Definitive proof that there was no fraud

Daggdag · Nov 29, 2020

Anansi the Spider said: ↑

Could you detail these alleged allegations?
Click to expand...

That members of the Trump campaign new from the start that China was interfering in the election and refused to do anything about it.

Anansi the Spider · Nov 29, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

What is it you think the far left is selling?

Medicare for all? 69% are in favor of it, including 42% of republics.

And, how is that 'far left' when universal health care is the norm in some 50 western developed nations?

That's the main thing.

What else are you are afraid of?
Click to expand...

So easy to manipulate polls.

https://www.insidesources.com/n-h-voters-oppose-medicare-for-all-by-2-to-1-margin/

Anansi the Spider · Nov 29, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

His debt to foreign banks is a national security threat.

His incessant undermining public faith in elections is a national security threat.

His incessant assertion that the press is the enemy of the people undermine public confidence in the very thing that protects them from tyranny, i.e., a vigorous and free press, which is a threat to liberal democracy, and a national security threat.

His contempt of congress and obstruction of justice is a threat to national security

His attempt to use the DOJ for political ends is a threat to national security

His hiring lobbyists to the cabinet posts they fought against is a threat to national security

His failure to grasp the seriousness of climate change is a threat to national security ( this is the big one)

His gutting the state department, leaving half of the ambassadorships unfilled is a threat to national security

His hiring of incompetent persons is a threat national security.

His incompetence handling Covid is a threat to national security

the unprecedented turnover in the white house is a threat to national security

His tendency to hire sycophants/yes men, and fire those who speak truth to power is a threat to national security.

His lack of knowledge of US history, lack of knowledge of civics, and many things along these lines, is a threat to national security

His arrogance and total lack of empathy, and total lack of humility, plus the above, means he is unfit for the job and his unfitness is a threat to national security.

His nepotism is a threat to national security.

His spending too much time watching TV and tweeting and playing golf is a threat to national security ( well, it's not good, let's just say that much )

Trump's imposing tariffs which caused farmers to permanently lose markets is a threat to national security

his corruption, bilking of the US Taxpayer to the tune of $16 million from entourage stays in his hotels and resorts, all of which his family has profited and his nepotism, allowing his daughter in law to win millions of dollars worth of China trademarks while he was negotiating with China, his allowing Jared to garner a $500 million bailout from QATAR, all of which is a threat to national security

is nauseating fawning over Putin whose objective is to destroy and/or greatly diminish America's standing in the world, is a threat to national security

his incessant egregious lying, i.,e., "Truth Decay" is a threat to national security

Trump's usurping the Senate by appointing 'acting' heads of departments of whom the president is supposed to appoint and be confirmed by the Senate, the acting heads cause more instability and decrease of moral in the rank and file in those departments,
is a threat to national security

Trump's firing of Comey, which was detrimental to the morale of the rank and file of the FBI, and Trump's scapegoating the FBI, and undermining a once trusted American institution (post Hoover, of course). is a threat to national security

his acquiescing to Erdogan by allowing DOJ to interfere in US Attorney's office investigation of a Turkish bank because it will adversely affect members of Erdogan's family, noting that Erdogan tried to do it with Obama, and his DOJ refused, but Erdogan is finding Trump a pliant president, noting that Trump abandoning the kurds, who were instrumental in helping us in the Iraq war, whose members died for America, Trump did this to appease Erdogan, whereupon the vacuum that that pull out created forced the Kurds to turn to Russia, thus increasing Russia's influence in the region, noting that Trump has property in Turkey, is a threat to national security

Trump's decision to begin the process of withdrawing the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty will end an arms control agreement with Russia that has been a centerpiece of European security since the Cold War. The move, meant to penalize Russia for noncompliance, is likely to alarm the international community, particularly Europe, and cause fears that the US and Russia could enter a new nuclear arms race is a threat to national security

Trump's pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, A massive trade deal meant to counteract China's economic power. Trump ran on a promise to spike the plan, saying it was unfair to American workers. The pact was never officially adopted by Congress. The other 11 nations have carried on without the US, the void this pullout caused allowed China to gain considerable influence over international Trade in the affected regions. The partnership was an agreement that was the result of many years of negotiation is a threat to national security

His pullout of the Iran nuclear deal. Despite criticism, the deal bought America about 15 years of time to work on ways to thwart their development of nukes, and without the deal, they are restored to their pre-agreement abilities, with one difference, their money in banks, which was frozen, is now in their hands, so we don't have the benefit of the agreement nor the benefit of the freeze on their funds is a threat to national security

Trump's receiving a $500 million dollar loan from Deutsche Bank while simultaneously a deposit that amount was made to that bank, the money coming from a Russian state bank ( which means Putin controlled ) which makes Trump beholden to Putin, which explains his refusal to criticize Putin, or do much about Russian election interference is a threat to national security
.
Trump's appointing a Secretary of Commerce who was the VP of the real estate loan department at Deustche Bank when Trump was getting many loans from Deutsche Bank is a threat to national security

Trump's failure to grasp certain fundamental economic concepts, his contentions which are essentially false, such as 'Tariffs are paid by China" ( no, they are paid by Americans ) is a threat to national security

Trump's appointing of a Postmaster General whose apparent mission was to slow down mail in ballots from arriving on time, noting that this postmaster general (Dejoy) has failed to comply with a court order to expedite the mail in ballots is a threat to national security

Trump's 'tax cut' which was nothing more than largesse for the superrich, and crumbs for everyone else thus causing deficits to careen to levels history has never seen is a threat to national security

Trumps repeal of many important environmental regulations is a threat to national security.

And this is at the top of my head, who knows what I'll find if I research it.
Click to expand...

Wow now that is an endless obsessive fact-free rant.

Many of your criticisms are the sort of vague claims made by partisan fools.

Is it wrong for Trump to criticize the corporate media?

You criticize Trump for fawning over Putin and also for penalizing Russia. Are you blind to the illogic of your charges?

Regarding the tax cuts: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ump-lowered-taxes-for-middle-class-americans/

And why do love the TTP so much?

https://www.npr.org/2016/07/03/484574128/sanders-centers-platform-fight-on-trans-pacific-trade-deal

Can you PROVE any of your charges, <COMMENTS EDITED>?

Show us how fair minded you are by praising Trump for not getting the US mixed up in a mess like Obama’s Libya disaster.

Soupnazi · Nov 29, 2020

Anansi the Spider said: ↑

Check out the margins in those three states and you’ll find you are mistaken.
Click to expand...

I did and no I am not

110,000 will not even come close

rkhames · Nov 29, 2020

CenterField said: ↑

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-suffered-crushing-down-ballot-151200736.html

How Democrats Suffered Crushing Down-Ballot Losses Across America

Just look at how the Dems were DECIMATED EVERYWHERE! I was unaware of this slaughter in down ballot races. I knew about the Dems not capturing the Senate and losing seats in the House but I was unaware of all these state legislatures that the Dems desperately tried to get, and how their results across the board all over the nation were so poor and much worse than in 2018.

If the widespread fraud the Trump campaign keeps claiming (with not an ounce of proof) were real, this decimation wouldn't have happened.

What did happen is that suburban Americans were sick and tired of Trump and voted to kick him out, but actually voted even MORE for the rest of the GOP than in 2018.

No fraud.

And don't even start to claim that fake ballots only had the presidential race. Makes no sense. A presidency without the Senate is a handicapped presidency. It would take all of 3 seconds to also check the senatorial box if the intention was to defraud the elections.

Another lesson here: no mandate for progressive policies. The American voters are not interested in what the far left is offering.
Click to expand...

The article deals with Pennsylvania only. So, I will stick to that particular state.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed that the Governor of Pennsylvania violated the state's election laws by extending the deadline for receiving absentee ballots. The law states that absentee ballots much be received by COB on the day before the elections. That means any ballots received after 2200 (10:00pm) were not supposed to be counted. The Governor took the illegal action of extending that deadline by Executive Order. The state's Supreme Court stated that the Governor violated the law, but they are going to allow it. This case will end up in the hands of the SCOTUS. When that happens, I have no doubt that the late votes will be thrown out. Will, that change the results? Not sure, but it will set a precedence that reinforces that you can not change laws by EO.

To make the assumption that all election results were affected by the counting of late votes is unfounded. You also have to recognize the possibility that acceptance of late votes might have hurt Democrats is other races. But the fact remains, that the election was not held in accordance with the state's election laws. Those late votes should never have been counted.

Cosmo · Nov 29, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

His debt to foreign banks is a national security threat.

His incessant undermining public faith in elections is a national security threat.

His incessant assertion that the press is the enemy of the people undermine public confidence in the very thing that protects them from tyranny, i.e., a vigorous and free press, which is a threat to liberal democracy, and a national security threat.

His contempt of congress and obstruction of justice is a threat to national security

His attempt to use the DOJ for political ends is a threat to national security

His hiring lobbyists to the cabinet posts they fought against is a threat to national security

His failure to grasp the seriousness of climate change is a threat to national security ( this is the big one)

His gutting the state department, leaving half of the ambassadorships unfilled is a threat to national security

His hiring of incompetent persons is a threat national security.

His incompetence handling Covid is a threat to national security

the unprecedented turnover in the white house is a threat to national security

His tendency to hire sycophants/yes men, and fire those who speak truth to power is a threat to national security.

His lack of knowledge of US history, lack of knowledge of civics, and many things along these lines, is a threat to national security

His arrogance and total lack of empathy, and total lack of humility, plus the above, means he is unfit for the job and his unfitness is a threat to national security.

His nepotism is a threat to national security.

His spending too much time watching TV and tweeting and playing golf is a threat to national security ( well, it's not good, let's just say that much )

Trump's imposing tariffs which caused farmers to permanently lose markets is a threat to national security

his corruption, bilking of the US Taxpayer to the tune of $16 million from entourage stays in his hotels and resorts, all of which his family has profited and his nepotism, allowing his daughter in law to win millions of dollars worth of China trademarks while he was negotiating with China, his allowing Jared to garner a $500 million bailout from QATAR, all of which is a threat to national security

is nauseating fawning over Putin whose objective is to destroy and/or greatly diminish America's standing in the world, is a threat to national security

his incessant egregious lying, i.,e., "Truth Decay" is a threat to national security

Trump's usurping the Senate by appointing 'acting' heads of departments of whom the president is supposed to appoint and be confirmed by the Senate, the acting heads cause more instability and decrease of moral in the rank and file in those departments,
is a threat to national security

Trump's firing of Comey, which was detrimental to the morale of the rank and file of the FBI, and Trump's scapegoating the FBI, and undermining a once trusted American institution (post Hoover, of course). is a threat to national security

his acquiescing to Erdogan by allowing DOJ to interfere in US Attorney's office investigation of a Turkish bank because it will adversely affect members of Erdogan's family, noting that Erdogan tried to do it with Obama, and his DOJ refused, but Erdogan is finding Trump a pliant president, noting that Trump abandoning the kurds, who were instrumental in helping us in the Iraq war, whose members died for America, Trump did this to appease Erdogan, whereupon the vacuum that that pull out created forced the Kurds to turn to Russia, thus increasing Russia's influence in the region, noting that Trump has property in Turkey, is a threat to national security

Trump's decision to begin the process of withdrawing the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty will end an arms control agreement with Russia that has been a centerpiece of European security since the Cold War. The move, meant to penalize Russia for noncompliance, is likely to alarm the international community, particularly Europe, and cause fears that the US and Russia could enter a new nuclear arms race is a threat to national security

Trump's pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, A massive trade deal meant to counteract China's economic power. Trump ran on a promise to spike the plan, saying it was unfair to American workers. The pact was never officially adopted by Congress. The other 11 nations have carried on without the US, the void this pullout caused allowed China to gain considerable influence over international Trade in the affected regions. The partnership was an agreement that was the result of many years of negotiation is a threat to national security

His pullout of the Iran nuclear deal. Despite criticism, the deal bought America about 15 years of time to work on ways to thwart their development of nukes, and without the deal, they are restored to their pre-agreement abilities, with one difference, their money in banks, which was frozen, is now in their hands, so we don't have the benefit of the agreement nor the benefit of the freeze on their funds is a threat to national security

Trump's receiving a $500 million dollar loan from Deutsche Bank while simultaneously a deposit that amount was made to that bank, the money coming from a Russian state bank ( which means Putin controlled ) which makes Trump beholden to Putin, which explains his refusal to criticize Putin, or do much about Russian election interference is a threat to national security
.
Trump's appointing a Secretary of Commerce who was the VP of the real estate loan department at Deustche Bank when Trump was getting many loans from Deutsche Bank is a threat to national security

Trump's failure to grasp certain fundamental economic concepts, his contentions which are essentially false, such as 'Tariffs are paid by China" ( no, they are paid by Americans ) is a threat to national security

Trump's appointing of a Postmaster General whose apparent mission was to slow down mail in ballots from arriving on time, noting that this postmaster general (Dejoy) has failed to comply with a court order to expedite the mail in ballots is a threat to national security

Trump's 'tax cut' which was nothing more than largesse for the superrich, and crumbs for everyone else thus causing deficits to careen to levels history has never seen is a threat to national security

Trumps repeal of many important environmental regulations is a threat to national security.

And this is at the top of my head, who knows what I'll find if I research it.
Click to expand...

Independent4ever · Nov 29, 2020

rkhames said: ↑

The article deals with Pennsylvania only. So, I will stick to that particular state.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed that the Governor of Pennsylvania violated the state's election laws by extending the deadline for receiving absentee ballots. The law states that absentee ballots much be received by COB on the day before the elections. That means any ballots received after 2200 (10:00pm) were not supposed to be counted. The Governor took the illegal action of extending that deadline by Executive Order. The state's Supreme Court stated that the Governor violated the law, but they are going to allow it. This case will end up in the hands of the SCOTUS. When that happens, I have no doubt that the late votes will be thrown out. Will, that change the results? Not sure, but it will set a precedence that reinforces that you can not change laws by EO.

To make the assumption that all election results were affected by the counting of late votes is unfounded. You also have to recognize the possibility that acceptance of late votes might have hurt Democrats is other races. But the fact remains, that the election was not held in accordance with the state's election laws. Those late votes should never have been counted.
Click to expand...

Last I read - there were 10K in ballots effected and I don't know if they were ever added to the 80K lead total

fmw · Nov 29, 2020

Definitive proof that there was no fraud

An attempt to prove a negative. That's fun. Is it possible that Trump lost because he was hated?

Hoosier8 · Nov 29, 2020

CenterField said: ↑

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-suffered-crushing-down-ballot-151200736.html

How Democrats Suffered Crushing Down-Ballot Losses Across America

Just look at how the Dems were DECIMATED EVERYWHERE! I was unaware of this slaughter in down ballot races. I knew about the Dems not capturing the Senate and losing seats in the House but I was unaware of all these state legislatures that the Dems desperately tried to get, and how their results across the board all over the nation were so poor and much worse than in 2018.

If the widespread fraud the Trump campaign keeps claiming (with not an ounce of proof) were real, this decimation wouldn't have happened.

What did happen is that suburban Americans were sick and tired of Trump and voted to kick him out, but actually voted even MORE for the rest of the GOP than in 2018.

No fraud.

And don't even start to claim that fake ballots only had the presidential race. Makes no sense. A presidency without the Senate is a handicapped presidency. It would take all of 3 seconds to also check the senatorial box if the intention was to defraud the elections.

Another lesson here: no mandate for progressive policies. The American voters are not interested in what the far left is offering.
Click to expand...

Sure sign of fraud. No ounce of proof can only be claimed by someone not paying attention. Two critical Senate seats are heading to a runoff. Only those that change the landscape would need to be targeted even then they got sloppy. Trump carried down ballot significantly so it defies logic that those voting down ballot preferred Biden.

spiritgide · Nov 29, 2020

CenterField said: ↑

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-suffered-crushing-down-ballot-151200736.html

How Democrats Suffered Crushing Down-Ballot Losses Across America

Just look at how the Dems were DECIMATED EVERYWHERE! I was unaware of this slaughter in down ballot races. I knew about the Dems not capturing the Senate and losing seats in the House but I was unaware of all these state legislatures that the Dems desperately tried to get, and how their results across the board all over the nation were so poor and much worse than in 2018.

If the widespread fraud the Trump campaign keeps claiming (with not an ounce of proof) were real, this decimation wouldn't have happened.

What did happen is that suburban Americans were sick and tired of Trump and voted to kick him out, but actually voted even MORE for the rest of the GOP than in 2018.

No fraud.

And don't even start to claim that fake ballots only had the presidential race. Makes no sense. A presidency without the Senate is a handicapped presidency. It would take all of 3 seconds to also check the senatorial box if the intention was to defraud the elections.

Another lesson here: no mandate for progressive policies. The American voters are not interested in what the far left is offering.
Click to expand...

If the focus and intent of anyone perpetrating fraud was to unseat Trump- a cause the democrats have desperately focused on and pursued since day one, which replaced everything else in their field of view-
the congressional races may well have been ignored in that state of mind; assumed as a sure thing; to be swept along to benefit them with the loss of Trump.
In a typical election, the shift in congress goes with the presidential vote, not to the opposite side. That in itself make the presidential fraud situation questionable.

You are, I'm quite sure, aware that while claiming something didn't happen is just an opinion, proving something didn't happen is often impossible. The fact hard evidence that fraud occurred can't be found at this point in time is hardly evidence it didn't occur. We all, including the experts- draw a lot of conclusions for a belief from what we can observe, or what we will observe. The latter explains the wide disparity in what people believe. Some may choose to believe fraud occurred when it didn't- but what falls in line with the democratic plan of the last four years is to tell you it didn't when in fact it did.

Let's let the investigations determine that. They may get it wrong- but if they do, it will be in missing evidence, not finding what is not there.

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 29, 2020

Andrew Jackson said: ↑

WRONG!

You have got to be kidding.

People voting ONLY for President is extremely common.

Here is a helpful article that destroys your assertion:

VERIFY: It's normal to have ballots that vote only for president

https://www.king5.com/mobile/articl...dent/507-683eff6b-be69-4902-8302-d85085fe5c0b

You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Normalcy is not the point, the POINT is that is inconsistent with the allegation 'Dems rigged the election'.

If dems rigged the election, why in hell would they allow repubs to gain in the house and keep the senate?

That PROVES, aside from the minor detail there IS NO EVIDENCE, that dems DID NOT rig any election, that, in point of fact, via gerrymandering, purging, closing of thousands of polling places in poor neighborhoods, and Trump attempts to use the courts to thwart Biden's victory, IT IS REPUBLICANS WHO ARE TRYING TO STEAL THE ELECTION.

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 29, 2020

CenterField said: ↑

Single issues are misleading, when we look for voting patterns. I've mentioned this here, a few times. A pollster asks someone "are you in favor of Medicare for All?" It seems politically correct to say "yeah, sure" because it's hard to say that one is not interested in extending health care to fellow Americans. But when that same person goes to the secret ballot box, he/she will think "wait a moment; this will cost me more taxes; this will dilute my own benefits when I reach Medicare age; likely I'll have to face waiting lines for services, and by the way this guy who is for Medicare for All is also for this, this, this, this, this, and that, all positions that I don't like. F....k Medicare for All, I'm voting for the other guy." Why? Because even if it is true that the voter was actually for Medicare for All and not just paying lip service to it when approached by the pollster, the voter still isn't overall a liberal. It's not one issue that defines one's ideological position.

Here, a real life example. In my town, there was once a ballot referendum to increase local property taxes, earmarked for the public school system. I remember a Home Owners Association meeting in which an organizer stood up and said "Dear neighbors, it's off topic but I'd like to invite you all to join this great initiative of increasing our property taxes for the good of our children. Our schools need more money, which will result in better education for our children. Let's all vote for it!" Everybody said "Yes! Sure! Great idea! Absolutely!" Well, come election day, the referendum failed. They published maps showing how the neighborhoods voted. Ours voted massively against it. In the secret of the ballot box, the neighbors likely thought "What, my taxes will go up? F....k the schools! I'm not voting for it!" This is how misleading single issues can be.

In this election cycle, this point was again thoroughly demonstrated by Super Tuesday Dem primary exit polls. I clearly remember (because at the time this very issue was being discussed in a forum I used to be a member of) that CNN exit polls in a given state showed massive support for Medicare for All. I thought "oh well, this bodes well for Bernie Sanders, the champion of M4A!" Hm... when the actual votes were counted, Sanders was thoroughly beaten in that state, by a humiliating margin. So much for the M4A support collected by the pollster...

This was also demonstrated by the one poll at the time that asked the question in two stages: Pollster: Are you for Medicare for All? Responder: "Yeah, sure." Pollster: "Would you still be for Medicare for All if it resulted in your taxes going up by $2,000 per year?" Responder: "I'd have to pay $2,000 more per year? Wait a moment. Hell, no!"

You can collect a figure like this, 42% of Republicans being for M4A and 69% of Democrats.

But then if you ALSO ask "are you for the Green New Deal? Are you for immediately banning fracking and drilling? Are you for more regulations for businesses? Are you for a generous refugee policy at the border? Are you for amnesty for illegal aliens? Are you for extending free healthcare to illegal aliens? Are you for decreasing the Military budget in favor of social programs? Are you for defunding the police? Are you for higher income taxes across the board?" And then, you ask "Would you still vote for the candidate proposing M4A if all of the above ALSO came with it?"

I GUARANTEE that you'd collect A LOT smaller percentage of people saying yes to the last question, than 42% of Republicans (more likely a round zero) and 69% of Democrats (probably not much more than 30%, consistent with how Sanders and Warren performed in the Dem primaries, when the final percentage of popular votes given to the sum of these candidates was 33% while the sum of the moderates was 67%).

Look, we've just nominated a moderate in the Dem primaries, soundly defeating the far left candidate by more than 8 million popular votes. Then we got that same moderate candidate beating the far right candidate by a lot of popular votes but with the down ballot races telling a far different story (federal Senate, federal House, state Senates, state Houses ALL showing GOP gains almost everywhere - unlike in 2018 - and the electoral college going for the moderate candidate by a difference of merely less than 44,000 votes total in 3 states (had Trump won Wisconsin, Arizona, and Georgia, the EC would have featured a 269-269 tie, sending the presidential election to the House with the Constitution granting one vote per state delegation, and then Trump would have prevailed with the 26 Republican-majority delegations - Trump would have won the election if he had flipped just 22,000 votes or 0.014% of the total).

This doesn't sound to me as a mandate to implement far left policies.

And by the way, I'm FOR universal health care (I'm NOT "afraid of it"), and I DID vote for Biden. Just, I don't see these elections as delivering a far left mandate. But for example, no, I'm NOT for free healthcare for illegal aliens, which was spelled out in all letters, believe it or not, in Sanders' official platform in his web site, but not in Biden's. I checked.
Click to expand...

You're not being honest, because if the question were honest, it would be worded thus:

"Would you support medicare for all, if taxes went up, but the fact that premiums would be eliminated, resulting in a net savings to you, meaning MORE MONEY IN YOUR POCKET , (because the health insurance cost layer would be removed ) would you support medicare for all?

If it were worded honestly, I'll bet even more than 69% would support it.

Health care should be available to permanent residents, illegal or not, noting that most illegals work and pay taxes just like you, and in fact, crime is less per capita, among non citizens than citizens.

Why? Because their children are innocent, and not to provide health care to children and the parent is ****ing immoral. Not providing health care to permanent residents is immoral, period. EVERYONE needs health care, it's vital to life. We're not talking about luxury items. Those doing 'medical tourism' in the US have to pay of course -- no one is suggesting rewarding people who come here just for health care, and leave after they get it, there has to be a residency requirement.

Repubs have gerrymandered all their districts, that is why dems are underrepresented in the house. IN the senate, the system is rigged in repubs favor as big states with big cities which tend to vote blue are under represented because of the 2 senators per state rule. that fact doesn't negate what people want.

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 29, 2020

Anansi the Spider said: ↑

So easy to manipulate polls.

https://www.insidesources.com/n-h-voters-oppose-medicare-for-all-by-2-to-1-margin/
Click to expand...

Wording a question honestly is not 'manipulation', for example, and honest poll question medicare for all
should be worded thus:

"Would you support medicare for all, if taxes went up, but the fact that premiums would be eliminated, resulting in a net savings to you, meaning MORE MONEY IN YOUR POCKET , (because the health insurance cost layer would be removed ) would you support medicare for all?

If it were worded honestly, I'll bet even more than 69% would support it.

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 29, 2020

Anansi the Spider said: ↑

Wow now that is an endless obsessive fact-free rant.

Many of your criticisms are the sort of vague claims made by partisan fools.

Is it wrong for Trump to criticize the corporate media?

You criticize Trump for fawning over Putin and also for penalizing Russia. Are you blind to the illogic of your charges?

Regarding the tax cuts: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ump-lowered-taxes-for-middle-class-americans/

And why do love the TTP so much?

https://www.npr.org/2016/07/03/484574128/sanders-centers-platform-fight-on-trans-pacific-trade-deal

Can you PROVE any of your charges, <COMMENTS EDITED>?

Show us how fair minded you are by praising Trump for not getting the US mixed up in a mess like Obama’s Libya disaster.
Click to expand...

I can back up most of them, though a few are opinions ( like the one on Postmaster General Dejoy ) but on the opinions, I can provide a more detailed path of logic why the view is reasonable.

I don't have time right now, but I'll back up the one I posted on Erdogan and the DOJ investigation of a Turkish bank:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/29/us/politics/trump-erdogan-halkbank.html

Vernan89188 · Nov 29, 2020

Anansi the Spider said: ↑

Wow now that is an endless obsessive fact-free rant.

Many of your criticisms are the sort of vague claims made by partisan fools.

Is it wrong for Trump to criticize the corporate media?

You criticize Trump for fawning over Putin and also for penalizing Russia. Are you blind to the illogic of your charges?

Regarding the tax cuts: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ump-lowered-taxes-for-middle-class-americans/

And why do love the TTP so much?

https://www.npr.org/2016/07/03/484574128/sanders-centers-platform-fight-on-trans-pacific-trade-deal

Can you PROVE any of your charges, <COMMENTS EDITED>?

Show us how fair minded you are by praising Trump for not getting the US mixed up in a mess like Obama’s Libya disaster.
Click to expand...

You just did.
The cons out weight the pros.
Done deal, he simply had to go.

Nothing you have presented is something someone else cant accomplish without Trumps baggage.

ECA · Nov 29, 2020

One would have to suspend all logic and thinking ability to believe in this massive voter fraud nonsense. Pssst...just because Trump wants you to believe he could only lose by voter fraud doesn’t mean you have to believe it.

Anansi the Spider · Nov 29, 2020

Soupnazi said: ↑

I did and no I am not

110,000 will not even come close
Click to expand...

What was the margin in Wisconsin?

Hoosier8 · Nov 29, 2020

Biden under performed Hillary in major cities except in four or five swing state cities that switched the states to Biden after Nov 3rd.

Independent4ever · Nov 29, 2020

Hoosier8 said: ↑

Biden under performed Hillary in major cities except in four or five swing state cities that switched the states to Biden after Nov 3rd.
Click to expand...

and do those cities include Philadelphia?

Hoosier8 · Nov 29, 2020

Independent4ever said: ↑

and do those cities include Philadelphia?
Click to expand...

Yes, the city where if they didn’t cheat it would be unusual.

Independent4ever · Nov 29, 2020

Hoosier8 said: ↑

Yes, the city where if they didn’t cheat it would be unusual.
Click to expand...

Thank you for playing along

2016 Hillary won by 475K
2020 Biden won by 471K

Clearly Biden overperformed with the mass cheating....

ECA · Nov 29, 2020

Independent4ever said: ↑

Thank you for playing along

2016 Hillary won by 475K
2020 Biden won by 471K

Clearly Biden overperformed with the mass cheating....
Click to expand...

Walked him right into that one

Independent4ever · Nov 29, 2020

ECA said: ↑

Walked him right into that one
Click to expand...

Sadly they and others will not stop posting the same misinformation. Like the more ballots than registered voters in MI, or the 700K more mail-in ballots received in PA then sent out that continually gets debunked

CenterField · Nov 29, 2020

Hoosier8 said: ↑

Sure sign of fraud. No ounce of proof can only be claimed by someone not paying attention. Two critical Senate seats are heading to a runoff. Only those that change the landscape would need to be targeted even then they got sloppy. Trump carried down ballot significantly so it defies logic that those voting down ballot preferred Biden.
Click to expand...

The Dems lost many other Senate races they expected to win. And the Georgia runoffs are not unexpected given how Georgia is turning blue.
So, it defies logic to vote for Republicans down ballot and for Biden at the top? Not at all. That's how I voted, by the way. Me and a bunch of others (especially moderate, centrist independents like me), sick and tired of Trump but still wishing for checks and balances and not willing to grant to the Dems too much of a mandate.

ECA · Nov 29, 2020

Independent4ever said: ↑

Sadly they and others will not stop posting the same misinformation. Like the more ballots than registered voters in MI, or the 700K more mail-in ballots received in PA then sent out that continually gets debunked
Click to expand...

It’s amazing they keep doing it. If they just did a little research on their own instead of relying on the echo chamber.

Log in or Sign up

Definitive proof that there was no fraud

Daggdag Well-Known Member

Anansi the Spider Well-Known Member

Anansi the Spider Well-Known Member

Soupnazi Well-Known Member

rkhames Well-Known Member

Cosmo Well-Known Member

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

fmw Well-Known Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Vernan89188 Well-Known Member

ECA Well-Known Member

Anansi the Spider Well-Known Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

ECA Well-Known Member

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

ECA Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Definitive proof that there was no fraud

Daggdag Well-Known Member

Anansi the Spider Well-Known Member

Anansi the Spider Well-Known Member

Soupnazi Well-Known Member

rkhames Well-Known Member

Cosmo Well-Known Member

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

fmw Well-Known Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

Vernan89188 Well-Known Member

ECA Well-Known Member

Anansi the Spider Well-Known Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

ECA Well-Known Member

Independent4ever Well-Known Member

CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

ECA Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches