Me too. I’m sick of these EARTH SHATTERING ALLEGATIONS that only live about a week, or one single turn of the news cycle.
1 Like
This is where you’re wrong. Not all of us get our information from sources with huge biases and you don’t have to either.
Yes. Because there seems to be proof (according to his legal team) that fraud takes place in our elections. And I’m not talking about the fact that there’s always SOME form of voter fraud, of course there is, but a system designed to manipulate elections (again, according to his legal team)
Maybe there is, maybe there isn’t. We don’t know yet. Do I think it’s possible? Absolutely. Maybe you have more faith in our leaders that they wouldn’t stoop to that level. I’m not there yet.
As I stated above, Powell claims to have evidence. We’ll have to see.
I have no idea what their legal strategy is. I am pretty sure they are smarter than you and I though.
It doesn’t matter - what matters is what they plead and what they sign their name to. What they bellow into a microphone is completely irrelevant. And they aren’t alleging fraud in pleadings. That isn’t the MSM spin - that’s a fact.
We’re not exactly the same on this - I get my info from the pleadings.
1 Like
Because Obama, as much as i hate him, was a great candidate for the Democrats. Very tactical. Turned out the vote like no other. Hope, change, whether you bought in or not, it got people fired up and they voted. Wtf did Biden even run on? Im not Trump? I just dont see that equating to 10 million more votes than “hope and change.”
I think Trump turned out the vote like no other, just he did it for both sides. I know many people who were never this excited to vote, voted for Biden, but were only so so on him as a candidate.
1 Like
EXACTLY!
And while people talk of a greater-than-average African American turnout (that still favors Democrats); Biden cut significantly into the White Vote in both Red and Blue States, across all demographics.
I will not be able to convince you of much, because I’m just a guy on a weightlifting forum, but there’s real benefit to thinking things through all the way, not halfway as you seem to be doing.
When I hear things like “all sources are biased”, it doesn’t mean much. Sure, it’s a start, but if you think “all sources are biased” is the same as “all sources are equally biased”, you aren’t thinking it through. Facts are still separate from spin, and you owe it to the civil society you live in to learn to tell them apart.
There’s a reason most Nigerians know the name Dele Giwa, and Russians the name Anna Politkovskaya. It is an old staple of illiberal leaders or regimes to get the media under their control. Whether it’s Charles Taylor, or Putin, or any number of strongmen, they want to control journalists, or kill them. Their fate is what happens to media when they cannot be controlled, and disparaging them is too difficult. The new American right can’t kill them, so they discredit them. Which is disheartening, because they’re succeeding at what America’s adversaries have failed to do for decades.
Getting people to believe all sources are equally suspect has great benefits for those who have a difficult relationship with the truth, so that the cost of lying becomes much reduced.
Think of it this way: what does it cost Reuters when they publish falsehoods and are caught? And what has it ever cost Trump/Alex Jones/random Youtube blowhard?
@H_factor @mnben87 @thunderbolt23
Did you watch the clip @Alrightmiami19c linked above? So my question is, is she just making all that up?
My question is, how the hell did Trump’s opponent get only 10 million more votes than Obama? I truthfully expected this total to be much higher.
True statement.
So because we disagree that means I must not be thinking things through? So if I thought things through I would see things your way?
A bit overdramatic dude. And if you think American media is truthful and honest then you’re the naive one.
Yes. She is making accusations that do not have the evidence to hold up in court. Trump’s legal team is NOT alleging fraud in court, just on Twitter and news conferences where evidence is not needed. This is all about keeping up an illusion of fraud.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9740535009
To what end if it will fail in court anyway?
If she’s not, people wouldnt want to believe it anyway because things will get ugly fast.
1 Like
If she is not, then she should be able to back it up and I’ll take it seriously. I will hold off on taking it seriously until it is logical to do so.
(Damn excellent post, @ddinante…)
I have a picture in my office of a squad of Taylor’s “Children Soldiers”.
The Squad “leader” is at best, 16 years old.
His squad looks to be somewhere between 8-12 years of age, all carrying AK-47’s and one with a Self-Propelled Grenade.
(I’ll try and post it when I get home or this weekend…)
Excellent.
That’s a good question. Trump is filing lawsuits that DON’T allege fraud, and his lawsuits, even if successful, would not change the result of the election. Yet, his twitter account and press conferences ARE alleging fraud and pushing conspiracy theories. Why do this?
- Most likely: financial gain. The longer he can keep the “fraud” narrative going and not concede, the longer he can financially collect from his supporters. This money is going towards his own campaign debt. Also, if he can keep it going post-inauguration, he will springboard this into his media endeavors. This is much more appealing to him than just conceding and “losing” fair and square.
2). The other option is that he still does want to retain the presidency. The goal with these lawsuits is not to overturn the election (they can’t, there is no fraud alleged in court to any extent that would overturn things), but to cast enough doubt that the electors are reluctant to give Biden the electoral votes. This is a huge long shot, but he has nothing to lose for trying it.
- He sees absolutely no positive to drop the fraud narrative. It allows him to keep the Democrats from starting their transition, and if we know anything about Trump, his main agenda is to “un-do” Obama-era policies.
1 Like
Isn’t this common sense?
Same here. Which is why I’m asking for compelling EVIDENCE of any form. Not utterances from his cronies, speculations from conspiracy nuts or wild extrapolations from individual incidences of a couple of votes being misplaced due to inefficiency and/or stupidity.
Anyone with any semblance of common sense would understand the simple fact that his legal representatives would be alleging every single fucking thing under the sun if they had a scintilla of acceptable evidence in their pleadings.
Perhaps this is all just 4D Chess.
1 Like
This is not what they have said in court though. Trump’s lawyers when pressed in more than one case have explicitly said they don’t have evidence of fraud.
All major studies done on the subject in previous years including by the Trump administration have found no evidence of widespread fraud.
Of course it’s possible. But Trump came into the election saying it was rigged. Why do so unless you’re hedging bets so you can cry foul if you lose? Do you think he would be saying any of this if he had won? Of course not. He came into the election saying “I’ll cry fraud if I lose” and followed through on his word.
I don’t have faith that no leaders would stoop to that level. I absolutely think both sides have incentive to do so. But we don’t have proof either has been successful before. But again why if Democrats did stoop to this level why not fix the Senate? That would have been far easier and if you’re going to cheat why not cheat so you can get some stuff done?
I’m talking about hearings that have already taken place where they said they weren’t alleging fraud.
I would hope so. They make far more money than me.
But so far the losses have been numerous and more than one Trump lawyer has said no fraud in front of a judge. I’m not saying they aren’t intelligent. I’m saying they are saying in front of a judge they don’t have evidence of fraud.
1 Like