Fact check: True. The fraudsters are disputing it!
No one winning cleanly would have an issue with a recount/audit as it would only cement their win and completely shut down the losing side's base.
I bet there was tons of fraud here in TX, Beto was their test run. His numbers made no sense when compared to how people voted in the governor's race on the same ballot.
And still lost!
FLUCK AROUND AND FIND OUT, DEMS!!!!
Also acceptable!
We will win them when major fraud is proven
Fixed that for you!
My anonymous sources have confirmed it!
If fake news can call Biden the winner, then I can call Trump the winner!
In 1984, Orwell writes:
In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable – what then?
George Orwell used this concept before publishing 1984. During his career at the BBC, he became familiar with the methods of Nazi propaganda. In an essay published in 1943, Orwell wrote:
Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as "the truth" exists. ... The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, "It never happened" – well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five – well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs.
I know this idea is too crazy to be true, but I think it would be hilarious if the Trump campaign covertly printed illegitimate ballots knowing the Dems would not be able to resist filling them out and submitting them.
If these states can't appoint electors in December, then no one will be able to get 270 electoral votes. Scotus will then have to ask the house to choose a president. Each state will choose one of their representatives as delegate to vote.
In theory, Trump wins in this scenario because 27 states have a republican majority of representatives.
Stick to positives, bro.
Not if they shredded and burned them before counting them
There really is no way of knowing, as he would campaign completely differently under different rules. But it would be interesting to calculate out based on how each district votes.
All this evidence of USPS backdating ballots could end up getting ALL mail ballots in those states invalidated, because there will be no way to separate the legit ones from the late ones.
Their desperation is horrific. Trump must be REALLY close to truly exposing the swamp, ruining their rackets, and putting people behind bars. Much much closer than we think.
While we're at it, let's repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments and separate the individual from the federal government even further.
Amen to that!
If the federal gov wants tax money, divide the federal budget up by congressional representation and send a bill to the state legislatures. Let them figure out how to come up with it. Combine this with a new balanced budget amendment and we've solved the deficit problem and a lot of corruption as well.
And it's obvious senators shouldn't be elected by popular vote, because they do not represent the population -- the house reps represent the population! The senators represent the state governments and should be appointed by the state governments! Want say in who your senators are? Participate in local politics!
I like this way better tbh, it seems much more compatible with a republic.
Instead of having a presidential popular vote shit show every 4 years, have the people elect their state legislature reps and then the state legislatures appoint the electors. No need to even put potus on the ballots.
It seems like the electors would end up better representing the overall state this way, much in the same way that the electoral college better represents the overall country.
lmao 12 more years!
They classify themselves a PLATFORM, for their own legal protection. Everyone should get equal access to post content to a PLATFORM without censorship, that's the whole concept of a platform (obvious exception being illegal content).
If YT wants to editorialize and choose what content they allow, then they should classify themselves as a publisher.
Indeed. After a bit of searching I found some commentary on the subject:
When Congress added that phrase to the oath of office in 1861, they were responding to an ongoing rebellion by the Southern states.
Most Constitutional scholars would side with Berkeley law professor Orin Kerr: “The oath is probably best understood ... in its historical context as a promise to oppose political reforms outside the Constitution. You have to stay loyal to the government that is based on the Constitution, and you can’t support a rebellion or overthrow of that government.”
Outside another literal civil war, the concept of a domestic enemy is not only useless but dangerous. Even small-scale treason is simply a criminal act, for which citizens are entitled to due process and other protections under our Constitution. Absent a declaration of war, the designation of any domestic group as an “enemy” not subject to these rights would be an unconstitutional bill of attainder [an item of legislation, prohibited by the US Constitution, that inflicts the forfeiture civil rights without judicial process].
But I think to require a formal "declaration" of war is not really applicable in the modern day. We live in an era where terrorist groups fight on behalf of governments and the world super-powers fight through economic policy and indoctrination.
Very interesting stuff to think about.
The fraud is definitely more rampant in smaller elections with less media attention
Sometimes I'll just add on, "Plus he was KILLING IT with the economy before the covid lockdowns, so I'd like to get back to that."
As a Romney-hating Mormon Texan, let me say there are PLENTY of reasons to criticize him without using his religion as a means to attack his character. I see this all the time on this site, too.
You can believe the religion is crazy as much as you want; that's your freedom of speech/religion and I will die for your right to believe that. But why talk down about such a large conservative voting block? They pretty much guarantee the electoral votes of Utah and Idaho, and probably have a good amount of influence in Arizona and Nevada.
Mormons, like pretty much most religious groups, are pretty much universally viewed as stand up citizens with strong conservative values and are a strong voting block for Republicans. I caution that this may not always be the case, as I've seen lots of Utah millennials favoring Bernie on social media during these last two election cycles, which is just insane to me.