD FRAUD has materialized. The election is only illegitimate because “your guy” lost, and is taking it to the Court of Public Opinion, since he lacks the evidence to win in court. His own lawyers even had to admit they couldn’t show fraud.

My opinion: Trump and his supporters are hoping to run out the clock on the certification through endless lawsuits, and have electors chosen by (the mostly Republican) state legislatures who would, of course vote Trump.

My question to you: is the above acceptable to you?

My claims are not false, you just don't like them.

And since 5his is YOUR OPINION, what difference does it make if I find it acceptable?

The left spent 3 years chasing RUSSIA when they created most of the evidence. They felt it valid to look into.

Great. Now the right finds this worth looking into and should be given the opportunity.

I want to make sure our elections and TRUE will of the people isn't being danced around cause you really really really really hate Trump.

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.

But but but Russia!

Deflection.

here we go again.

no point in talking to you because you do this *every single time*. i try to establish what we're talking about and your clear opinion and you tell me i'm trolling and choose to ignore me for a week.

"deflection"? not at all. in 2016, "precedent" was set that if you question an election you can go nuts to attack the winner and make accusations. you can't allow 1 side to do something and the other NOT to do it as well. this is where we get our divides. different sets of rules for people based on "feelz".

i've tried to take out the "but whatever" and for a brief moment, we BOTH agreed to not do that anymore. you went right back to doing it and got mad at me for calling you on it.

now i try to do it and you again get mad.

in fact, i reply, you get mad. maybe it's not me.

Oh good grief Iceberg. You are an intelligent man. I just don’t get why you keep resorting to these type highly personal arguments. Get over it. I'm trying to. Can you?

You and I have some very distinct and different perspectives. You see Trump as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one. I don’t. I see Obama as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one (and on throughout Trump’s presidency). We do not agree here. That should be ok. I am ok with it.

When I answered your post I made a real effort to address the claims (not get personal) you made about legitimacy. From my perspective, 2016 was legitimate. Yes, the Russians attempted and did interfere, but they did not alter voting machines and there is no way to quantify what effect their disinformation might have had on the electorate. Fast forward to 2020. Trump starts seeding fraud claims as soon as it starts to look like he really might lose. None of those claims hold up in our courts. The fact that you, and others continue to push those claims is, IMO, disturbing.

We have a process of settling election disputes. And that is through our courts. But what I seem to be hearing is...the courts are wrong.

When you involve the judiciary in those evergrowing conspiracy...where does it stop Iceberg? You have a populist president, unwilling to accept defeat, slowly but surely destroying public trust in our very institutions of democracy.

In my view, even though it is highly unlikely, I find it incredibly disturbing that Trump and other Republicans would even attempt to have state legislatures override the vote and pick electors favorable to Trump hugely disturbing. Don’t you? This time it is Republican...next time it could be Dems. Precedents are set.

I've found a lot of things odd about our entire gov and the bullshit way both sides try and get things done.

I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected. I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper.

I seldom fight for "Trump" per se, but more the process by which people get so emotional they are willing to lie about what he says and who he is and get very upset if you don't agree.

ie, trump never said to drink bleach. yet the left swears he did.
biden can say flat out they have an elaborate voting fraud scheme but somehow that's not what he meant.

speculate what was said by one side and deny what the other flat out says.

names and people here don't matter. sides don't matter.

when you make up evidence to frame someone in a RUSSIA attack and look the other way cause you hate Trump, how can I think you are being objective to an election you feel you won?

you simply refuse to give the idea the dems are trying to pull a fast one but would rather believe someone who couldn't pull 20 people to a rally got more. votes than Obama.

I find that odd. yet if I question it, I'm a troll or being stupid.

or defending Trump.

I want to define what we are talking about not jump around constantly on the attack.

I'd rather talk issues, not people.

but we can't do that these days in identity politics.

Now that we know we are only 7/10ths of a person, I think we all better start having some babies or have a rebellion and Civil War.

I'm surprised to find out that I am only 7/10ths of a person, according to Democrat Fraud Machines used in The 6 states that cheated.

Dr Shiva from MIT just proved Vote Swapping Live on TV at The Arizona Hearing.

130% of Democrats voted for Biden vs. -30% voted for Trump.

If you are a Republican, you are only 7/10ths of a person.

Based on the revelation from MIT Scientist Dr. Shiva, that Dominion Machines swapped votes counting Trump votes at 7/10ths of a vote, and Biden votes as 1.3 votes, here are the actual legal vote totals for the 2020 Election

President Trump 98,028,452 votes
Joe Biden 56,161,000

 

[Faun]

get pretty tired of this "will of the people" when neither extreme viewpoint seems to give a damn about "the will of the people" - it's simply a phrase they use to try and gain sympathy for THEIR viewpoint.

When we have a record turn out election, with both candidates getting a record number of votes, EVER in our history, and an interesting mixture of results that send out some pretty strong messages, then yes, I think we can honestly call this a reflection of the electorate’s feelings.

What did they say?

1. This isn’t a referendum on either party’s platform. It is a referendum on Trump personally with strong feelings for and against.

2. Take away for the Dems: you still aren’t getting it right.

3. Take away for the Republicans: Trump May control your base, but your base isn’t enough to win a Presidential election.

The people could not have been more clear.

this is not a legitimate election. the entire mail out ballot scenario were never tested, never secured, and so on. your assuming all is well. how come you're OK with totally redoing our voting process in favor of YOUR candidate yet suddenly are worried about THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

It absolutely was legitimate and your claims are false.

1. It was never tested.

Yes, it has been tested. A number of states have had no-excuse absentee ballots and mail in ballots for years as have members of the military.

2. “Never secured”
Also untrue. States utilize a number of procedures (varying by state) to secure the integrity of the ballot. These include signature verification, ballot tracking procedures, etc.

3. How come...blah blah blah. I never questioned the results of the 2016 election when “your guy won”, despite it totally upending the polls, with Trump winning some states with even more narrow margins than Biden and Trump, and, when he thought he might lose, seeding the field with allegations of rigging and fraud, just like he did this time. “How come” you never questioned the results?

Conclusion: we have a system for adjudicating election disputes. Each candidate has every right to dispute it, ask for recounts, apply to the courts. As we have seen, Trump has done that,and over and over, NO EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD FRAUD has materialized. The election is only illegitimate because “your guy” lost, and is taking it to the Court of Public Opinion, since he lacks the evidence to win in court. His own lawyers even had to admit they couldn’t show fraud.

My opinion: Trump and his supporters are hoping to run out the clock on the certification through endless lawsuits, and have electors chosen by (the mostly Republican) state legislatures who would, of course vote Trump.

My question to you: is the above acceptable to you?

My claims are not false, you just don't like them.

And since 5his is YOUR OPINION, what difference does it make if I find it acceptable?

The left spent 3 years chasing RUSSIA when they created most of the evidence. They felt it valid to look into.

Great. Now the right finds this worth looking into and should be given the opportunity.

I want to make sure our elections and TRUE will of the people isn't being danced around cause you really really really really hate Trump.

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.

But but but Russia!

Deflection.

here we go again.

no point in talking to you because you do this *every single time*. i try to establish what we're talking about and your clear opinion and you tell me i'm trolling and choose to ignore me for a week.

"deflection"? not at all. in 2016, "precedent" was set that if you question an election you can go nuts to attack the winner and make accusations. you can't allow 1 side to do something and the other NOT to do it as well. this is where we get our divides. different sets of rules for people based on "feelz".

i've tried to take out the "but whatever" and for a brief moment, we BOTH agreed to not do that anymore. you went right back to doing it and got mad at me for calling you on it.

now i try to do it and you again get mad.

in fact, i reply, you get mad. maybe it's not me.

Oh good grief Iceberg. You are an intelligent man. I just don’t get why you keep resorting to these type highly personal arguments. Get over it. I'm trying to. Can you?

You and I have some very distinct and different perspectives. You see Trump as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one. I don’t. I see Obama as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one (and on throughout Trump’s presidency). We do not agree here. That should be ok. I am ok with it.

When I answered your post I made a real effort to address the claims (not get personal) you made about legitimacy. From my perspective, 2016 was legitimate. Yes, the Russians attempted and did interfere, but they did not alter voting machines and there is no way to quantify what effect their disinformation might have had on the electorate. Fast forward to 2020. Trump starts seeding fraud claims as soon as it starts to look like he really might lose. None of those claims hold up in our courts. The fact that you, and others continue to push those claims is, IMO, disturbing.

We have a process of settling election disputes. And that is through our courts. But what I seem to be hearing is...the courts are wrong.

When you involve the judiciary in those evergrowing conspiracy...where does it stop Iceberg? You have a populist president, unwilling to accept defeat, slowly but surely destroying public trust in our very institutions of democracy.

In my view, even though it is highly unlikely, I find it incredibly disturbing that Trump and other Republicans would even attempt to have state legislatures override the vote and pick electors favorable to Trump hugely disturbing. Don’t you? This time it is Republican...next time it could be Dems. Precedents are set.

I've found a lot of things odd about our entire gov and the bullshit way both sides try and get things done.

I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected. I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper.

I seldom fight for "Trump" per se, but more the process by which people get so emotional they are willing to lie about what he says and who he is and get very upset if you don't agree.

ie, trump never said to drink bleach. yet the left swears he did.
biden can say flat out they have an elaborate voting fraud scheme but somehow that's not what he meant.

speculate what was said by one side and deny what the other flat out says.

names and people here don't matter. sides don't matter.

when you make up evidence to frame someone in a RUSSIA attack and look the other way cause you hate Trump, how can I think you are being objective to an election you feel you won?

you simply refuse to give the idea the dems are trying to pull a fast one but would rather believe someone who couldn't pull 20 people to a rally got more. votes than Obama.

I find that odd. yet if I question it, I'm a troll or being stupid.

or defending Trump.

I want to define what we are talking about not jump around constantly on the attack.

I'd rather talk issues, not people.

but we can't do that these days in identity politics.

"I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected."

You do know that system was used in only one county and not in a battleground state, don't you?

"I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper."

But you're not disturbed by Trump's utter lack of proof of any such improprieties, huh?

 

[Coyote]

get pretty tired of this "will of the people" when neither extreme viewpoint seems to give a damn about "the will of the people" - it's simply a phrase they use to try and gain sympathy for THEIR viewpoint.

When we have a record turn out election, with both candidates getting a record number of votes, EVER in our history, and an interesting mixture of results that send out some pretty strong messages, then yes, I think we can honestly call this a reflection of the electorate’s feelings.

What did they say?

1. This isn’t a referendum on either party’s platform. It is a referendum on Trump personally with strong feelings for and against.

2. Take away for the Dems: you still aren’t getting it right.

3. Take away for the Republicans: Trump May control your base, but your base isn’t enough to win a Presidential election.

The people could not have been more clear.

this is not a legitimate election. the entire mail out ballot scenario were never tested, never secured, and so on. your assuming all is well. how come you're OK with totally redoing our voting process in favor of YOUR candidate yet suddenly are worried about THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

It absolutely was legitimate and your claims are false.

1. It was never tested.

Yes, it has been tested. A number of states have had no-excuse absentee ballots and mail in ballots for years as have members of the military.

2. “Never secured”
Also untrue. States utilize a number of procedures (varying by state) to secure the integrity of the ballot. These include signature verification, ballot tracking procedures, etc.

3. How come...blah blah blah. I never questioned the results of the 2016 election when “your guy won”, despite it totally upending the polls, with Trump winning some states with even more narrow margins than Biden and Trump, and, when he thought he might lose, seeding the field with allegations of rigging and fraud, just like he did this time. “How come” you never questioned the results?

Conclusion: we have a system for adjudicating election disputes. Each candidate has every right to dispute it, ask for recounts, apply to the courts. As we have seen, Trump has done that,and over and over, NO EVIDENCE OF WIDESPREAD FRAUD has materialized. The election is only illegitimate because “your guy” lost, and is taking it to the Court of Public Opinion, since he lacks the evidence to win in court. His own lawyers even had to admit they couldn’t show fraud.

My opinion: Trump and his supporters are hoping to run out the clock on the certification through endless lawsuits, and have electors chosen by (the mostly Republican) state legislatures who would, of course vote Trump.

My question to you: is the above acceptable to you?

My claims are not false, you just don't like them.

And since 5his is YOUR OPINION, what difference does it make if I find it acceptable?

The left spent 3 years chasing RUSSIA when they created most of the evidence. They felt it valid to look into.

Great. Now the right finds this worth looking into and should be given the opportunity.

I want to make sure our elections and TRUE will of the people isn't being danced around cause you really really really really hate Trump.

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.

But but but Russia!

Deflection.

here we go again.

no point in talking to you because you do this *every single time*. i try to establish what we're talking about and your clear opinion and you tell me i'm trolling and choose to ignore me for a week.

"deflection"? not at all. in 2016, "precedent" was set that if you question an election you can go nuts to attack the winner and make accusations. you can't allow 1 side to do something and the other NOT to do it as well. this is where we get our divides. different sets of rules for people based on "feelz".

i've tried to take out the "but whatever" and for a brief moment, we BOTH agreed to not do that anymore. you went right back to doing it and got mad at me for calling you on it.

now i try to do it and you again get mad.

in fact, i reply, you get mad. maybe it's not me.

Oh good grief Iceberg. You are an intelligent man. I just don’t get why you keep resorting to these type highly personal arguments. Get over it. I'm trying to. Can you?

You and I have some very distinct and different perspectives. You see Trump as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one. I don’t. I see Obama as uniquely and viciously attacked from day one (and on throughout Trump’s presidency). We do not agree here. That should be ok. I am ok with it.

When I answered your post I made a real effort to address the claims (not get personal) you made about legitimacy. From my perspective, 2016 was legitimate. Yes, the Russians attempted and did interfere, but they did not alter voting machines and there is no way to quantify what effect their disinformation might have had on the electorate. Fast forward to 2020. Trump starts seeding fraud claims as soon as it starts to look like he really might lose. None of those claims hold up in our courts. The fact that you, and others continue to push those claims is, IMO, disturbing.

We have a process of settling election disputes. And that is through our courts. But what I seem to be hearing is...the courts are wrong.

When you involve the judiciary in those evergrowing conspiracy...where does it stop Iceberg? You have a populist president, unwilling to accept defeat, slowly but surely destroying public trust in our very institutions of democracy.

In my view, even though it is highly unlikely, I find it incredibly disturbing that Trump and other Republicans would even attempt to have state legislatures override the vote and pick electors favorable to Trump hugely disturbing. Don’t you? This time it is Republican...next time it could be Dems. Precedents are set.

I've found a lot of things odd about our entire gov and the bullshit way both sides try and get things done.

I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected. I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper.

Let’s look at this one item.

Are you talking about Dominion?

 

[protectionist]

I don't need to get a copy. How about the entire presentation.


This is actually more than they showed on OAN. Here is a bit more coming from the presentation directly from the OAN website.


One poll watcher testified she was certified to witness poll workers study questionable ballots, but was denied access to watch. The purpose of the public hearing was to collect evidence in the 2020 election, which would justify holding a special session for state lawmakers to investigate.

Meanwhile, retired Col. Phil Waldron also confirmed voting machines in Arizona used Smartmatic derivative software. He explained it’s a common software being used in the U.S. His testimony indirectly confirms the claims of potential Venezuelan and Iranian meddling in the election, which went through Scytl servers in Europe.

Waldron’s testimony confirmed foreign meddling was helping Joe Biden and switching votes away from President Trump. Attorney Sidney Powell said the Scytl server has since been seized and secure by who she called “the good guys.”

This is the same attack that was used in Penn, MI, WI, GA and it failed miserably when the Judges began asking questions for clarification.

I also reviewed the OAN presentation for Nevada done today. Again, it's the same tired BS that has failed in at least 4 other states. You can make all sorts of claims but when you can't provide irrefutable proof then you are just wasting a Judges time.

FALSE! The testimony did not fail. It was the judges that failed it. And irrefutable proof is exactly what is being provided. Provided in Gettysburg, PA, and now again in Arizona.

The same irrefutable proof that has been posted in this forum, which some people refuse to acknowledge (which doesn't change the proof)

 

[protectionist]

"I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected."

You do know that system was used in only one county and not in a battleground state, don't you?

"I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper."

But you're not disturbed by Trump's utter lack of proof of any such improprieties, huh?

He doesn't know that, and neither do you. Stop lying.

 

[protectionist]

What about it, gramps?

Isn't it a lie ?

 

[Contumacious]

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.
But but but Russia!
Deflection.

No one expects a set of Dimborcrap court judges to honestly evaluate evidence THAT THEY REFUSE TO ALLOW TO BE PRESENTED.

Huh, how the hell does that work Coyote? You say that they laughed the evidence out of court when they refused to even hear it.

They weren't laughing at the evidence, they were laughing at you stupid Dims for not having the presence of mind to stop allowing voting machines to be hackable and open to the internet, to include China, Russia, the Norks and anydamendbody else.

If you are going to resort to retarded slurs, don’t expect to be taken seriously.

And do your research Jim. It is going to be tricky to stuff all those judges into your spandex conspiracy, some were Trump and Bush appointees.

Show us first the Law or legal maxim which allows ANY judge - Trump/Bush/Obama Appointee to SUMMARILY dismiss a VERFIED COMPLAINT



.

 

[Coyote]

Your claims are unsubstianted and laughed out of the courts of law.
But but but Russia!
Deflection.

No one expects a set of Dimborcrap court judges to honestly evaluate evidence THAT THEY REFUSE TO ALLOW TO BE PRESENTED.

Huh, how the hell does that work Coyote? You say that they laughed the evidence out of court when they refused to even hear it.

They weren't laughing at the evidence, they were laughing at you stupid Dims for not having the presence of mind to stop allowing voting machines to be hackable and open to the internet, to include China, Russia, the Norks and anydamendbody else.

If you are going to resort to retarded slurs, don’t expect to be taken seriously.

And do your research Jim. It is going to be tricky to stuff all those judges into your spandex conspiracy, some were Trump and Bush appointees.

Show us first the Law or legal maxim which allows ANY judge - Trump/Bush/Obama Appointee to SUMMARILY dismiss a VERFIED COMPLAINT



.

Easy.


It was not verified.

 

[protectionist]

You do know that many states whose faithless electors cast votes against the will of the people of their respective states will have their deviant votes reversed back to the rightful winner, right?

And if they cast votes against the will of the people of their respective states, BY VOTING FOR BIDEN, then yes, they will have their deviant votes reversed back to the rightful winner, Donald J. Trump. Which is exactly what is probably going to happen.

 

[Arresmillao]

PA house steps in on the fraudulent election process.


In the immediate future, we will be introducing the following resolution:

...

THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED that the Pennsylvania House of Representatives—

1. Recognizes substantial irregularities and improprieties associated with mail-in balloting, pre-canvassing, and canvassing during the November 3, 2020 election; and

2. Disapproves of the infringement on the General Assembly’s authority pursuant to the United States Constitution to regulate elections; and

3. Disapproves of and disagrees with the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s premature certification of the results of the November 3, 2020 election regarding presidential electors; and

4. Declares that the selection of presidential electors and other statewide electoral contest results in this Commonwealth is in dispute; and

5. Urges the Secretary of the Commonwealth and the Governor to withdraw or vacate the certification of presidential electors and to delay certification of results in other statewide electoral contests voted on at the 2020 General Election; and

6. Urges the United States Congress to declare the selection of presidential electors in this Commonwealth to be in dispute.

House Co-Sponsorship Memoranda

www.legis.state.pa.us

Dare I say, fuck your feelings deplorables, President Biden won and pussygraber not, he was beaten like a dog....

 

[protectionist]

Dare I say, fuck your feelings deplorables, President Biden won and pussygraber not, he was beaten like a dog....

Easy to see leftist BS media has got YOU programmed.

 

[Faun]

"I find it disturbing we use a voting system that got the Venezuela press elected."

You do know that system was used in only one county and not in a battleground state, don't you?

"I find it disturbing the left refuses to believe ANYTHING in this election was even a little off or improper."

But you're not disturbed by Trump's utter lack of proof of any such improprieties, huh?

He doesn't know that, and neither do you. Stop lying.

Anybody with a brain knows that, gramps.

Los Angeles County 2020 - present: VSAP Modernizes Elections - Smartmatic

Los Angeles County selects Smartmatic to partner on its Voting Systems for All People (VSAP), a model for American’s 21st Century elections.

www.smartmatic.com

 

[Faun]

What about it, gramps?

Isn't it a lie ?

No.