Half of Republicans say Biden won because of a 'rigged' election: Reuters

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  one week ago  •  207 comments

By:   Chris Kahn (MSN)

Half of Republicans say Biden won because of a 'rigged' election: Reuters
Half of Republicans say Biden won because of a 'rigged' election: Reuters/Ipsos poll

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



AAy0gvU.img?h=24&w=24&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&f=png Half of Republicans say Biden won because of a 'rigged' election: Reuters/Ipsos poll

By Chris Kahn

e151e5.gif © Reuters/TOM BRENNER U.S. President-elect Joe Biden attends briefing on national security in Wilmington, Delaware

(Reuters) - About half of all Republicans believe President Donald Trump "rightfully won" the U.S. election but that it was stolen from him by widespread voter fraud that favored Democratic President-elect Joe Biden, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll.

The Nov. 13-17 opinion poll showed that Trump's open defiance of Biden's victory in both the popular vote and Electoral College appears to be affecting the public's confidence in American democracy, especially among Republicans.

Altogether, 73% of those polled agreed that Biden won the election while 5% thought Trump won. But when asked specifically whether Biden had "rightfully won," Republicans showed they were suspicious about how Biden's victory was obtained.

Fifty-two percent of Republicans said that Trump "rightfully won," while only 29% said that Biden had rightfully won.

Asked why, Republicans were much more concerned than others that state vote counters had tipped the result toward Biden: 68% of Republicans said they were concerned that the election was "rigged," while only 16% of Democrats and one-third of independents were similarly worried.

Since Biden amassed enough electoral votes to win the White House on Nov. 7, Trump has ramped up those criticisms, telling his supporters that he is the victim of widespread illegal voting.

Trump has failed to give any proof for his claims and has not been able to back them up in court, however. Republicans announced this week that they were dropping federal election lawsuits in Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The poll showed that more Americans appear to be more suspicious about the U.S. election process than they were four years ago.

Altogether, 55% of adults in the United States said they believed the Nov. 3 presidential election was "legitimate and accurate," which is down 7 points from a similar poll that ran shortly after the 2016 election. The 28% who said they thought the election was "the result of illegal voting or election rigging" is up 12 points from four years ago.

The poll showed Republicans were much more likely to be suspicious of Trump's loss this year than Democrats were when Hillary Clinton lost four years ago.

In 2016, 52% of Democrats said Hillary Clinton's loss to Trump was "legitimate and accurate," even as reports emerged of Russian attempts to influence the outcome. This year, only 26% of Republicans said they thought Trump's loss was similarly legitimate.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online, in English, throughout the United States. It gathered responses from 1,346 respondents, including 598 Democrats and 496 Republicans, and has a credibility interval, a measure of precision, of 5 percentage points.

(Reporting by Chris Kahn, editing by Ross Colvin and Sonya Hepinstall)


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    one week ago

This is why we can't just let bygones be bygones with the right .

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

Since Democratic leaders called Trump an illegitimate President for years, why should the right let bygones be bygones?

When will the left ever live up to the standards it demands the Right play by?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1    one week ago

Donald Trump was never, for one second, fit to hold the office of the president of the United States.  Hence he was always going to be resisted. Don't compare the way Trump was treated with anyone else because it is bullshit and you know it. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1    one week ago
Since Democratic leaders called Trump an illegitimate President for years

Links?  Any evidence of this claim?  Anything???

 
 
 
Suz
1.1.3  Suz  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago
Donald Trump was never, for one second, fit to hold the office of the president of the United States. 

I suppose you could say they liked that about him.  That he wasn't a career politician.

Hence he was always going to be resisted. Don't compare the way Trump was treated with anyone else because it is bullshit and you know it. 

Isn't that par for the course?  Isn't that to be expected?  Isn't that the normal way of things??

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.2    one week ago

"the congressman said he would skip Trump's inauguration. Lewis considered Trump an illegitimate president because of Russian interference in the 2016 election."

"“I don’t see this president-elect as a legitimate president,” Lewis told NBC's "Meet the Press" a week before the inauguration in January 2017. "I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected and they have destroyed the candidacy of Hillary Clinton."

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.4    one week ago
"the congressman said he would skip Trump's inauguration. Lewis considered Trump an illegitimate president because of Russian interference in the 2016 election." "“I don’t see this president-elect as a legitimate president,” Lewis told NBC's "Meet the Press" a week before the inauguration in January 2017. "I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected and they have destroyed the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.

So no links, no evidence just you making claims.

 
 
 
Tacos!
1.1.6  Tacos!  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.5    one week ago
So no links, no evidence just you making claims.

I'll give you a link in the (perhaps vain) hope that you will acknowledge the truth of it.

John Lewis: Trump is not a 'legitimate' president

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.7  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.5    one week ago
So no links, no evidence just you making claims.

Highlight the text. Google it and voila. 

And that is where it came from. It's sad that the link had to be provided, as well as the one above, when it was pretty easy to remember and easier to find. I know. You probably weren't serious wanting a link right? RIGHT?  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.8  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.7    one week ago
Highlight the text. Google it and voila. 

You're making the claim, [Deleted] substantiate it.  Easy, I do it with mine.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.8    one week ago

I did. Can't you read it? See that little USA Today in blue in the little oval? Open up your eyes and read it. 
Thanks

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.10  Ozzwald  replied to  Tacos! @1.1.6    one week ago
I'll give you a link in the (perhaps vain) hope that you will acknowledge the truth of it.

He was also correct, as you have to admit if you'd look at the date of the article.  Trump WAS NOT a legitimate President when Lewis made the statement.

If you'd look at Sean's original claim, you would also see that this example does not support it.  He said, QUOTE:

Since Democratic leaders called Trump an illegitimate President for years

Your quote was before Trump was even President.  So FAIL!!

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.11  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.10    one week ago
Trump WAS NOT a legitimate President when Lewis made the statement.
Your quote was before Trump was even President.  So FAIL!!

No fail. FFS for all intents and purposes yes he was. A matter of a few days until the inauguration.....and the votes and EC had already done their jobs of certifying it and moving forward.

So now I suppose you will have a stunning comeback with some nit picking semantics..........which you also do. Quite regularly along with your links.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.12  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.11    one week ago
No fail. FFS for all intents and purposes yes he was.

So you're claiming he was President on 1/14/2017?

A matter of a few days until the inauguration

Now you're saying he wasn't President on 1/14/2017?

So now I suppose you will have a stunning comeback with some nit picking semantics

No need, just using 2 of your own sentences.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.13  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.12    one week ago
So now I suppose you will have a stunning comeback with some nit picking semantics

And you didn't disappoint. Guess you missed this.................

"FFS for all intents and purposes yes he was."

At the very least, President elect AND verified by Congress and the EC. It doesn't get much better than that..............prior to inauguration day and it was a bit late to turn that around don'tchathink?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
1.1.14  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.5    one week ago
nks, no evidence just you making claims.

Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, John Lewis..  

 
 
 
Tacos!
1.1.15  Tacos!  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.10    one week ago
He was also correct, as you have to admit if you'd look at the date of the article.  Trump WAS NOT a legitimate President when Lewis made the statement.

VelvetyAgileHarrierhawk-size_restricted.gif

Your attempt at goalpost shifting is only not-bullshit if Lewis' reason for thinking Trump was illegitimate was that he hadn't been sworn in yet. However, that was not the reason.

"I don't see this President-elect as a legitimate president," Lewis, a Georgia Democrat, told NBC News' Chuck Todd in a clip released Friday. "I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton."

This makes it clear that Lewis would never support Trump as the legitimate president because he did not believe he had been legitimately elected. Though he was the only one to say it at the time, several other prominent Democrats supported his remarks by joining Lewis in boycotting the inauguration .

The incident is a great example of how absurdly Trump was treated both by the media and by Democrats from the very beginning. Lewis started the nastiness with his ridiculous and unfounded assertions about the elections and the Russians. Trump responded by saying unflattering things about Lewis. We can debate whether or not that was the best response, but the whole thing was characterized by Democrats and the media as "Trump insults Lewis" - as if Trump had started it.

The president-elect's insults, made just days ahead of Martin Luther King Day, were the final straw for a number of Democrats, who will break with tradition by missing the inauguration ceremony on Friday.
"When you insult Rep John Lewis, you insult America," said Yvette Clarke, one of five representatives for New York who will boycott the event.

And that disingenuous nonsense has never stopped.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.16  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Suz @1.1.3    one week ago
I suppose you could say they liked that about him.  That he wasn't a career politician.

Thats one way to describe a pathological liar, crook, bigot, moron , and cheat. 

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.17  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago

Joe Biden is not fit for office. I guess that means we can resist him for the next 4 years, or until Harris offs him to take his place.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.18  Gordy327  replied to  bugsy @1.1.17    one week ago
Joe Biden is not fit for office.

On what grounds do you make that determination?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.19  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.13    one week ago
"FFS for all intents and purposes yes he was."

LOL, that means he wasn't.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.20  Ozzwald  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.14    one week ago
Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, John Lewis.

Mary Ellen, Booby Sue, Billy Jean, Wolfgang, Jeremiah, and Bob.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.21  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.16    one week ago
"Thats one way to describe a pathological liar, crook, bigot, moron , and cheat."

You forgot gangster, grifter, thug

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  bugsy @1.1.17    one week ago
"or until Harris offs him to take his place"

Offs him?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
1.1.23  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.21    one week ago
"Thats one way to describe a pathological liar, crook, bigot, moron , and cheat."
You forgot gangster, grifter, thug

Don't forget coward.

Commander Bonespurs

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.24  bugsy  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.18    one week ago
On what grounds do you make that determination?

Doesn't matter what grounds. We have heard that same stupid comment over and over and over and over and over x 1000 the past 4 years.

The person(s) who continuously made that comment did so never producing any proof. Why can't I do the same.

BTW...Biden is not for for office.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.25  bugsy  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.22    one week ago
Offs him?

Yea...offs him

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.26  Gordy327  replied to  bugsy @1.1.24    one week ago

Oh, so you're just spewing BS then. Got it.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.27  bugsy  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.26    one week ago
Oh, so you're just spewing BS then

If that is what you believe, then so be it. I guess you believe the same about the person(s) that continuously made that comment and never showed proof.

Got it.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.28  Gordy327  replied to  bugsy @1.1.27    5 days ago

It's not belief. It's simple fact. You make an assertion but fail or refuse to support it. That demonstrates your asserion lacks any merit and is therefore just BS!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

And we will never forgive and forget what the radical left has done.

What the poll really shows is an unresolved divide and no way to ever breach that divide.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2    one week ago

Its not a fight based in reality though. One side supports the worst president in the 244 year history of this country and the other side supports Biden. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.1    one week ago
Its not a fight based in reality though.

Oh, yes it is.


One side supports the worst president in the 244 year history of this country and the other side supports Biden.

One side supports the man who corrected the course of this nation and the other supported anything that was an option. IMO, Nobody likes Biden!

 
 
 
bugsy
1.2.3  bugsy  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.2    one week ago
IMO, Nobody likes Biden!

Correct. That's why I believe the majority of those that voted for Biden did not do so because they like Biden and want him as president. They did so because "Orange man bad".

If Trump were not president, and any other Republican was running against Biden, Biden would have had his ass handed to him by many millions of votes.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

The Dems can't win with their bizarre and crazy ideas and socialist agenda without cheating

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.3.1  Gordy327  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3    one week ago

How did they cheat? Can you prove it?

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.4  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

I seem to recall some tRump supporters saying they would accept the results of the election if their loser lost.  Gee, where are those folks now?

125556516_3542095995829665_4440411283275862544_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=HdX6h8K3uFwAX9sRH1a&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=cd30aa624a728a1cb46eced457ccb4fc&oe=5FDB3529

 
 
 
bugsy
1.4.1  bugsy  replied to  Tessylo @1.4    one week ago
I seem to recall some tRump supporters saying they would accept the results of the election if their loser lost

And I seem to remember a certain past two time losing democratic losing presidential candidate saying do not concede, no matter what. Looks like Trump is taking that advice.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2  Sean Treacy    one week ago

For perspective, two years after the 2016 election two out of three democrats believed Russians tampered with vote tallies to help Trump in 2016.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one week ago

The difference is that 2016 was a traditional election without all the mail-in ballots, stopped counts, found ballots and BS that nobody can now sort out.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    one week ago

Wait WHAT? From day one Trump claimed that there was a plethora of fraud during the 2016 election. Trump lost the popular vote so there HAD to be right? 

Hell, he formed the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity to document his fabrications. It came up with nothing, NADA. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @2.1.1    one week ago
he formed the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity to document his fabrications.

Vic forgot about that

 
 
 
cjcold
2.1.4  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    one week ago

Pretty sure I like Biden just as much as I hate Trump. And yes, I have come to hate Trump.

Trump is the worst POS on the planet.

 
 
 
cjcold
2.1.5  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @2.1.4    one week ago

Were I to become an assassin, Trump would be my first target (for free).

Trump is now doing everything he can to destroy the United States.

Trump is now doing everything he can to destroy our environment.

A wounded beast is the most dangerous beast.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.1.1    one week ago
From day one Trump claimed that there was a plethora of fraud during the 2016 election.

You have it backwards.....Remember, they said Russia did it!   No mention of Russia now.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.7  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.6    one week ago
You have it backwards.....Remember, they said Russia did it!   No mention of Russia now.

No Vic, Trump said that there was election fraud. That 3-5 million illegal aliens voted, that dead people voted, that there was wide spread voter 'impersonation'.

There os no 'THEY', there is only Trump and his epic narcissism. That is unless you want to include the bat shit crazy conspiracy theorist Kris Kobach who headed his Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.8  Gordy327  replied to  Dulay @2.1.7    one week ago
Trump said that there was election fraud. That 3-5 million illegal aliens voted, that dead people voted, that there was wide spread voter 'impersonation'.

And note how there was no evidence of fraud and legal allegations of fraud have been largely rebuked by the courts.

there is only Trump and his epic narcissism.

Which is why this farce of fraud still goes on.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.9  Dulay  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.8    one week ago
And note how there was no evidence of fraud and legal allegations of fraud have been largely rebuked by the courts.

I read the Pennsylvania court filing that Giuliani today. It's so ridiculous that it had me laughing out loud. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.1.10  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.6    one week ago
You have it backwards

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.10    one week ago

It is a bit late for that, right?   The time to prevent that will be when Republicans one day control the WH, House of Representatives and have a super majority in the US Senate. Then they can criminalize ballot harvesting, unsolicited mail-in voting and counting votes after election day, along with a lot of other issues that need legislation.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.10    one week ago

And you should let people know that this is Trump as a candidate in 2016 declaring that the election was rigged and giving people the impression that he will not accept the results of the election (if he loses).

How can anyone not comprehend that declaring an election to be fraud is what Trump does?    How can anyone believe this guy when he utters those words?

Amazing, is it not, the gullibility and sycophantic trust that some have in Trump?   jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif    It is sickening and speaks very poorly of the electorate.

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.13  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.12    one week ago

The fact that some people continue to support Trump and treat what he says like gospel speaks very poorly of the nation as a whole.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.1.14  Ozzwald  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.12    one week ago
How can anyone not comprehend that declaring an election to be fraud is what Trump does?

Trump is a one trick pony.  If he doesn't get what he wants, it is always someone else's fault.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.14    one week ago

Exactly.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.2  Ozzwald  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one week ago
For perspective, two years after the 2016 election two out of three democrats believed Russians tampered with vote tallies to help Trump in 2016.

Russia Targeted Election Systems in All 50 States, Report Finds

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2.2.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.2.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.2.1    one week ago

Except for this that must have gotten overlooked............

It concluded that while there was no evidence that any votes were changed in actual voting machines, “Russian cyberactors were in a position to delete or change voter data” in the Illinois voter database. The committee found no evidence that they did so.
 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.2.3  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.2    one week ago
Except for this that must have gotten overlooked.

Nope not overlooked. 

Pointing out there was more evidence of fraud in 2016 than there has been in 2020.  And as far as " perspective" is concerned, well there you go.  We KNOW Russia interfered.

Senate panel backs assessment that Russia interfered in 2016

G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia

Here's What We Know So Far About Russia's 2016 Meddling

Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.2.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2.3    one week ago

We know they TRIED. All that was done was MAYBE feed propaganda to a bunch of morons that ate it up. And it wasn't full fledged Trump supporters that got duped. If ANY one's mind was changed it was liberal dems and independents who were on the fence to begin with. You're calling some of your fellow travelers dumbasses and that isn't a good look.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.2.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.4    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.2.6  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.5    one week ago

Just what influence do you think they had if it's not the propaganda on social media? It's already been established that no votes were changed or tampered with but maybe some minds. What is YOUR take on what actually happened.............................

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.2.7  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.4    one week ago
We know they TRIED.

Wrong.  We know they interfered, we just don't know the results of that interference.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.2.8  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2.7    one week ago
we just don't know the results of that interference.

And Bingo...............................that's the point. You can say it all you want but if you don't know the result, the results of their "interference", it can't be proven how much if any it had.

Thank you.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2.2.9  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.2.1    one week ago

There  is zero evidence Russia changed vote tallies in [2016,deleted]

 
 
 
cjcold
2.2.10  cjcold  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2    one week ago

Anybody who doubts Putin helping Trump is a fool.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.2.11  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.8    one week ago
You can say it all you want but if you don't know the result, the results of their "interference", it can't be proven how much if any it had.

I have a feeling that common sense like that will not be tolerated here for long.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
2.2.12  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.4    one week ago
All that was done was MAYBE feed propaganda to a bunch of morons that ate it up

They definitely fed propaganda to a bunch of morons who no doubt ate it up.

And it wasn't full fledged Trump supporters that got duped.

So the morons who got duped didn't vote for Trump? How exactly does that work? A "full fledged Trump supporter" are those that were dumb enough to vote for him.

If ANY one's mind was changed it was liberal dems and independents who were on the fence to begin with.

If there were any "liberal Democrats" or independents who were stupid enough to buy the bullshit propaganda pushed by the Russians then they deserve the disaster of a President they got

You're calling some of your fellow travelers dumbasses and that isn't a good look.

Those who bought that bullshit haven't been "fellow travelers" with rational liberals and progressives for a long time. They are now Trump supporters fellow travelers as are neo-Nazi's, KKK members and virtually every other openly white supremacist piece of shit.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.2.13  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.8    one week ago
And Bingo...............................that's the point. You can say it all you want but if you don't know the result, the results of their "interference", it can't be proven how much if any it had. Thank you.

Your welcome.  The point you seem to be ignoring is that they DID interfere.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
2.2.14  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2.13    one week ago

Didn't miss that point at all. The thing that YOU seem to be ignoring is even though they interfered (tried to sway perhaps but........) no one can, without extensive research of those whom it may have swayed, can determine whether or not said "interference" had anything to do with the outcome. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.2.15  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.14    one week ago
The thing that YOU seem to be ignoring is even though they interfered (tried to sway perhaps but........) no one can, without extensive research of those whom it may have swayed, can determine whether or not said "interference" had anything to do with the outcome

The thing that YOU seem to be ignoring is that they likewise cannot show that the Russian interference DIDN'T cause massive changes in people's opinion, and at the very least keep them away from voting.

The fact that there is no way to prove the Russian interference caused a change in the results, also means that there is no way to prove the Russian interference didn't cause a change in the results.

You can't have it one way and ignore the other.  Again, the important part is that they DID interfere.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.2.16  Greg Jones  replied to  Ozzwald @2.2.15    one week ago
Again, the important part is that they DID interfere.

Again, you have NO credible proof or evidence

 
 
 
TᵢG
3  TᵢG    one week ago
Half of Republicans say Biden won because of a 'rigged' election: Reuters/Ipsos poll

This suggests that the level of stubborn ignorance (and, to a lesser degree, stupidity) is much higher than I anticipated.

GettyImages_587169617.0.jpg

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3    one week ago
This suggests that the level of stubborn ignorance (and, to a lesser degree, stupidity)

what's the difference ? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one week ago

Ignorance is the lack of relevant information.

Stubborn ignorance is ignorance that is a result of a refusal to even try to learn

Stupidity is a cognitive deficiency

There are plenty of very intelligent people who are stubbornly ignorant.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
3.1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.1    one week ago
Ignorance is the lack of relevant information.

Stubborn ignorance is ignorance that is a result of a refusal to even try to learn

Stupidity is a cognitive deficiency

There are plenty of very intelligent people who are stubbornly ignorant.

How about "Willful Ignorance"?

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.2    one week ago

Same as stubborn ignorance.

 
 
 
cjcold
3.1.4  cjcold  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.1    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  cjcold @3.1.4    one week ago

Some are.  But I know plenty of Trump supporters who are intelligent, normal people who held their noses regarding the individual and voted for his policies because they were concerned about the direction Biden-Harris might take the nation.   

 
 
 
Greg Jones
3.1.6  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.5    one week ago

because they were concerned about the direction Biden-Harris might take the nation.

  Very much so.

 
 
 
devangelical
3.1.7  devangelical  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.6    one week ago

the future really won't matter to a lot of trump's supporters, will it?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @3.1.7    one week ago
"the future really won't matter to a lot of trump's supporters, will it?"

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ronin2
3.2  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @3    one week ago

After 5 years of leftist bullshit regarding Trump stealing the election from Hillary; "Russia, Russia, Russia" and whatever other crap they thought they could make stick; I don't even want to hear it.

Biden had better buckle up- or find a real comfy space in the White House basement to hide for the next 4 years.

Paybacks are a bitch; and we learned very well from the left.

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2    one week ago

Do you maintain that the election was stolen from Trump?

 
 
 
Suz
3.2.2  Suz  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.1    one week ago

Why is it wrong to be thorough?

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  Suz @3.2.2    one week ago
Why is it wrong to be thorough?

Being thorough is what we should always do in an election.

The system is routinely thorough.   Each SoS in each state is responsible to ensure the votes are correct and certifies same.  The certified results are then certified by Congress.   If there is any evidence of fraud the states investigate.   If they do not, lawsuits can be filed to force the issue.

So given there is no evidence of fraud that would change the results of this election and the lawsuits have been dropped, what is the point of keeping this charade going and inhibiting Biden's transition?

 
 
 
Ronin2
3.2.4  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.1    one week ago

No, what I maintain is after four years of Democratic and leftist bullshit about Trump not being President; and trying every damn way possible to remove him from office- Biden can expect a shit sandwich for his 4 years in office.

I can't stand Trump; but in the war of lesser of two evils- he is a damn site better than the Democratic Party.

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.2.5  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.4    one week ago
Biden can expect a shit sandwich for his 4 years in office.

Yeah, fine, partisanship.   What else is new?


Given there is no evidence of fraud that would change the results of this election and the lawsuits have been dropped, what is the point of keeping this charade going and inhibiting Biden's transition?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
3.2.6  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.4    one week ago
what I maintain is after four years of Democratic and leftist bullshit about Trump not being President; and trying every damn way possible to remove him from office- Biden can expect a shit sandwich for his 4 years in office.

If Biden acts anything like Trump while in office then he'll deserve the shit sandwich. The fact is that Trump deserved what he got because of his actions, not because of any partisanship. Many Republicans felt the same way and rejected Trump and Trumpism and came out to campaign and vote for Biden because of Trump's errant and dangerous behavior.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.2.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.4    one week ago

He was impeached ONCE in four years

 
 
 
cjcold
3.2.8  cjcold  replied to  Suz @3.2.2    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
cjcold
3.2.9  cjcold  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.4    one week ago

So folk who care about other folk is what you can't stand?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.2.10  Tessylo  replied to  cjcold @3.2.9    one week ago
"So folk who care about other folk is what you can't stand?"

No wonder they love tRump.  He doesn't care about anyone else but himself.  

 
 
 
Suz
3.3  Suz  replied to  TᵢG @3    one week ago

Tig, if Trump were never to concede, what would happen if after the swearing-in ceremony, they found enough ballots to change the outcome of what should have been?  Silly question  but asked just the same.

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Suz @3.3    one week ago
Tig, if Trump were never to concede, what would happen if after the swearing-in ceremony, they found enough ballots to change the outcome of what should have been?  Silly question  but asked just the same.

The election is certified by Congress on Jan 6, 2021.   At that point in time, Biden is officially the president-elect. 

If the results were found to be wrong after this certification then I suppose a lawsuit will be raised that will no doubt eventually hit the SCotUS.   This likely would present a constitutional crisis. 

I do not expect this to happen.  In fact, I would bet huge $$$ that it will not happen.   Trump clearly lost this election.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.3.2  Dulay  replied to  Suz @3.3    one week ago

My question is: WHO would be looking for these ballots?

Every state has a very clear statutory process for certifying their vote counts. If the SoS of each state [or the election board] didn't get their shit together before the Dec. 8th 'safe harbor' deadline, WHY would they be looking for NEW ballots at that late date? That MUST be done accurately BEFORE the electoral college is seated, they vote their certification documents are sent to Congress.

 
 
 
cjcold
3.3.3  cjcold  replied to  Suz @3.3    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.4  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @3.3.3    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Suz
3.3.5  Suz  replied to  TᵢG @3.3.1    one week ago
Thank you.

 
 
 
Split Personality
3.3.6  Split Personality  replied to  Dulay @3.3.2    one week ago

Well a lot of US Postal Inspectors would be involved if they aren't already.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @3    one week ago

I like the cartoon.

I almost crashed my car into a pedestrian last night because of something I heard from the moron on the radio. 

Numbnutz claims that trmp won in a landslide and it will be proven. How far out in space do you have to go to come up with something as crazy as that? I only listen as long as I need to get to get the top of the hour news and a traffic report.

 
 
 
cjcold
3.4.1  cjcold  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.4    one week ago

DON'T DRIVE ANGRY OR I'LL RUN YOU OFF THE ROAD AND CAUSE A 20 CAR PILEUP !!!!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.4.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  cjcold @3.4.1    one week ago

LOL! I got distracted is what happened! I got this look on my face and then saw a pedestrian in the cross walk. Poor fella

 
 
 
devangelical
3.4.3  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.4.2    one week ago

up until last march I used to listen to rwnj AM radio for laughs. amazing how willfully ignorant some people can be. I wear really dark sunglasses while driving and can look like I'm distracted when jaywalkers cross in front of me when I'm driving downtown. ha ha ha, cheap thrills.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.5  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @3    one week ago
This suggests that the level of stubborn ignorance (and, to a lesser degree, stupidity) is much higher than I anticipated.

I tend to agree. Although, I think the level of stupidity is also higher.

 
 
 
cjcold
3.5.1  cjcold  replied to  Gordy327 @3.5    one week ago

Please stop talking about my mother!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.6  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  TᵢG @3    one week ago

As a non-American observer from afar with no loyalties to any American political party, I would say that I think that the American educational system needs some genuine upgrading.  Hey, I was taken in by Trump at first myself, especially when he kept his promise to move the Embassy to Jerusalem, but then I started to see the light.  At least I was not permanently mesmerized by him as the polls noted here indicate, and as sadly also indicated by some of the members of NT.  If I could allow objectivity to realize the truth, what the hell is wrong with so many other supposedly intelligent and educated people?

 
 
 
lib50
3.6.1  lib50  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.6    one week ago

I think if people didn't belong to a party it would be better. Its easier to really look at issues and what politicians say and do when you look without those party blinders on. Even then its not easy to take issue with the side who is most in line with ones beliefs, but easier to make that conscious decision to look without bias and push against that initial knee-jerk reaction of defending 'my' party. And it gets easier with practice.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.6.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  lib50 @3.6.1    one week ago

Excellent point.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
4  Hal A. Lujah    one week ago

Something tells me the same people also think Hillary Clinton runs a global pedophile ring that drinks baby blood.

 
 
 
cjcold
4.1  cjcold  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @4    one week ago

As long as there is pizza I'm good with it!

 
 
 
cjcold
4.1.1  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @4.1    one week ago

On a side note, almost cut my hair. Happened just the other day.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5  Tacos!    one week ago

I'm always a little surprised (maybe 'disappointed' is a better word), I guess, when people are prepared to accept such a far-reaching, wide-ranging, and complex conspiracy theory. Just think about all the things that would have to go right for the allegations to be real. Then contrast that with what you know about people - their ineptitudes, their inability to keep a secret, their general stupidity. And they pulled off a scam of this magnitude? It's just not plausible.

It's also a great argument for continuing to elect the president on a state-by-state basis. To pull it off, you have to corrupt the election in multiple states, not just one.

 
 
 
cjcold
5.1  cjcold  replied to  Tacos! @5    one week ago

I realIy hate it when I feel like voting you up.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6  Nerm_L    one week ago

Well, of course the election was rigged.  That only states the obvious.

We've seen the press' hardball treatment of Trump and softball treatment of Biden.  We've seen blatant harassment of Trump supporters.  We've seen weeks of voting.  We've seen ballot harvesting and ballot curing.  And, most importantly, we've seen that the Republican Party won down ballot races.

How Democrats' miserable failure down ballot translated into a Joe Biden win will require more than hand waving to explain away.  Are there really that many Republicans who chose Joe Biden over Donald Trump?  Are there really more independents leaning Republican?  Or was the election rigged?

If the election was not rigged then Democrats would appear to be in deep, deep trouble for coming elections.  That's what the down ballot results show.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one week ago
Well, of course the election was rigged. 

p07jstr1.jpg

 
 
 
JBB
6.2  JBB  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one week ago

256

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.1  Nerm_L  replied to  JBB @6.2    one week ago

An election entails more than just voting.  That was the premise for the allegations of Russian interference in 2016.  There wasn't any evidence Russians interfered with voting but Democrats claimed Russians interfered with the election.

And if we are only looking at voting then explain why Democrats miserable failure down ballot translated to a Joe Biden win.

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.2.2  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.1    one week ago
And if we are only looking at voting then explain why Democrats miserable failure down ballot translated to a Joe Biden win.

Because more people voted for Biden. It's not rocket science.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
6.2.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Gordy327 @6.2.2    one week ago

That reminds me of a really dry joke a guy told me once:

Q:  When you see geese flying in a V formation, one leg of it is always longer than the other.  Do you know why that is?

A:  Because there’s more geese on that side.

I don’t know why but that joke makes me chuckle.  The humor is all in the face of the person who says “no, why is that?”

 
 
 
JBB
6.2.4  JBB  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.1    one week ago

Are you alleging voters interfered by voting?

If you have proof show it or else just LEGO...

256

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.5  Nerm_L  replied to  Gordy327 @6.2.2    one week ago
Because more people voted for Biden. It's not rocket science.

Yes, Joe Biden won more electoral votes this election.  For the 2016 election, Donald Trump won more electoral votes.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.6  Nerm_L  replied to  JBB @6.2.4    one week ago
Are you alleging voters interfered by voting? If you have proof show it or else just LEGO...

No, I'm pointing out the election was rigged.  Voters were concerned about the election being rigged, too.  That's why voters waited in line for hours to vote early and in person.

Any sane person watching news reporting for the past year could understand that the election was rigged.  Joe Biden, on one occasion, began explaining how door knockers could help fill out mail-in ballots and sign affidavits before he caught himself.  Voters were having none of that and waited in line to vote during a pandemic.

Democrats can't deny the 2020 election results.  Joe Biden did win more votes for President.  But voters rejected the Democratic Party down ballot.  Overall the Republican Party won the 2020 election down ballot.  Apparently voters wanted a Congress and state governments that would oppose Joe Biden as President.

Joe Biden received more votes but didn't win anything other than a title.  The election results really do indicate that voters don't trust Joe Biden; voters didn't hand Joe Biden a friendly Congress.  Democrats tried to rig the election for a blue wave but voters rejected that.  And, as Democrats have pointed out, the voting results for the 2020 election can't be questioned.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.7  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.6    one week ago
No, I'm pointing out the election was rigged. 

Irrational.   You are declaring that the USA electoral system has suffered a level of fraud sufficient to alter the results of the presidential election.

And your evidence of this is what .... ?  

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.8  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.7    one week ago
Irrational.   You are declaring that the USA electoral system has suffered a level of fraud sufficient to alter the results of the presidential election. And your evidence of this is what .... ?  

Not fraud.  Election interference.  The same sort of election interference Democrats alleged Russia conducted during the 2016 election.  

However, for the 2020 election, domestic election interference was far more prevalent than foreign election interference.  The Democratic Party actively and overtly conducted surveillance and sabotage of the Trump administration in collusion with the press.  The Democratic Party utilized the same means of manipulating public disclosure, reporting, and public discussion as are used by the Chinese Communist Party.

The Democratic Party even changed its own primary rules to benefit Michael Bloomberg at the expense of candidates who had followed the rules from the beginning.  The Democratic Party rigged its own primaries.

The election was rigged.  Trying to use voter fraud as a squirrel to divert attention is consistent with Democrats' obvious efforts to interfere with the 2020 election.  Democrats tried to rig the election for a blue wave and failed miserably.  And that miserable failure by Democrats is a direct result of voting that was not fraudulent.  The voters aren't as stupid as Democrats want to believe.

 

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.2.9  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.5    one week ago

Yes, and?

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.2.10  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.8    one week ago

That's nice. Prove it!

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.11  Nerm_L  replied to  Gordy327 @6.2.10    one week ago
That's nice. Prove it!

That's lame.  Refute it!

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.12  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.8    one week ago
Not fraud.  Election interference. 

Substitute 'election interference' in my comment then.   My point remains the same.

You claim that rogue actions have been sufficient to change the result of the election.

Based on what ... speculation ... feelings?

Every election will have rough edges.   You are claiming actions that undermine the system.   Deliver the evidence.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.13  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.11    one week ago

You want Gordy to refute your unsubstantiated claim that the Ds engaged in activities that caused Biden to emerge the victor when Trump is the true victor?

You made the (irrational) claim, you bear the burden of proof / evidence.

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.2.14  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.11    one week ago

You're the one making the allegation. So you bear the burden of proof. Your failure to do so will only prove that your allegations are baseless and you lack credibility. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.15  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.13    one week ago
You want Gordy to refute your unsubstantiated claim that the Ds engaged in activities that caused Biden to emerge the victor when Trump is the true victor? You made the (irrational) claim, you bear the burden of proof / evidence.

I am pointing out that Democrats tried and failed.  How did Democrats miserable failure down ballot translate into a Biden win?  The Democratic Party invested their efforts into making the 2020 election a referendum on Trump and what Democrats call Trumpism.  Biden won the election but voters clearly did not reject Trumpism.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.16  Nerm_L  replied to  Gordy327 @6.2.14    one week ago
You're the one making the allegation. So you bear the burden of proof. Your failure to do so will only prove that your allegations are baseless and you lack credibility. 

That would require access to anonymous sources within the Trump administration.  However, Democrats and a friendly press seemed to have ready access.  Mr. or Ms. Anonymous was talking to Democratic members of the House and the press quite often.

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.2.17  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.15    one week ago
I am pointing out that Democrats tried and failed. 

You are just talking trash Nerm.   It is not information bearing or valuable in any way.   Just more bullshit.  

Biden won the election but voters clearly did not reject Trumpism.

Fine.   Move on.

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.2.18  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.15    one week ago

How did the Democrats fail? Winning a presidential election seems like a big win to me. Clearly more voters voted for Biden.  While some cling to Trump or "Trumpism," obviously not enough do to keep Trump in office.

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.2.19  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.16    one week ago

So you, like Trump, have no proof and are just spewing BS at this point. So noted.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.2.20  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @6.2.13    one week ago
You want Gordy to refute your unsubstantiated claim that the Ds engaged in activities that caused Biden to emerge the victor when Trump is the true victor? You made the (irrational) claim, you bear the burden of proof / evidence.

Haven't the press reported a number of unsubstantiated claims made by anonymous sources within the Trump administration?  Democrats even justified impeachment hearings with a parody.  Democrats even demanded (and got) appointment of a special counsel to investigate unsubstantiated accusations.

Democrats have scoffed at demands for proof over the last four years.  I'm only following the example of Democrats.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.21  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @6.2.4    one week ago

"Are you alleging voters interfered by voting?"

Yeah, makes no sense, as usual.  I seem to recall a certain poster saying it was Hillary Clintons' fault and our fault for voting for her, that gave us tRump, or some other such nonsense.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.2.22  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @6.2.8    one week ago

Nyet Nerm-L, Nyet.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.3  Dulay  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one week ago

There isn't enough mustard on the planet to cover that pretzel 'logic'.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.3.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Dulay @6.3    one week ago
There isn't enough mustard on the planet to cover that pretzel 'logic'.

As usual, Democrats are more concerned about the mustard and not the pretzel.  Joe Biden is the mustard.  But Democrats don't have a pretzel.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.3.2  Tacos!  replied to  Nerm_L @6.3.1    one week ago
As usual, Democrats are more concerned about the mustard and not the pretzel.  Joe Biden is the mustard.  But Democrats don't have a pretzel.

Aaanndd . . . now I'm hungry.

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.3.3  Gordy327  replied to  Tacos! @6.3.2    one week ago

I could go for a big, hot soft pretzel. But with spicy mustard. :p

 
 
 
Dulay
6.3.4  Dulay  replied to  Nerm_L @6.3.1    one week ago
As usual, Democrats are more concerned about the mustard and not the pretzel.  Joe Biden is the mustard.  But Democrats don't have a pretzel.

Ask me if I am surprised that you avoided the 'logic' part of my comment.

 
 
 
cjcold
6.4  cjcold  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one week ago

I no longer feel like voting you up.

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.5  Tacos!  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one week ago
How Democrats' miserable failure down ballot translated into a Joe Biden win will require more than hand waving to explain away.

So the people rigging the election were willing to count Republican success in the House, Senate, and state races but just not the White House? That is a very selective conspiracy.

It really isn't that big of a surprise that Trump lost (is losing . . . whatever). The states he lost this time around were states he won in 2016, but only barely. They were close in 2016, and they were close again in 2020 - just for the other guy this time.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.5.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @6.5    one week ago
So the people rigging the election were willing to count Republican success in the House, Senate, and state races but just not the White House? That is a very selective conspiracy.

The ones running this conspiracy don't bother with that part because then the conspiracy falls flat on its face (to them). It's as obvious as my backside that if democrats conspired to steal the election for Biden, why didn't they take senate seats away from McConnell and Graham?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.5.2  Nerm_L  replied to  Tacos! @6.5    one week ago
So the people rigging the election were willing to count Republican success in the House, Senate, and state races but just not the White House? That is a very selective conspiracy.

Where have I said anything about conspiracies or fraud?  I've only pointed out the Democrats attempted to rig the election.  And that goes beyond the election of one office holder.  You do understand that the election included a lot of down ballot races?

It really isn't that big of a surprise that Trump lost (is losing . . . whatever). The states he lost this time around were states he won in 2016, but only barely. They were close in 2016, and they were close again in 2020 - just for the other guy this time.

Yes, it's not a surprise Trump lost the election.  Donald Trump is an inept politician.  I'm surprised Democrats felt the need to make the Presidential election a referendum on Trump.  Trump's character flaws and political bumbling seem rather obvious.  The general election seemed like a golden opportunity for the Democratic Party to sell its brand without serious challenges from the Republican candidate Trump.  After all, Trump has difficulty stringing three words together into a sentence that makes any sense.

Democrats were quite clear about their election objectives.  Democrats intended to use Trump to flip state offices, increase their House majority, and flip control of the Senate.  Democrats were quite clear that Joe Biden was chosen for electability; not as a unifying leader.  And Democrats made quite clear that they thought vote by mail and extended voting would provide them an advantage.  A cooperative press glossed over Biden's weaknesses while reporting unsubstantiated allegations against Trump.  

Democrats didn't try to only rig the Presidential election.  Democrats rigged their own primaries so that a safe candidate would be nominated and that safe candidate could be ignored during the general election.  Democrats tried to rig the overall election.  The Presidential election was only one race among many.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.5.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.2    one week ago
I've only pointed out the Democrats attempted to rig the election.

That's a conspiracy because you have no proof that the Democrats attempted to rig the election

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.5.4  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.2    one week ago

If you claim democrats rigged the (your choice here) election, then present the evidence! Otherwise, your claims are without merit and fall into conspiracy theory territory.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.5.5  Nerm_L  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.5.3    one week ago
That's a conspiracy because you have no proof that the Democrats attempted to rig the election

Democrats pushed vote by mail and extended voting because they believed that would give them an advantage in down ballot races.  That's why Democrats suddenly became interested in the fiscal well being of the Postal Service.  What is at stake is redistricting.  The Democrats' blue wall is losing districts because of changes in population density.  Democrats heightened support for vote by mail was an attempt to rig the overall election.

Democrats working together to achieve clearly stated political objectives isn't a conspiracy.  Anyone paying attention knew what Democrats were attempting to do; Democrats told the public what they were doing.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.5.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.5    one week ago
Democrats pushed vote by mail and extended voting because they believed that would give them an advantage in down ballot races.

That doesn't prove they conspired to "rig" an election. Safety was at stake during this election season. You know that. So you pushing that they suddenly became interested in the post office and wanting mail in and extended voting doesn't prove shit

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.5.7  Nerm_L  replied to  Gordy327 @6.5.4    one week ago
If you claim democrats rigged the (your choice here) election, then present the evidence! Otherwise, your claims are without merit and fall into conspiracy theory territory.

Are you denying the vote tabulation?  Are you denying that mail-in ballots and early ballots provided Joe Biden a distinct advantage?  Are you denying that Democrats expected that advantage would translate into wins in down ballot races?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.5.8  Nerm_L  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.5.6    one week ago
That doesn't prove they conspired to "rig" an election. Safety was at stake during this election season. You know that. So you pushing that they suddenly became interested in the post office and wanting mail in and extended voting doesn't prove shit

Democrats didn't conspire.  Democrats blatantly told the public that they were trying to rig the election.  

Democrats were so arrogant they didn't believe they needed to hide anything.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.5.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.8    one week ago

WHAT....THE...ALMIGHTY! .....FUCK!!! are you talking about?

I should have known better than to engage you in conversation......

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.5.10  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.5.9    one week ago
"WHAT....THE...ALMIGHTY! .....FUCK!!! are you talking about?
I should have known better than to engage you in conversation......"

The projection and denial and deflection and what the fuckism are quite strong amongst some tRump supporters.  

 
 
 
Ender
6.5.11  Ender  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.5.9    one week ago

This is why I always call it a cult. People believe every lie that comes out of donald's mouth.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.5.12  Nerm_L  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.5.9    one week ago
WHAT....THE...ALMIGHTY! .....FUCK!!! are you talking about?

I'm talking about how Democrats tried to rig the 2020 election.

I should have known better than to engage you in conversation......

[deleted]

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6.5.13  Trout Giggles  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.12    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.5.14  TᵢG  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.5.9    one week ago

Well said.

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.5.15  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.7    one week ago

Spare me the smokescreen tactics. Show me evidence. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.5.16  Gordy327  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.8    one week ago

When did they say that? Cite the news source and audio/video ofrom that declaration. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.5.17  Tacos!  replied to  Nerm_L @6.5.2    one week ago
Where have I said anything about conspiracies or fraud?

When you say the election is "rigged" that sounds to me like a conspiracy to commit fraud.

You do understand that the election included a lot of down ballot races?

Yes, and those down ballot races are what make it so improbable that the presidential election was rigged. People vote on a ballot that includes both the presidential election and the local races.

So, for the election to be rigged only for the presidential race, the people doing this would have to somehow count the pro-Republican votes in the local races, but reverse or throw out the presidential votes on the same ballots. It's too complicated. It doesn't make sense.

And Democrats made quite clear that they thought vote by mail and extended voting would provide them an advantage.

Agreed. They don't appear to be wrong, either. Republicans conversely feel that they do better with votes case on election day. I don't know why this is a thing, but both parties know it to be true, and the counting of votes seems to bear this out.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
6.5.18  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tacos! @6.5.17    one week ago
Yes, and those down ballot races are what make it so improbable that the presidential election was rigged. People vote on a ballot that includes both the presidential election and the local races.

I'll see if I can find it but there was some scuttlebutt that a few thousand votes in Detroit had nothing BUT Presidential votes on them and they were Biden votes. I can also vote nothing but POTUS as well as any of the other categories and all it did was remind me I hadn't made a selection and asks if I want to continue. Yep and it takes it the way I enter/entered it. In this Detroit case, NO down ballot selections made. Not sure how true but I will look nonetheless.

 
 
 
lib50
6.6  lib50  replied to  Nerm_L @6    one week ago

Lol. Suck it up. Elections have consequences. Trump lost, deal with it.

Did I leave anything out? As someone who as been disenfranchised in more than one presidential election, take the advice those of us who have been there heard ad nauseam. GET OVER IT. HE LOST.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.6.1  Nerm_L  replied to  lib50 @6.6    one week ago
Lol. Suck it up. Elections have consequences. Trump lost, deal with it.

Yes, elections have consequences.  And the Democratic Party lost the overall election.  Democrats shouldn't whine about that when redistricting takes place.

But, of course, Democrats will whine about the consequences of the 2020 election.  Maybe there will be more protests, too.  Democrats seem to be more skilled at protesting than winning elections.

 
 
 
lib50
6.6.2  lib50  replied to  Nerm_L @6.6.1    one week ago

Lol, Biden won. Trump lost.

Democrats seem to be more skilled at protesting than winning elections

They won this one.

By the way, the cheating we've found so far is from republicans. And if you think dems are so powerful they rigged this election, you must think Trump and the gop are impotent morons. So stupid that even with all that power and help from Putin they lost. Dems have been sidelined for 4 years and they must be super smart to pull something like that off and keep it secret. Where are all of Trump's secret votes? Biden won by MILLIONS of votes.

I like seeing karma in action.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.6.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Nerm_L @6.6.1    one week ago

Nerm,

Redistricting is what sore losers do, to make sure they are don't lose again. It will only work is small parts of the country, and what can be done, can be undone and is a very poor precedent. 

Btw, in general, I am against redistricting. I think our nation should be set up in some sort of grid. That would be the fair way to go.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.6.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  lib50 @6.6.2    one week ago
Where are all of Trump's secret votes?

72 MILLION STRONG!

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
6.6.5  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.6.3    one week ago
Redistricting is what sore losers do, to make sure they are don't lose again.

I don't think that is always the case. Doesn't the party in charge, or let's call it the winners, in the states have the opportunity to redistrict after the census? That being the case, both sides do it............especially when the win and get the power. Saw it happen last census here in NC.

"I think our nation should be set up in some sort of grid. That would be the fair way to go."

And I absolutely agree with this approach................

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.6.6  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @6.6.5    one week ago

Oh I know both sides do it, but they do it not to fairly represent the populous, but to better themselves. Hence why I think a grid is the fair way to go. But there we agree :)

 
 
 
Nerm_L
6.6.7  Nerm_L  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.6.3    one week ago
Redistricting is what sore losers do, to make sure they are don't lose again. It will only work is small parts of the country, and what can be done, can be undone and is a very poor precedent. 

Redistricting is controlled by the winners.  Sorry, that's the consequences of losing elections.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7  seeder  JohnRussell    one week ago

Reuters is now reporting a poll indicating 68% of Republicans think the election was rigged. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
7.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @7    one week ago

256

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
7.2  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @7    one week ago

John,

Are you shocked? I mean didn't the Dems feel the same way after the last election?

And let's put that number into perspective. It's not WHO voted for Trump. It's the number of Republicans who voted for Trump. 29% of voters are registered Republicans. That means 95,120,000 are Republicans. Of that number 64,681,600 think the election was rigged or....19.72% or Americans believe this. 

I'm not losing sleep at night.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8  seeder  JohnRussell    one week ago

Trump is now openly trying to tamper with the election results in Michigan. 

 
 
 
MUVA
8.1  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @8    one week ago

It’s called a challenge.

 
 
 
lib50
8.1.1  lib50  replied to  MUVA @8.1    one week ago

And its come to an end, he lost. Suck it up.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  lib50 @8.1.1    one week ago

Al Gore had 37 days!

And when it's over, irony of ironies - we shall resist!

 
 
 
TᵢG
8.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.2    one week ago

The 2000 election was very tight and the focus was on counting errors and how to interpret punched ballots.  

Here we have the PotUS continuing to push the allegation of fraud based on no relevant evidence and in an election that, in terms of the electoral college and the popular vote, is not close like with Bush | Gore in 2000.   There is simply no path to victory for Trump.

Trump is being ridiculous and his current actions are now irrational ... do you disagree with that, Vic?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8.1.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.3    one week ago
Trump is being ridiculous and his current actions are now irrational ... do you disagree with that, Vic?

I don't know if it's irrational or simply retribution or maybe he is putting out a narrative for the next election. He had a horrendous tenure as President. If he wants to engage in payback by holding to this unprovable claim, I can't really blame him. I do like elections where there is a smooth transition, but let's face it terrible things where done in the past 4 years.  

Call it irrational if you want. I consider it undignified, but I understand his motivation.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
8.1.5  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.2    one week ago
And when it's over, irony of ironies - we shall resist!

if the software used was the same software used in venezuala's election they would be ok with that.  and if a tabulation server was in germany for some weird reason, they would be ok with that also.

512

 
 
 
TᵢG
8.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.4    one week ago
I don't know if it's irrational or simply retribution …

Retribution for being treated badly as PotUS?   How does looking like a petulant fool achieve retribution?   Seems to me it just punctuates the claims of his opponents.  

In particular, JR has been claiming Trump unfit for office for four years now.   Trump is making JR's point, is he not?    How is this good for Trump and how is this not horrible for his legacy?

That is why I deem this irrational.

 
 
 
Kavika
8.1.7  Kavika   replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @8.1.5    one week ago

125785702_10208064512606043_4621841549454382362_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=2&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=l7Sv_kC7kcgAX-OpCLd&_nc_ht=scontent-mia3-1.xx&oh=e7665414908809bf32193c7bbddd92cf&oe=5FDCB003

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.6    one week ago
Retribution for being treated badly as PotUS? 

That would be my first guess. I still can't get over all that he accomplished under all that resistance. He was under a cloud for 3 years.


 How does looking like a petulant fool achieve retribution?  

I know what you mean. Who is going to convince him?


Seems to me it just punctuates the claims of his opponents.  

You mean about his disposition. There is some truth to that. I've made the point about the tragic hero here a few times.


In particular, JR has been claiming Trump unfit for office for four years now.   Trump is making JR's point, is he not?   

No. JR can't distinguish tweets from policy & actions. Even if I were a rabid progressive, as soon as I get that vaccine, I'll be grateful to Trump. (It can't come fast enough for me)


How is this good for Trump and how is this not horrible for his legacy?

Do you recall the story of Gen Patton slapping the soldier suffering from battle fatigue/whatever?  He was by far the most effective field commander the allies had. When he was dead and gone, I think some said thank God we had him & thank God he's gone.

That will be Trump's legacy IMO.

 
 
 
Gordy327
8.1.9  Gordy327  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.4    one week ago

Since when is retribution or payback rational? Especially when it disrupts an otherwise simple process and doesn't do anything to serve the American people. It's not just undignified and irrational, it's petty and vindictive. If Trump had a horrendous tenure as president,  perhaps it's because he was a horrendous president. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
8.1.10  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Gordy327 @8.1.9    one week ago
when is retribution or payback rational?

When you're a poorly educated petulant white supremacist fearing the influence of your conservative white Christian culture is being eroded.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8.1.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gordy327 @8.1.9    one week ago

But that's not true Gordy. He had a fraudulent investigation against him for 3 years. That's just for starters. Tell me the rational of progressives defending that and all the other obscene things they did?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
8.1.12  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.8    one week ago
some said thank God we had him & thank God he's gone. That will be Trump's legacy IMO.

is that a Stormy Daniels and/or her paid off  Playmates' quote, ahh, no it can't be due to "thank God we had him"

 
 
 
Gordy327
8.1.13  Gordy327  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.11    one week ago

How was the investigation fradulent? A concern was raised and an investigation was conducted. That's proper protocol. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
8.1.14  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.8    one week ago
No. JR can't distinguish tweets from policy & actions.

His actions right now are not those one would attribute to a PotUS.   These petulant, foolish and dishonorable maneuvers support JR's position that he is (as a person) unfit to hold the office of PotUS.

That will be Trump's legacy IMO.

Maybe.   I tend to think not, but you could be correct.

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.15  Dulay  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @8.1.5    one week ago

I seeded an article about the fellow travelers of the source of that meme. 

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.16  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.8    one week ago
That would be my first guess. I still can't get over all that he accomplished under all that resistance.

I still can't get over that some still think that Trump made epic accomplishments. 

He was under a cloud for 3 years.

A cloud of his own making.

I know what you mean. Who is going to convince him?

No one is going to convince Trump that his narcissism isn't good for the country. You and yours have been telling him that for the last 4 years. 

You mean about his disposition.

This isn't about 'his disposition' Vic. This is about Trump proving beyond any doubt that he doesn't give a fuck about this country or the people who live in it. 

I've made the point about the tragic hero here a few times.

It was ridiculous then and even MORE ridiculous now. 

No. JR can't distinguish tweets from policy & actions.

Well hell Vic, JR isn't alone. There is a LONG list of people that Trump has fired via tweet and in there case there wasn't one iota of difference between Trump's tweets and his policies and actions. 

Even if I were a rabid progressive, as soon as I get that vaccine, I'll be grateful to Trump. 

Trump did exactly what he has done his whole fucking life, he threw other peoples money [ours] at it. Giving Trump credit for not standing in the way of the development of vaccines is like praising him for breathing and blinking. 

That will be Trump's legacy IMO.

Sure if history forgets that instead of slapping one soldier, Trump slapped ALL our soldiers AND most of our citizens for good measure. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
8.1.17  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Dulay @8.1.16    one week ago

Seed rather a fantastic read

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8.1.18  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.14    one week ago
His actions right now are not those one would attribute to a PotUS.   These petulant, foolish and dishonorable maneuvers support JR's position that he is (as a person) unfit to hold the office of PotUS.

Fitness for office involves a lot more than tone. I would counter that Joe Biden is unfit based on his cognitive abilities.

 
 
 
Gordy327
8.1.19  Gordy327  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.18    one week ago

Has Mr. Biden been medically or psychologically evaluated for cognitive disfunction? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
8.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.18    one week ago
Fitness for office involves a lot more than tone.

I have no knowledge of any other PotUS or candidate who behaved like a petulant fool rather than concede a demonstrably lost election.   Trump stands out (and not in a good way).

I would counter that Joe Biden is unfit based on his cognitive abilities.

One cannot counter a fact by deflecting to another person.  

Biden is far from what I would seek for PotUS but he is the president elect and will soon be the PotUS.   You are likely stating your opinion that Biden is not sharp enough to perform the job of PotUS.   I certainly understand why you would feel that way but I think we should give the president-elect a chance to serve as PotUS before making a call of unfitness. 

In the meantime, the current PotUS is behaving like a spoiled child who is angry that he has been denied a cookie.   He is engaging in pointless lawsuits and, possibly, behind the scenes attempts to manipulate our system to his advantage.   He is a contemporary example of the quintessential sore loser playing out on the world stage and further embarrassing the United States of America.    This latest incident adds to his public behavior over the past four years and is consistent with same. 

As noted, Trump is making JR's point that he is unfit for office.   In this case, he is unfit due to the lowest level of unpresidential behavior I have observed in my lifetime.

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.21  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1.18    one week ago
I would counter that Joe Biden is unfit based on his cognitive abilities.

That posit will and has failed in connection to Biden and been proven beyond any reasonable doubt in connection to Trump. 

Hell, y'all can't even get him to understand and acknowledge the concept of simple MATH. 

 
 
 
Dulay
8.1.22  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @8.1.20    one week ago
I certainly understand why you would feel that way but I think we should give the president-elect a chance to serve as PotUS before making a call of unfitness. 

One qualification that Trump has never had and that Biden has already exhibited, is empathy for the people he has been elected to protect. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
8.1.23  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @8.1.22    one week ago

Trump cares about Trump.   Next he cares about loyal (i.e. sycophantic) family members.   After that, I doubt that he gives a shit.

IMO, of course.

 
 
 
bugsy
9  bugsy    one week ago

If Biden actually makes it to the White House, it is going to be fun blaming everything wrong (and there will probably be a lot with a socialist VP) on Biden starting January 20 and giving zero credit for anything going right (probably not much of that anyway).

Starting January 20th, every COVID death will be Biden's fault.

Just using liberal logic here.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
9.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  bugsy @9    one week ago
Starting January 20th, every COVID death will be Biden's fault.

I hear ya, but before then the vaccine will be out (for some of us) and we really won't be hearing Biden getting the same medicine he dished out. Today I heard somebody say on a left wing cable news station that Trump was right about the "warp speed" initiative.  I think we'll be hearing more of the Trump was right comments now that he's finally been defeated.

 
 
 
TᵢG
9.2  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @9    one week ago
… it is going to be fun blaming everything wrong (and there will probably be a lot with a socialist VP) on Biden …

Why do so many people treat politics like a team sport?  

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.2.1  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @9.2    one week ago
Why do so many people treat politics like a team sport?  

I think politics has taken on an "us vs. them" mentality in recent years. It's become more about winning an election than doing what is actually necessary or best for the American people.

 
 
 
bugsy
9.2.2  bugsy  replied to  Gordy327 @9.2.1    one week ago

With this I agree. The problem is for the past 4 years, the left forever attacked Trump for everything, true or not (mostly untrue) with zero proof or anonymous sources that, for some reason, never wanted to come forward. The media gladly got on the attack train and tried to change public opinion against Trump, This was orchestrated to get the public behind impeach and remove.

Unfortunately for the left and the media (the same), their tactics failed. Americans are onto them more than ever.

I don;t advocate attacking Biden for everything, but I sympathize with those that will.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
9.2.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  bugsy @9.2.2    6 days ago
With this I agree. The problem is for the past 4 years, the left forever attacked Trump for everything, true or not (mostly untrue) with zero proof or anonymous sources that, for some reason, never wanted to come forward.

If you change that to the last 25 years, and both the left and the right then I will agree with you. But by singling out only "the left" you are just showing that you will happily engage in that which you are trying to speak out against. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.2.4  Gordy327  replied to  bugsy @9.2.2    5 days ago

Both sides of the political spectrum have engaged in the same tactic for years. The last 4 years is nothing new. But pretending one side is worse than the other or is less to blame as it were is just being disingenuous.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

MUVA
Bob Nelson


43 visitors