There may have been massive voter fraud in Virginia

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nepperhan said:
his team has paid for a recount, but only in two counties (Milwaukee and Dane) where there are numerous black folks.
Click to expand...
Before you go too far into this topic, African Americans make up 6.7% of Wisconsin, 5.5% of Dane county and 27.6% of Milwaukee.
 
Cathoholic said:
When you have this level of “irregularities” a close examination needs to be done.
Click to expand...
There you go again. “This level”? You know, this presidential election has had fewer irregularities than previous ones. Conservatives are just bootstrapping and saying ‘there’s something wrong here in River City’. Wishing doesn’t make it so.
 
Cathoholic said:
Why are you bringing race into a recount?
Click to expand...
How many black folks are way north in Wisconsin in Door County? The two WI counties involved are the only ones with sizable numbers of black folks. WI is 6.7% black but Milwaukee County is 27.2% black. Think on that.

“Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, a Democrat, called the recount “an attack on cities, on minorities, on places that have historically voted Democratic. Don’t let anyone fool you that this is about irregularities.””

You know what should be said when some Republican board of canvassers members would not certify the results in the city of Detroit (79% black) but would certify the results in Livonia (96% white) even though there was a higher percentage of precinct irregularities in Livonia. Some commentator mentioned the obvious.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan . . .
How many black folks are way north in Wisconsin in Door County?
Click to expand...
But that does not explain the reason for the Trump campaign asking for recounts in Madison and Milwaukee.

It just assumes that BECAUSE of the higher black population there, the recounts are wanted there.
But that is just your assumption so far.

Madison has had a history that I can recall with voter fraud. Maybe this is WHY.

Madison is a leftist bastion. Maybe this is WHY.

Perhaps Trump’s people told him about issues in Madison. Maybe this is WHY.

Maybe it is because of the concentrated numbers. Maybe this is WHY.

But your point about “black folks” doesn’t tell me anything about Trump’s campaign.

WHY are you dragging race into the discussion?
 
Last edited:
TMC . . .
I would point out that they have had their “day in court” in multiple cases and courts, with no evidence presented and no wins to date.
Click to expand...
I would point out that "courts can be activists”.

We just got done hearing weeks of the Democrat guys telling us this
(were the Democrats wrong in principle?)
with their freight expressed over the Amy Coney Barrett nomination process and confirmation.

“Having your day in court” doesn’t necessarily show much.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
“Having your day in court” doesn’t necessarily show much.
Click to expand...
Hmm, goalposts now sliding waaaay back.

So the state secretaries of state, most of whom are Republicans are in on the conspiracy, along with the county election officials, and the thousands of election workers, and the poll watchers. And now, the courts and the judges are in on it. At some point, every American will have to be part of the “conspiracy” for these theories to make sense.

If the courts are not the right forum to adjudicate the election, how to you propose to proceed? Maybe we should just go with the guy that was voted for by, you know, the voters.
 
TMC said:
If the courts are not the right forum to adjudicate the election, how to you propose to proceed? Maybe we should just go with the guy that was voted for by, you know, the voters.
Click to expand...
Accompany every voter to the machines, one by one. 😉 Or, better yet, spare them the effort of going to the voting places, and (out of the kindness of our heart) we can do the chores ourselves, instead of them? How about just giving a proxy to Trump, so he can make the decision for us… as any good autocrat would do. It will be so very easy.
 
Zake said:
After all, we need a little respite from this election nightmare. It cannot end soon enough.
Click to expand...
I remember back when I had the anticipation of relief that I would wake up on November 4th and it would all be o er. Here we are, two weeks later…
 
ThinkingSapien said:
I remember back when I had the anticipation of relief that I would wake up on November 4th and it would all be o er. Here we are, two weeks later…
Click to expand...
Well, you know, it ain’t over until the FAT LADY SINGS! Never has that phrase been more appropriate than this time. . . .
 
Last edited:
So I will be hearing about it until I go deaf or take the long nap.

Trump once said something to the effect that “there will be so much winning you will get tired of all the winning.” I feel like if one changes “win” to “whine” he’d be spot on.
 
Last edited:
Tmc . . .
the poll watchers
Click to expand...
Ya mean the Republican poll “watchers” that were kicked out?

Or the Republican poll “watchers” that were never allowed in?

Or how about the Republican poll watchers that the democrats covered the window up for preventing them from observing.

Or the Republican poll watchers that had a court order to get back in, and the democrats still would not let them back in without consequences?

All the above?

Which “poll watchers” are you insisting were treated fair?

Are the videos and photos of the democrats covering up the windows “conspiracy theories” too.

And when there is no evidence like three years of a FAKE Russian collusion hoax, NOT a conspiracy theory? (While Project Veritas videos show numerous vote fraud - refused to be classified as “fraud” for legalistic reasons - show first hand evidence of voter fraud.)

The left could not win.

Despite having Fakebook do everyting it could to steal an election, Twitter and Google too, new last-second “laws” getting felons OKed to vote in many states, relaxing voter verification without legislative action, etc. etc. the left still needed to cheat to “win”.

And the poll watchers were not allowed.

Those “poll watchers” tmc?
 
The “poll watchers” issue was litigated in both state and federal court - and the courts found nothing that would overturn even a single vote. I know that your position is that the court’s opinions on these things don’t matter (and apparently neither do the votes actually cast). But at some point don’t the law or the facts matter?

I am reminded of that old saw - when you have the facts argue facts, when you have the law argue the law, when you have neither - just argue. We are clearly in the “just argue” phase of this process.
 
TMC said:
But at some point don’t the law or the facts matter?
Click to expand...
No.

I’m not a sociologist, but right about now I’ve wanted to be one more than ever. Over the past couple of decades I have noticed a flowering of media personality worship. Some of the most successful of these people have built online followings so loyal, that they can be described as cult like. Trump is one, but there are others.

Elon Musk is a good example. His business is little more than getting followers to invest billions in his half baked ideas (some of which make less than no sense, like Neurolink, or are actually far worse versions of things we already have, like his Las Vegas tunnel). Like Trump, his has essentially built an alternate online reality for his followers. They will go to war for him (if I posted this on Twitter, I would be immediately attacked), and they will volunteer to work for his for-profit companies “for the greater good.”

All of this is to say, that I think these online cults have formed to fill a vacuum that our social media heavy society has left us with. We may be more connected than ever before, but those connections are more superficial than ever. To feel important, so many of us need these fake online connections. So many of us want to be connected to Elon Musk, or Donald Trump, or Kim Kardashian, and social media gives us the ability to fake it.
 
Last edited:
I am saddened by the fact that you are probably correct. We have entered into a post-factual world, which is troubling.
 
TMC said:
We have entered into a post-factual world, which is troubling.
Click to expand...
If it makes you feel better, there isn’t much new here except the scale. Elon Musk can gather millions of more followers than William Miller ever could.

One of the best books I’ve ever read, The Destructive War by (sadly the recently deceased) Charles Royster, has a chapter in it in which he details all of the different stories about the death of Stonewall Jackson. He shows how everyone who was present gave a slightly different account (to the point that no two versions even agree on who was there), and that this was because just being near him at his death was fundamentally important to Americans. Even Northerners got in on the party. It was the 19th century equivalent to being retweeted by Elon Musk!
 
If I can tentatively make a constitutional suggestion to my American friends: perhaps it is unwise to leave in office for more than two months a leader who has been rejected by the people.
 
Last edited:
PickyPicky said:
If I can tentatively make a constitutional suggestion to my American friends: perhaps it is unwise to leave in office for more than two months a leader who has been rejected by the people.
Click to expand...
Point taken, but to be fair, it wasn’t a problem for the first 230 years or so. Most Presidents have viewed it as necessary turnover time.
 
I believe that the role of a president, as head of the executive branch of government, is significantly different than a prime minister. There is much more overhead involved.

The president has not been rejected by the people. If anything, his contract has not been renewed, which is different than being fired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top