D
Deleted User
Guest
I´m surprised no one here is talking about inauguration of Joe Biden on Wednesday, January 20, 2021.
Please provide the single best piece of specific evidence, not debunked claims of evidence. For example, if you're going to claim there's evidence of widespread dead people voting, please provide it.Yes. Because the election is decided by the electoral college not by most votes.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Dozens of whistleblowers. Eye witness testimony. Invalid votes cast post deadline not properly postmarked still counted as valid. Investigations showing dead people voting, showing people voting in states they don't live in and voting more than one time. Voting machines "glitching" and flipping votes at rates too high to be computer error, unmarked, unsecured boxes with tens of thousands of votes showing up from unknown couriers at 3am, vote watchers being refused to witness votes being counted.
But other than all this. There's no evidence at all.
....Yes. Because the election is decided by the electoral college not by most votes.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Dozens of whistleblowers. Eye witness testimony. Invalid votes cast post deadline not properly postmarked still counted as valid. Investigations showing dead people voting, showing people voting in states they don't live in and voting more than one time. Voting machines "glitching" and flipping votes at rates too high to be computer error, unmarked, unsecured boxes with tens of thousands of votes showing up from unknown couriers at 3am, vote watchers being refused to witness votes being counted.
But other than all this. There's no evidence at all.
The 'dead people voting' one is the worst he could have possibly chosen. That isn't just lacking evidence, it's actually been disproven.Please provide the single best piece of specific evidence, not debunked claims of evidence. For example, if you're going to claim there's evidence of widespread dead people voting, please provide it.
@Frankfort42*Snip* Everything that happened at the capitol was ILLEGAL! Trespassing on restricted land is not at all the same as peaceful protests in the public streets. Also don't you realise that doing what happened to the capitol is directly in contradiction with democracy..... Maybe you don't understand what democracy is... Democracy: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
The riot at the capitol is in direct contradiction of democracy! Don't you get that phrase *Snip*?!
I know. I'm just making the point that claiming evidence isn't the same thing as providing evidence.The 'dead people voting' one is the worst he could have possibly chosen. That isn't just lacking evidence, it's actually been disproven.
It's absolutely a fair system. The only system that makes sense. Otherwise the entire election is decided by just two states, California and Texas. Due to their population size. Making every other states votes useless. Not really fair is it. That's why the electoral college is in place.Stop dodging the question, silly goober, I'm asking you if you think a candidate losing the popular vote by 5 million votes is a fair system.
I know. I'm just making the point that claiming evidence isn't the same thing as providing evidence.
[Citation needed]It wasn't speculation. It's literal fact.
It's a good thing the burden of proof is on the person claiming there was widespread election fraud then.And claiming there is no evidence isn't the same as there being no evidence
Ok can we have be allowed to investigate the votes?It's a good thing the burden of proof is on the person claiming there was widespread election fraud then.
I love it. We're right back to Creationist Fallacy thinking: "Well God exists because I say so and the burden of proof is on you to disprove God"It's a good thing the burden of proof is on the person claiming there was widespread election fraud then.
...Investigations have been made. Courts have been shown 'evidence'. How can you be so incredulously ignorant about what's going on in your own country?Ok can we have be allowed to investigate the votes?
Democrats - "No."
Not only did Democrats not say "no" to investigations, but the investigations occurred, and no evidence of widespread voter fraud was found.Ok can we have be allowed to investigate the votes?
Democrats - "No."
When all else fails, just claim suppression and censorship. Makes you laughNot only did Democrats not say "no" to investigations, but the investigations occurred, and no evidence of widespread voter fraud was found.
I love it. We're right back to Creationist Fallacy thinking: "Well God exists because I say so and the burden of proof is on you to disprove God"
don't forget to Bypass Censorship of Sedition.. RUN to Russia to helpWhen all else fails, just claim suppression and censorship. Makes you laugh
When being "allowed" to investigate things like the Dominion voting machines it means they were allowed into a room to look at the outside of the machine. Refused to see internals, refused to see the code. They were completely obstructed and you're not clever by pretending you don't know.Not only did Democrats not say "no" to investigations, but the investigations occurred, and no evidence of widespread voter fraud was found.
Regardless of whether or not everyone there participated in the armed insurrection that was the invasion of the Capitol, it's anti-democratic to protest the results of a free and fair election, and they were still participating in Trump's attempted coup d'état. In other words, even if everything had been peaceful at the Capitol, those who were there perpetuated false and dangerous information about election fraud, and their goal was to persuade members of Congress to arbitrarily overturn the results of the election.Most of the 100,000+ protesters weren't rioting or trespassing. Protesting is a Constitutional right, regardless if you agree with why it's happening.
don't forget to Bypass Censorship of Sedition.. RUN to Russia to help
https://twitter.com/AdamSculthorpe/status/1350872780355596289
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
... Really?
Not necessarily. It could be done a similar way to how the UK does it; still not outright decided by the numbers alone, but a lot closer; any winner has to win more than 50% of votes. Obviously, it can't work in the exact same way, but the current system could be massively improved upon.It's absolutely a fair system. The only system that makes sense. Otherwise the entire election is decided by just two states, California and Texas. Due to their population size. Making every other states votes useless. Not really fair is it. That's why the electoral college is in place.
This is a non-response."We hold these truths to be self evident, all men and women created by the.. go you know the you know the thing" - Joe Biden