The entire MSM has changed their "Russia Russia Russia" tune from 2016 and are now saying that voter fraud is a myth and that you should accept the results. There's a reason for this.
During the 1982 midterms, the Democrats sued the Republicans over allegations of minority voter suppression in New Jersey. One of the concessions the GOP made for losing was that they would not challenge any election results on the grounds of ballot security.
All those stories of Dem fraud? Dead voters, people voting twice, people getting bussed in, ballot destruction. These are basically memes at this point because they're so well known and widespread. That's because the Democrats have had the legal greenlight to lie, cheat, and steal, and the GOP hasn't been able to do a damn thing about it for almost 40 years.
That's a long time to convince a nation your crimes don't exist, especially when justice has never been delivered. That ends now. The consent decree expired in 2018, which means that this is the first presidential election since Jimmy fucking Carter was in office that Republicans have had the full power of the law and courts on their side to challenge voter fraud.
You think Trump was gonna walk away after being given that power? If you thought it was a coincidence he ran in 2016, you don't understand how many dimensions this chess board has.
Everyone is talking about the Breakfast Club interview Biden gave yesterday where he made the infamous "You ain't black" comments. However, the magnitude of this gaffe actually overshadowed another gaffe that I think better represents why Biden is such a poor candidate, even if he wasn't suffering from dementia.
After the "you ain't black" comment, Biden follows up with "Look at my record man! I extended the voting racks 25 years!" Through his slurred speech, he was referring to the Voting Rights Re-authorization and Amendments Act of 2006. Read here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/9
Yes, this law did extend the 1965 Voting Rights Act for 25 years, and yes Biden did vote for that extension. What he will never say though is that this law passed with unanimous approval, (98-0) as it should have in my opinion. Read here: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00212
Biden acts like voting for this was some heroic act of solidarity with the black community, when in reality it would have been political suicide to vote against it. The bill originated in the House and passed with no amendments in the Senate, meaning that Biden had ZERO involvement with this bill other than his vote.
And that leads to why I think Biden is such a weak candidate. We can attack him for his mental deterioration, his racism, and his sexual misconduct, but even if none of that was true, he would still be a bad politician. He brags and brags about his political record, but I bet if you actually looked through it, it would be the most boring, milquetoast record imaginable. There wouldn't be one defiant vote where he stood up for what he believed. Everything would be straight down party lines exactly how the Dem leadership wanted him to vote. This is speculation on my part, but if anyone wants a homework assignment for the weekend, here's your opportunity!
Long-time lurker, first-time poster here on .win. Bit of a rant, and I'm probably preaching to the choir, but bare with me.
Disinformation and lies get published daily, so it's important for everyone to be able sniff out fake news. Luckily, most all of us here have had plenty of experience building those skills. However, years of "tick-tocks" and "it's happening's" made me realize it's no longer enough just to believe news articles that I agree with and disregard the ones that I don't. Hell, it's not even enough just to browse this forum (but it is a good starting point.). Staying informed means putting in the leg work to read and interpret primary sources, official documents, numbers, and statistics.
When a bombshell hits, don't let some talking head tell you how to think about it. Read the documents and think for yourself. Then come back to the commentary and compare. Did you come to the same conclusion? If not, why not? If the article links to their sources, all the better. If they don't, find the sources first. If you can't find any corroboration, the article probably isn't worth reading. A poll means nothing if you can't see their methodology and sampling data. I need named sources and hard facts if I want to form opinions.
If you find a voice that you agree with, trust but verify. Do I trust this source because they're a well-established, credible voice in the community, do they have solid data/evidence, or do I trust this source because I want to believe the content some nutter is posting to their no-name blog? Never be so naive to think that there aren't grifters out there preying on impressionable conservatives too.
I hope this reads like one man's reflection on how his consumption of news media has changed and not like some lecture. I hope it inspires you all to dig deeper, read more, and ask questions. It'll feel like homework, but that's what it takes to be an informed voter and citizen. Good luck Pedes!