Joe Biden Wins - Becomes 46th president of the United States

[omgcat]

oh boy. the best part about these recounts is that they could take up to weeks/months if they are done by hand. if no result is certified Pelosi becomes president on 1/20/2020, so GG for the GOP i guess, didn't know they liked Pelosi so much.

wish the lazy counties would let the working counties lead the country.

all this bitching and moaning about liberals not doing enough work/ are ruining the economy is horseshit.

 

[PiracyForTheMasses]

oh boy. the best part about these recounts is that they could take up to weeks/months if they are done by hand. if no result is certified Pelosi becomes president on 1/20/2020, so GG for the GOP i guess, didn't know they liked Pelosi so much.

wish the lazy counties would let the working counties lead the country.

all this bitching and moaning about liberals not doing enough work/ are ruining the economy is horseshit.

That is not how it works. Nancy Pelosi has no shot at presidency, more fake news.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

That is not how it works. Nancy Pelosi has no shot at presidency, more fake news.

Actually, if Trump delays shit for too long in court, yes she does. He can't stay elected president after the deadline passes and neither can Pence. Pelosi is the third candidate in line since she's the speaker of the House, and unlike the two clowns first in line for her, she got re-elected.

Granted, this election has basically been called. Recounts aren't going to change this election all that much. The most that usually gets shuffled around is somewhere around a 100 votes per state, and Trumps lawyers are repeatedly getting laughed out of court, and SCOTUS isn't too interested either in letting Trump ratfuck his way to the presidency by SCOTUS ruling.

(They don't want to risk a repeat of 2000, when their dicking with stopping the Florida recount caused severe damage to the credibility of SCOTUS. Another attack would make it acceptable for Democrats to start packing it, which they really don't want).

 

[tabzer]

You speak as if you consider Pelosi as a level up. May I ask why?

 

[ghjfdtg]

gonna be interesting now that trump lawyers need to put their law license on the line if they keep working for trump. My best guess is that most of them are gonna nope the fuck out soon. not worth throwing away your career for someone who might never pay you anyways.

I really hope this is happening. At this point they are throwing shit at the wall hoping something sticks. They should be required to stop this nonsense until they can backup their claims with real proof (they can't). Filing a flood of lawsuits does nothing but wastes time of the courts.

It's becoming clear they are playing on time trying to play the Busch vs. Gore card.

 

[tabzer]

I really hope this is happening. At this point they are throwing shit at the wall hoping something sticks. They should be required to stop this nonsense until they can backup their claims with real proof (they can't). Filing a flood of lawsuits does nothing but wastes time of the courts.

It's becoming clear they are playing on time trying to play the Busch vs. Gore card.

"Throwing shit at the wall" is according to your democratic sources, which have already demonstrated clear bias and selective cherry picking as does the "right". There is another side proposing another story. Democratic sources have already proven themselves unreliable as we have seen in the last election. It's repeating the same mistake to subscribe to your party line's news letter. I think it is more insightful to consider all sources, and attempt to see what they are saying with eyes unclouded by bias. There are facts in almost every article, left or right, but they are subtle. For example, everyone made monkey noises over that Breitbart poll article, but the contents of the article actually made Biden look better than Trump. I'm surprised that no one here has pointed that out.

*It is an unprecedented event, for an official to claim voter fraud, which I have personally waited for over a decade to happen. I don't have a lot of confidence in it, but I hope it results in a more reliable democratic process... but I cannot help but to shake the feeling that it's all still just a show. Especially considering Trump's involvement. Anyway, we are at a unique point of history that cannot be genuinely be compared to the last election round.

INB4 @Lacius gives another "that's because [excuse of why he's not 'technically' wrong]" BS.

 

[Lacius]

"Throwing shit at the wall" is according to your democratic sources, which have already demonstrated clear bias and selective cherry picking as does the "right". There is another side proposing another story. Democratic sources have already proven themselves unreliable as we have seen in the last election. It's repeating the same mistake to subscribe to your party line's news letter. I think it is more insightful to consider all sources, and attempt to see what they are saying with eyes unclouded by bias. There are facts in almost every article, left or right, but they are subtle. For example, everyone made monkey noises over that Breitbart poll article, but the contents of the article actually made Biden look better than Trump. I'm surprised that no one here has pointed that out.

*It is an unprecedented event, for an official to claim voter fraud, which I have personally waited for over a decade to happen. I don't have a lot of confidence in it, but I hope it results in a more reliable democratic process... but I cannot help but to shake the feeling that it's all still just a show. Especially considering Trump's involvement. Anyway, we are at a unique point of history that cannot be genuinely be compared to the last election round.

INB4 @Lacius gives another "that's because [excuse of why he's not 'technically' wrong]" BS.

Considering there's no actual evidence of widespread voter fraud, Trump is absolutely throwing shit at the wall to see what will stick. The lawsuits keep getting thrown out left and right.

Also, what do you mean when you say "Democratic sources have already proven themselves unreliable in the last election"? What sources? How did they demonstrate unreliability?

In 2016, neither the news nor the Clinton campaign contested the results of the election.

 

[smf]

The case is quite interesting, they want to strike ballots where the voter either failed to put their complete address or put it in the wrong place & where they got the date wrong (entering their date of birth for example). Even though the barcode allows them to identify the address & the date seems superfluous if the ballot arrived before voting closed.

https://webcache.googleusercontent....mery-County-BoE.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

I guess they are looking for a win that they can broadcast to their sheep as a sign of a stolen election as 592 ballots are not going to make a difference to the result.

Essentially Trump wants to disenfranchise 592 voters.

 

[tabzer]

Evidence you don't like, or evidence you dismiss outright doesn't make zero evidence. You could say that there is zero evidence that anybody vote for Biden and maintain the same face. .

Also, what do you mean when you say "Democratic sources have already proven themselves unreliable in the last election"? What sources? How did they demonstrate unreliability?

In 2016, neither the news nor the Clinton campaign contested the results of the election.

Oh right, 99% is technically okay, because 1% is still a possibility.

 

[LumInvader]

@ForgotWhoIam what no reply from you as into why you keep posting links from The gateway pundit a site that admits to making up every single thing they post hmmm?? Nothing to say for your actions??

ForgotWhoIam won't answer because he has most of us on ignore:

Most of you are on ignore so I don't know/care what you're saying.

If one spams misleading\debunked social media posts directed at a group of people, but has that group on ignore, it's pretty damn clear that his or her motive is not to have a rational conversation.

If readers got all of their information from this thread, they'd might come away believing that twitter users and misinformation peddlers are the ones deciding the validity of this election. But in the real world, it's up to the states to certify the results, the electors to cast their votes, and the courts to consider Trump's lawsuits, and if the pattern continues, throw them out.

 

[djpannda]

Evidence you don't like, or evidence you dismiss outright doesn't make zero evidence. You could say that there is zero evidence that anybody vote for Biden and maintain the same face. .




Oh right, 99% is technically okay, because 1% is still a possibility.

@tabzer is right!!
yea just because People say OBama is for not a Lizard person does not mean hes NOT a Lizard person..

 

[tabzer]

his or her motive is not to have a rational conversation.

Is there someone here that wants to have a rational conversation? I mean, just look at @djpannda, @Lacius's pet [email protected]$#$d.

 

[djpannda]

Is there someone here that wants to have a rational conversation? I mean, just look at @djpannda, @Lacius's pet [email protected]$#$d.

yea anybody??
because me and @tabzer want to avoid providing real Facts and want to cope by making believe nonfactual information matters because we fell for far right website that say trump won and that Lizard people are real!!

 

[tabzer]

Case *in point. Sorry, but it is what it is, unfortunately.

 

[AmandaRose]

Case and point. Sorry, but it is what it is, unfortunately.

Yes it is what it is and it's bloody hilarious. Not our fault you can't quite grasp what @djpannda is actually doing or see the sheer genius in it

 

[tabzer]

Nice use of "our"--almost as if you rely on him as a support animal. Calling it genius is a disservice to him , but he's not quite genius enough to recognize that.

 

[smf]

@tabzer is right!!
yea just because People say OBama is for not a Lizard person does not mean hes NOT a Lizard person..

Of course it doesn't mean that. Although you'd still need to prove that Lizard people exist and that Obama was a lizard person regardless & I don't think that evidence exists.

 

[djpannda]

Nice use of "our"--almost as if you rely on him as a support animal. Calling it genius is a disservice to him , but he's not quite genius enough to recognize that.

speaking of things that don't matter, Me and @tabzer were speaking in good Housekeeping weekly forums last night and people were agreeing with us about ...

and yes its real because it was retweeted by a random person with no source!!

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Zuckerberg is more likely to be a lizard person I would say.

 

[smf]

The most that usually gets shuffled around is somewhere around a 100 votes per state, and Trumps lawyers are repeatedly getting laughed out of court, and SCOTUS isn't too interested either in letting Trump ratfuck his way to the presidency by SCOTUS ruling.

Well we shall see.

I may be giving Trump too much credit, but I kinda expect him to mess up these cases either as a sign that the establishment is against him or just as a way of getting an appeal granted up to scotus where he pulls out some evidence at the last second that looks compelling enough but if he revealed it now then it would be argued away by the time it gets to court.

Either that or he is an idiot, but I'm not committing to that yet.