Page Juan and popcorn ready.

Orchestrating the fraud undetected in every district in the US would be impossible.

On the other hand, 5 heavily blue population centers in a single major counting location in swing states....

Something tells me you're not really interested in answers as much as trying to justify your young naive perspective on politics.

1) If you cheat ALL the time, you'll either slip up or people will catch on. This is already occurring.

2) Sadly it's not a surprise that ignorant freeloaders vote for people who give them things. That doesn't mean they can't be outnumbered. If you really think Biden got 81,000,000 votes, then lolololol

the extent to which people believe 2020 was "stolen" varies from person to person

some believe the dems took advantage of covid to illegitimately change voting laws in favor of dems (arguably true)

some believe covid was specifically created and maliciously released to accomplish that (looney bin conspiracy)

some believe the dems specifically targeted high population areas in swing states to manufacture votes to tip the scales (little to no evidence for this but i suppose i can understand how they arrive at that)

some believe the dems manufactured millions of fake votes without getting caught (lol)

it's not one size fits all

Just dropping in a reminder that the real debate on the 2020 election should be the election clause and whether or not state legislatures have the sole authority to determine their elections... and the Supreme Court absolutely punted on making a decision which led to the majority of election debates we have to deal with now...


It all could have been so much simpler...

AggieCo2023 said:

---

1. If the Democratic Party is so powerful and rife with corruption to the point they were able to "create" 81 million votes, why do they only use this power on selective occasions. Why did they elect to lose house seats in 2020, keep a tie in the senate, and lose most state wide elections such as Governors. If they're able to defraud their way to victory with ease why not do it more often?

---

They didn't create 81 million votes. They fabricated a few tens of thousands of votes in the right places.

They were so infested with rabid TDS, they had complete tunnel vision focused on the presidential race.

The thread title alone is enough to know the OP is not serious about a discussion regarding the 2020 election.

Toss in his post about Trump selling nuclear secrets to the Saudis and its obvious what the real intention is.

Would like to answer this one because its not even about all the specifics the legal eagle threads talk about but has an answer that can get your thread started.

Quote:

---

1. If the Democratic Party is so powerful and rife with corruption to the point they were able to "create" 81 million votes, why do they only use this power on selective occasions. Why did they elect to lose house seats in 2020, keep a tie in the senate, and lose most state wide elections such as Governors. If they're able to defraud their way to victory with ease why not do it more often?

---

One of the rules of this kind of thing for centuries is you don't overplay it. It takes finesse. You have to choose your moments. Your question is explained by the increasingly favored `Uniparty' or `swamp' interpretation. They don't need to interfere this way often, because only rarely does the people's choice get past the barrier of elevating go-along candidates that the MSM controls. Quite significantly, it only happens in `cast out' elections -- Reagan's rebuking Carter's malaise in 1980, Trump's rebuking the Bush-Obama fiasco of the 21st C.

Another word for it is since most are in the `the club' --it doesn't really matter hugely which one wins so they don't have to intervene further.

But most of the time, you can barely tell the admins apart --- so they don't need to meddle as much.

This specifically to your question: "Why not do it more often?"

Notice in 2020 they did feel the need to complete Schumer's theft of the Senate (which no one wanted) so the GA election looks shady in a way most of the Senatorial ones (with the big exception of MI) don't.

Old McDonald said:

---

the extent to which people believe 2020 was "stolen" varies from person to person

some believe the dems took advantage of covid to illegitimately change voting laws in favor of dems (arguably true)

some believe covid was specifically created and maliciously released to accomplish that (looney bin conspiracy)

some believe the dems specifically targeted high population areas in swing states to manufacture votes to tip the scales (little to no evidence for this but i suppose i can understand how they arrive at that)

some believe the dems manufactured millions of fake votes without getting caught (lol)

it's not one size fits all

---

Have you seen 2000 Mules?

The idiotic response to weakass COVID allowed different levels of fraud, where it was needed. Along with Dominion's big assist.

Funnily, I didn't even vote. I'm in Texas and knew Trump was a lock, even though I'd have rather had a conservative to choose, instead. But I traveled the country a lot and saw the overwhelming support for Trump. That, along with all of the weird last second shenanigans.....only a tard thinks the election was even remotely fraudless.

As soon as you explain these...

Rapier108 said:

---

The thread title alone is enough to know the OP is not serious about a discussion regarding the 2020 election.

Toss in his post about Trump selling nuclear secrets to the Saudis and its obvious what the real intention is.

---

I believe this is the kid that is going to be teaching AP government yet has no clue how our government actually works. Ignoring his opinions.

1) The "81 Million" is overblown in regards to election fraud. The difference in the election came down to less than 40,000 votes in a couple of states/districts.

Not an election denier, but here is my take on it.

I opposed mass mail in voting back in March when the Covid stuff was kicking off and it was first being floated. I said back then that it would obfuscate the certification of ballots, cause major delays in counting, and you would have the losers claiming that the election was stolen from them. Many Republican politicians said this too.

The left had it passed anyway in many states by setting up strawman that republicans wanted to kill grandma by forcing her to go to a physical ballot box.

November rolls around, everything the Republican politicians predicted came true. Took days to certify, there were massive shenanigans going on with collecting ballots, and you had people on the right claiming they were screwed.

Whether or not you believe the election was stolen, I think everyone can get behind the idea that the way we conducted the last election was absolutely terrible, and needs to be streamlined. We shouldn't have to wait almost a week to find out who won. We should have rules that both sides can agree to.

I don't think you even have to eliminate mail in voting. You can still have it, but if it's not turned in by Election Day, then it's not valid. It should be restricted to only those who physically can't make it to a ballot box, for security reasons. If more polling places need to be set up, that should be allowed. Early voting should be encouraged and talked about more. If your state doesn't allow for early voting, they should start considering it. And no more accidentally finding boxes you didn't know you have. Whatever your physical inventory says you have when polling closes, that is what gets counted.

Just doing the things above would drastically help alleviate concerns from both sides, and something I think that even the most hardcore lefties and righties could agree too.

AggieCo2023 said:

---

1. If the Democratic Party is so powerful and rife with corruption to the point they were able to "create" 81 million votes, why do they only use this power on selective occasions. Why did they elect to lose house seats in 2020, keep a tie in the senate, and lose most state wide elections such as Governors. If they're able to defraud their way to victory with ease why not do it more often?

---

They aren't so powerful. They did this because they had to create top ballot votes as they could. If you're having to fill out 100s of ballots, it goes faster to just check one name rather than 100s down the ballot. This makes cheating more likely not less that we only saw that number for president and not for as many dems down the ballot.

Also harder to replicate this in local elections, because people like me, poll watch and know what to look for from friends and neighbors. Locally we have the data and know roughly what to expect. Nationally and statewide when you throw out procedures and the rules, there is very little you can do to track it, and even if you did find evidence of tom-****ery, as we found out in 2020, there is no way to sue for damages or make it right afterwards.

Quote:

---

2. I also hear many people on here complain on how all the institutions are overrun with liberals from the schools to the colleges to Big Business to the government. Y'all say the highly populated cities are packed with ignorant liberals. My question is if you believe there are so many liberals in every position of power and in the major cities why would it be a surprise that Democrats get a lot of votes for the Presidency?

---

Unable to give you a good response to this because you aren't framing the opposition argument correctly. The premise is obscure and faulty. This leads me to think you don't want a real answer and just think of yourself as all-knowing and that you have it all figured out.

Democrats do get "a lot" of votes. In the case of the last election though they got about 32-40% more than their historical "lots of votes". Hope that helps.

81 million? Impossible to fake.

A couple hundred thousand 'fake' votes spread over 5 or 6 key urban environments? Plausible.

"Assisting" infirm, undecided, and harvesting voter IDs to 'help' folks "mail in" vote without telling them who their ballots will be cast for across potentially millions of ballots across the nation? Documented and proven.

Hillary's response to her losing the presidential election, and the campaigning effort of Hillary and Biden tell most everything they need to know. The empty halls and "covid cirlces" to make it appear that the events were not so empty is very telling.

This wasn't just a few thousand votes here and there.

Was it Wisconsin where 110 or 112k votes turned up at 5am the next morning and 100% of them were for Biden?

If you can watch 2000 mules and seriously believe the election was secure, may God have mercy on your soul.

AggieCo2023 said:

---

No opinions were given. Simply asking questions, I've appreciated the answers even If I may personally disagree

---

Do some research on David Plouffe's plan to focus on swing states, giving that plan to his buddy and former boss, Zuckerberg, Zuckerberg "finding" a very small and obscure organization (budget before Zuck was about a million a year) CTCL, Center for Tech and Civic Life and gave them over 300 million dollars to distribute to those identified targets . CTCL used "grants" of tens of millions with a lot of strings attached, including claw back provisions if those election officials did not spend the money exactly how CTCL specified.

In some locations, that included the number of drop boxes and even locations. Helpful information for developing their mule operation, no?

1. mail in ballots take longer to count and tabulate than in-person ballots
2. urban districts with high populations take longer to count and report mail ballots because of the sheer volume relative to other districts
3. due to partisan messaging, mail in ballots were disproportionately cast by people voting for democrats, and in-person disproportionately for republicans
4. republican state legislatures in MI and WI made it so mail ballots could not be counted until election day, thereby artificially making it so mail ballot tabulations would lag behind day-of in person ballots (and creating the impression of an early trump lead)
5. on election day, red districts with majority in-person and comparatively few ballots generally get reported faster. large urban districts with lots of mail ballots cast for democrats take longer to tabulate, then when they get reported it looks like a big blue jump because 1) there are a lot of votes in these districts and 2) they break overwhelmingly for dems

100% for a specific candidate.


Totally plausible

If you believe anything any liberal has to say on this, you are a fool. And the media is liberal.

If this had been in the opposite direction, do you believe the federal government would have applied all its resources to investigate?

AggieCo2023 said:

---

Why did they elect to lose house seats in 2020, keep a tie in the senate, and lose most state wide elections such as Governors. If they're able to defraud their way to victory with ease why not do it more often?

---

This question has been turned around, but perhaps you missed it: how could Trump lose under these conditions? The idea that he was unpopular doesn't wash. Was he only unpopular in certain areas? Just the areas where fraud happened to have occurred? He wasn't unpopular in Florida. Not in Ohio. Not in the other states he won. It was just the selective places where democrat machinery just happened to be in control.

The whole "Republicans underestimate just how much Trump is hated" always was and is stupid.

Incidentally, what happened to all the voter fraud complaints and slow ballot count issues in Florida, specifically Broward County? They were supposedly happening in elections between 2000 and 2016. You heard about them constantly. Then, by 2020, nothing. No issues anymore? Wow, I guess things got cleaned up fast. What happened was Desantis replaced the people in charge and they could no longer cheat, hold back counts to favor democrats. Thus, Florida was no longer ground zero of ballot county and they had to go elsewhere.

Hopefully, the same things will happen in both Georgia and Arizona this next cycle.

Old McDonald said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

100% for a specific candidate.


Totally plausible

---

citation needed

---

Look up at those graphs..

AggieCo2023 said:

---

I know most of you strongly disagree with me but I'm actually curious and wanted y'all's opinion.

1. If the Democratic Party is so powerful and rife with corruption to the point they were able to "create" 81 million votes

---

Stopped reading right here. No sane person and not even most of the conspiracy whack jobs are saying it was 81 million. That goes back to the propaganda. But that is what you focused on so we know what you are trying to do with your "curiosity".

Election laws were illegally changed with regards to absentee ballots in a number of states. The courts should have ruled on this before the election. This is not in dispute.