Jan 6

[Hughinn]

They did several recounts. They’re built into the system.

On what basis should more recounts have been ordered? On what evidence?

You can’t just order very expensive, time consuming recounts because you don’t like the result.

A recount isn't the same thing as an audit.

Any state legislature should be able to perform an Audit. And audits should be performed anytime a discrepancy is noted. Like for example shutting down counting in the middle of the night, just to start again several hours later with drastic trending changes. Which happened in all six swing states simultaneously.

The DNC tried to sue Arizona to prevent the audit.

Other states face the same situation.

If everything was legitimate, why would the DNC fight the audits, when it would vindicate them?

 

[Hughinn]

There is a point of disagreement. Many people were unsatisfied with the way the recounts were conducted. Why is one party so adamant against performing an open recount with public observers? What's the problem? The winning party should be chomping at the the bit to show how they clearly won.

Exactly. It would put all fears to rest and legitimately prove thier point.

 

[Test_Subject]

A recount isn't the same thing as an audit.

I realize that. Most states have provisions that allow for the triggering of recounts if the winning margin falls under a certain threshold.

The trending changes that you’re referring to after vote counting resumed was due to many states legally mandating that mail-in ballots be counted last. They HAD to count them last, by law.

Mail-in ballots tend to be weighted heavily toward Democrats and that difference was exacerbated by Trump literally telling his supporters not to vote by mail. It should come as no surprise that when they switched to counting mail-in ballots, the proportional number of Democratic votes increased.

 

[Hughinn]

I realize that. Most states have provisions that allow for the triggering of recounts if the winning margin falls under a certain threshold.

The trending changes that you’re referring to after vote counting resumed was due to many states legally mandating that mail-in ballots be counted last. They HAD to count them last, by law.

Mail-in ballots tend to be weighted heavily toward Democrats and that difference was exacerbated by Trump literally telling his supporters not to vote by mail. It should come as no surprise that when they switched to counting mail-in ballots, the proportional number of Democratic votes increased.

I understand that's the story we've all been told.

And thanks for aknowledging that a recount isn't the same thing as an audit.

I don't think any reasonable person at this point is pretending like they know exactly what happened. But like I said in a previous post, that enough lies, irregular actions, deception and deflection happened to make any reasonable person suspicious. Add that to the fact that the democrat party had fanatically fought to prevent states from performing transparent and open audit's and suspicion only deepens.

To be clear, I don't think anyone can be sure one way or The other at this point. And it doesn't make sense for the winners to be fighting the audit's.

Mathematical impossibilities, eyewitness testimony is supposed to trigger investigation and audits. Not be the investigation itself.

I'd also add that everyone knew none of this would see a courtroom until after the election. And what judge is going to throw out thousands of suspicious and unverified ballots because the governor broke the rules. Knowing full well endorsed and politically backed mobs were fully ready to burn down your house.

The threat of violence wasn't implied in this election. It was direct. That in itself is suspicious.

 

[pigeonhed]

Also for anyone wishing to actually help or make a local difference in elections.

 https://www.eac.gov/voters/become-poll-worker

 

[Big_paul]

The foundation of democracy in this country"

Is built on the basic tenets of personal Liberty, responsibility and fair representation.

This will most likely become the the most controversial issue in this country for the next couple decades. Where a person stands most likely depends on his source of information.

The only solution is to convince the one third of the country that currently believes elections are rigged that they are not. Regardless which side one stands concessions will need to be made. Whatever it takes to convince people that they are participating in a free and fair election is what is needed. If that means more restrictions on methods of voting, it is a small price to pay for unity. This political climate can't continue.

 

[Hughinn]

This will most likely become the the most controversial issue in this country for the next couple decades. Where a person stands most likely depends on his source of information.

The only solution is to convince the one third of the country that currently believes elections are rigged that they are not. Regardless which side one stands concessions will need to be made. Whatever it takes to convince people that they are participating in a free and fair election is what is needed. If that means more restrictions on methods of voting, it is a small price to pay for unity. This political climate can't continue.

Exactly on point Paul.
And well stated too.

Smart and honest leadership would understand that.

That's more important than what news you prefer to watch, or which party you support. Openness and transparency would go a long way on the matter.

I think most Americans can handle losing elections. We all have before. But nobody tolerates being cheated well.

 

[Big_paul]

get what you’re saying, but the onus for providing proof lies on the person or people making the claim. That’s the whole basis of “innocent until proven guilty.”

Thanks for answering. From my perspective, you have gone in the wrong direction. I could never support the political left

When the choice is what I believe to be a malignant narcissist, and I mean that in the clinical definition, or the left, I choose the candidate that is least flawed.

I would never have supported the Biden Harris ticket otherwise.

 

[Zerg]

There is a point of disagreement. Many people were unsatisfied with the way the recounts were conducted. Why is one party so adamant against performing an open recount with public observers? What's the problem? The winning party should be chomping at the the bit to show how they clearly won.

Because they stone cold stole that fucker.

Hope every one is enjoying their $5 gas, $35 a pound steaks and the privilege of training their Guatemalan replacement.

 

[Regular Joe]

When the choice is what I believe to be a malignant narcissist, and I mean that in the clinical definition, or the left, I choose the candidate that is least flawed.

I would never have supported the Biden Harris ticket otherwise.

Did you vote for Trump the first election? If so is it just the Jan 6th stuff that turned you or did he do other things as upsetting to you? I'm almost opposite of you, I've been pro union all of my adult life but I grudgingly voted for Trump both times but I also voted for Sanders in both primaries. I was not thrilled with Trump but honestly he did better than I thought he would. Im so sick of the run of the mill politicians, and Biden seems to be the epitome of them, that the ones that buck the system or come from another arena will usually get my vote.

 

[Test_Subject]

Biden seems to be the epitome of them, that the ones that buck the system or come from another arena will usually get my vote.

Trump’s entire administration was a huge dumpster fire and he set US international relations back about ten years, but I will say that he at least didn’t start any wars.

Biden will. Mark my words.

 

[Zerg]

Trump was the first real threat to the DC skim since Ike. Overpowered unaccountable 3 letter agencies, government contracts to keep crack in Jr's pipe. They were all scared.

 

[Regular Joe]

Trump’s entire administration was a huge dumpster fire and he set US international relations back about ten years, but I will say that he at least didn’t start any wars.

Biden will. Mark my words.

Not really sure how we were set back but he did annoy many of the other leaders. The one thing I hopped to get out of him was to stand up to China, he did a little, that has to happen at some point if we want to stay the dominant superpower.

 

[Regular Joe]

Trump was the first real threat to the DC skim since Ike. Overpowered unaccountable 3 letter agencies, government contracts to keep crack in Jr's pipe. They were all scared.

Yes trump came through and saved us, the non-stop surveillance by the 3 letter agencies has stopped, the 9/11 info got declassified and of course he didn't give any favored positions to family because he was above that

 

[Test_Subject]

Not really sure how we were set back but he did annoy many of the other leaders. The one thing I hopped to get out of him was to stand up to China, he did a little, that has to happen at some point if we want to stay the dominant superpower.

The issue with “standing up to China” is that what made them a superpower in the first place was allowing big business to sell out and move manufacturing to China to build their bottom lines at the expense of the middle class in North America.

No political party or candidate is willing to touch that topic because they either personally benefit from the exchange or their owners do.

 

[Test_Subject]

he didn't give any favored positions to family because he was above that

I really hope that you were being sarcastic.

 

[Hughinn]

Trump’s entire administration was a huge dumpster fire and he set US international relations back about ten years, but I will say that he at least didn’t start any wars.

Biden will. Mark my words.

I'm not sure what factual events you base that opinion on test. And I'm curious to know.

"US international relations". Joe Biden was just rebuked by the British Parliament. Do much repairing international relations.

They basically implied they wouldn't be working with us as long as he's in charge.
It seems like you suffer from TDS.

What are you referring to?

Good point with war though. Biden has been quietly moving troops into Syria.

 

[Hughinn]

The issue with “standing up to China” is that what made them a superpower in the first place was allowing big business to sell out and move manufacturing to China to build their bottom lines at the expense of the middle class in North America.

No political party or candidate is willing to touch that topic because they either personally benefit from the exchange or their owners do.

Good point.

George Bush , Clinton Obama all followed that same trend.
It didn't matter what party. They were all on the same page.

 

[Hughinn]

Did you vote for Trump the first election? If so is it just the Jan 6th stuff that turned you or did he do other things as upsetting to you? I'm almost opposite of you, I've been pro union all of my adult life but I grudgingly voted for Trump both times but I also voted for Sanders in both primaries. I was not thrilled with Trump but honestly he did better than I thought he would. Im so sick of the run of the mill politicians, and Biden seems to be the epitome of them, that the ones that buck the system or come from another arena will usually get my vote.

I'm the same way.

But like I said before, the media and corporate elite would've switched sides if it was Tulsi gabbard against mitt Romney. Or Bernie Sanders against George Bush.

We all know that.

I'm like you, I supported Trump because he wasn't in that clique.

 

[Regular Joe]

I really hope that you were being sarcastic.

All 3 points were