Maybe I'm missing something here. This is a bit disappointing. I was all hyped up expecting some grand revelation and it's just Jack saying stuff everybody already knows.
I really hope for solid evidence as well. "This dude who died 3 years ago voted on that Tuesday." alone as one instance isn't going to get you anywhere.
With my 'fraud" comment, I was criticizing some of the people who had already responded who were talking about cheating, not the OP. (and also the folks in other threads who are quick to jump right to "fraud!")
Can you imagine just how many people are gonna show up to these things considering they are the last ones they might ever be able to go to? It's probably gonna be massive turnout.
I hope so. I just don't want people to put all their hopes in a recount changing anything by itself. (unless the Dems really are morons who suck at cheating)
Unless they blatantly changed numbers in their tally, what use is a recount going to do?
They'll just count the same sham ballots that they already got in and we'll end up with the same.(or very similar) numbers. What we need is an audit.
That tweet made it sound like they recounted ballots and got a different number. That news piece says that those ballots are having to be duplicated and entered into their vote count.
Unless they blatantly tinkered with those ballots so they wouldn't scan, there's no fraud in this specific instance.
It would really help things a bit if people actually investigated new stories before immediately screaming "more fraud" at the top of their lungs.
How do you prove which ballots had info filled out? I'm sure they are all mixed in now. Maybe you could do a handwriting check or something I guess.
I hope it true, but this is the same guy who has been going around for months acting like the final nail in Joe Biden's coffin was imminent.
We've been hearing about supposed investigations and some laptop that's totally gonna finish off Joe Biden. So far, nothing. I sure hope Rudy has some actual evidence to go along with his statements.
This is great and all, but I'd much more enthused about it if it were actually citing post-election findings and not something from a September study.
Well said Mr. Woods. We might not "win" in the end, but we're not going anywhere and we will remember what they did to us.
Infowars? Nice, I'm sure that'll fill a ton of people with confidence in his story.
it's an entertaining tale though, I'll give him that. Heck, I even wish it were true.
She hadn't read in on all the details at that point. It was smart for her to recuse herself. Not doing so without all the facts before her would have only have called her neutrality into question.
Who in their right mind thinks this stuff is legal? They aren't supposed to even be allowed to modify anything on a ballot.
How in the world is this fair? There's pretty much no way to identify those ballots. What do you do, throw all of them out? How is that fair to everybody else who isn't a complete moron and did their ballot correctly?
As far as the average person is concerned, we did lose. Overturning that notion is an uphill battle.
Since it seems like there's no hope of a comeback in PA or GA, legal wins are all we have left to rely on.
It's not being a debbie downer to see how things might not go our way, it's realism. There's no reason to give up hope though.
No matter what happens though, I hope AZ flips red in the end just so everybody can see what a shitty network Fox News is.
Well, A good chunk of them could totally go the opposite way if they wanted to. There's like 18 states or so that have no law restricting faithless electors. Only part of states that do have the law have one that lets them replace somebody.
I think I read somewhere that the fine is pretty much a slap on the wrist in many places. (or at least it used to be) If so, somebody who felt strongly enough about it would probably gladly pay the fine.
The guys on the Charlie Kirk show were talking about her yesterday. One guy felt that Libertarian candidates mainly take votes from Republicans and that they had to make sure to get a Green Party candidate on future ballots to counterbalance by taking votes from Democrats.
Like 2/3 of the states have laws that try to keep them from doing that. Either it's the threat of a fine or their law lets them directly replace somebody who tries it.
Earlier in the year, the Supreme Court said that those laws were legal.
The tech most definitely exists. The Department of Homeland Security put out a whole manual I think on using the tech to prevent voter fraud.
Whether they actually used it this election, well, we have no clue.
Nah, he's got himself insulated very well. Nobody would dare touch him because it would put that commie Kamala in the Oval Office.
It was too late at night for ole sleepy Joe. He probably recorded it earlier in the day.
These people are delusional. We've told them over and over again that you actually have to commit a crime to be arrested. If you can't even manage to justify the arrest part, how the heck do they get to "prison"?
This could flat out wreck Biden in Pennsylvania. All week long, we've heard just how heavily in favor of Biden the mail-ins have been. It's even a higher percentage that most anywhere else in the country.
If they have to toss a certain part of them, Trump gets Pennsylvania probably. If they have to dump all of them because of problems, Trump gets a crushing victory there I think.
The sure love using the playbook of the wretched groups they claim to despise.
Good thing the majority of country music fans aren't conservative white people huh Garth? Oh, whoops.