- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
- Messages
- 3,605
- Reaction score
- 2,422
Let's crack this nut.This article posted from the BBC in 2016 describes the tell-tale signs of vote rigging:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-africa-37243190
In a nutshell:
Turnout was up everywhere for both sides. Especially so in battlegrounds because the effort to pull out new voters to gain advantage was a strong focus, again from both sides.1. Unusually high turnout rates in certain areas compared to other areas.
Mail-in ballots, and the sheer number of them, plus the rules on when votes could be counted.... are the reasons for delays. Except in Nevada where it was just awful lack of preparedness.2. Delays in announcing the results.
Not sure what group votes are but I'd need to understand what this is about.3. Large numbers of invalid votes.
Apparently, the turn out in mid-western cities like Chicago was significantly lower than it was in 2016, yet in cities such as Milwaukee, the turnout in some counties was very high.
I’m not saying that the democrats cheated, but there at least needs to be an independent investigation and transparency.
At the very least to assuage the concerns of people that suspect foul play.
See this is how I know you still don’t understand mail in ballots.
there was no radical change like you claimed. None.
Listening to Mike Baker in JRE's latest episode, I agree that the dems don't have the moral high ground after crying for 4 years about Russian collusion then gloating with a highly suspect election.
This article posted from the BBC in 2016 describes the tell-tale signs of vote rigging:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-africa-37243190
In a nutshell:
1. Unusually high turnout rates in certain areas compared to other areas.
2. Delays in announcing the results.
3. Large numbers of invalid votes.
Apparently, the turn out in mid-western cities like Chicago was significantly lower than it was in 2016, yet in cities such as Milwaukee, the turnout in some counties was very high.
I’m not saying that the democrats cheated, but there at least needs to be an independent investigation and transparency.
At the very least to assuage the concerns of people that suspect foul play.
The lack of tolerance is because his OP is totally wrong though.Notice how there is zero tolerance for any dissent? You're being pressured into not even raising any questions. It's indicative of a certain type of people. People which you cannot trust.
This happened with Florida after 2000, look how smooth their recent results have come in.The whole election vote counting system needs an overhaul, too much potential for manipulation.
My position before anyone attacks me:
1. Biden may well have legitimately won.
2. Some of the numbers don’t make sense.
3. There needs to be transparency.
I am sure that no election is 100% without fraud, but it’s typically an incredibly small percentage. It we’re talking about widespread fraud to the tune of rigging an election, it should be able to be proved.There's no doubt that there has been voter fraud. The problem Trump and his legal team has is proving it.
Sure, but I feel that I did that. Viral videos mean nothing. How many times have we seen faked, heavily edited, or incorrectly labeled pics and videos? I care about evidence that can meet a legal standard. And so far that’s pretty lacking.The GOP has videos at specific polling places that have been aired on television. They are not accusing every single polling place of these "irregularities." Many of these videos are not available on social media though, which is making it a challenge to post "the evidence."
If the OP's questions are off-base, it should be easy to address them without simply attacking him or dismissing them by saying "this entire election was absolutely 100% kosher" (when no one here can legitimately make that guarantee).
Logical people—Let me know when you have some.Trump team - we will be looking for evidence of voter fraud.
Crazy people - You have no right to look for evidence of voter fraud.
We didn't have the mail in voting in 2016, or the same determination to upend Trump, so it's obviously not a congruent situation.
If you're confident that there was no cheating, why would you be opposed to an independent review?