JFK Assassination Forum
Off Topic => News - Off Topic - Weird & Wacky => Topic started by: Michael T. Griffith on January 16, 2023, 01:53:49 PM
-
If anyone wants more information and sources on this evidence of serious election fraud in the 2020 election, I recommend that you check out my website on the 2020 election:
https://sites.google.com/view/electionfraudin2020/home
Let's take a quick look at some odd facts about Biden's supposed vote total.
* There was a historic disparity between Biden's alleged vote total and his number of counties won. According to the certified results, Biden shattered Barack Obama's 2008 record for number of votes by a whopping 12 million votes, but Biden won 37% fewer counties than Obama won. Obama received 69 million votes while winning 875 counties, but we are asked to believe that Biden won 81 million votes while winning 551 counties, 324 fewer counties than Obama won. Democrats have offered several lame explanations for this massive disconnect ("people move," "huge turnout"). Suffice it to say that never in the history of U.S. elections has there been such a huge disparity between the number of votes and the number of counties won.
* Mail-in ballot rejection rates in the 2020 election were two to 10 times lower than in any previous election, varying by state, even though the 2020 election had a record number of such ballots.
* Biden somehow got 16 million more votes than Hillary got in 2016, even though Trump got 12 million more votes than he got in 2016, even though Trump sizably increased his share of the black vote, the Hispanic vote, and the Asian vote, and even though Trump increased his share of the overall male vote and the overall female vote.
According to the NYT exit polls, compared to 2016, Trump's share of the black vote rose by 50% (from 8% to 12%); his share of the Hispanic vote rose by 10% (from 29% to 32%); his share of the Asian vote rose by 17% (from 29% to 34%); and his share of "other" minorities rose by 11% (from 37% to 41%). And those four voting blocks accounted for 34% of all voters in the election.
What's more, Trump's share of the white vote rose by 1.7% (from 57% to 58%), and white voters accounted for 67% of all voters. Surprisingly (at least to some)--and, again, this is according to the NYT exit polls--Trump's share of the LGBT vote rose by a whopping 96% (from 14% to 27%), and LGBT voters accounted for 7% of all voters.
So we can readily see where and how Trump got 12 million more votes than he got in 2016. But it is not at all apparent where Biden could have gotten the extra millions of votes that were credited to him.
* An audit ordered by the Arizona Senate found evidence that 200,000 mail-in ballots had signature mismatches--i.e., the signature on the ballot did not match the signature on file. Biden "won" Arizona by just 11K votes.
* In Wisconsin, which Biden "won" by just 20K votes, a special counsel investigation found that 91 nursing homes had an astounding, unprecedented voter turnout rate of 95-100%. Investigators interviewed family members of many of the seniors in those nursing homes, and they repeatedly insisted that their loved ones were in no condition to vote and had not voted in years.
* Republicans clobbered Democrats in state legislative races in NH, GA, and WI, running up large majorities in both chambers in those states, yet somehow Trump supposedly lost those states.
* There are videos that show election workers illegally preventing GOP election observers from entering voting facilities. We know that at least, at the very least, well over 600,000 ballots in PA alone were counted without any observers being present.
* There are videos that show election workers illegally covering the windows of voting centers to prevent GOP observers from even observing the vote-counting through windows.
* There are videos that show GOP election observers being illegally forced to sit 50-100 feet away from vote-counting areas.
* An especially damning and disturbing video is the surveillance video that shows election workers in the largest vote-counting facility in GA (the State Farm Arena in Atlanta) pulling out crates of ballots and counting them late at night after GOP election observers had departed.
* There are hundreds of sworn statements from election observers documenting cases where election workers ignored obvious differences in mail-in ballot signatures and envelopes, ignored major missing information on mail-in ballots, and scanned ballots multiple times, among other violations.
-
This horse is deader than dead.
Anything is possible but the courts have rejected the evidence that alleges that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump.
I think Trump might've won in 2020 if he handled Covid-19 more responsibly.
-
FYI, about 20 minutes ago, I realized that many of the links on my election fraud website were links from my old domain and were thus broken. I've now fixed all the broken links.
This horse is deader than dead.
Anything is possible but the courts have rejected the evidence that alleges that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump.
Actually, the courts never explained the evidence of election fraud presented to them in the various lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign. In nearly all cases, the courts issued summary judgments and did not even pretend to address the evidence. In the few non-summary judgments, such as in Wisconsin, the courts rejected the evidence with brief, superficial dismissals and made no effort to explain it. See, for example, the 4-3 ruling of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, where the majority simply ignored the evidence while dismissing, as the minority opinion, written by the court's chief justice, notes.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rbzbQS2FTYvio2Qt4xuEuVoRsQ36LqqL/view
I think Trump might've won in 2020 if he handled Covid-19 more responsibly.
Oh? What should he have done differently? Plus, Trump did not control the COVID policies that governors imposed. If anything, Trump supported the CDC's deeply flawed recommendations for too long.
Furthermore, the evidence indicates that Trump did not lose but actually won.
-
I think Trump might've won in 2020 if he handled Covid-19 more responsibly.
What exactly should he have done differently? What did Old Joe do differently when he took over EVEN after Trump had gifted him a vaccine? A million Americans and counting have died. The vast majority under Biden. Hundreds are still dying every day over two years after he took over. The media and Biden are just ignoring it now. Old news. Nothing to see. They gather in mass events with no masks etc. It's suddenly fine. There was nothing that realistically could have been done. China is learning that now. A total lockdown only delays the inevitable. Everyone was always going to get COVID. Biden has gotten himself multiple times. The media used the pandemic, as they attempted to use fake conspiracies like "Russian collusion," to finally get Trump. It worked. It was a politically driven narrative. Trump's big mistake was shutting the entire country down. The focus should have been limited on the most vulnerable - the elderly and infirmed - and everyone else should have gone about their business, got COVID, and recovered. There was little risk to healthy people. Instead the Dems nearly destroyed the entire country for politics. A shameful legacy.
-
October 2020 - Trump's handling of coronavirus pandemic hits record low approval: Reuters/Ipsos poll
Americans are steadily losing confidence in President Donald Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, with his net approval on the issue that has dominated the U.S. election hitting a record low in a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.
The poll taken Tuesday through Thursday, after Trump’s COVID-19 infection and weekend hospitalization, found 37% of American adults approved of the president’s handling of the pandemic and 59% disapproved.
The net approval rating of negative 22 percentage points is the lowest in the poll dating back to March 2 and has steadily declined over the last 10 days, as Trump’s illness and his return to work in the White House dominated news headlines.
Trump has repeatedly dismissed the severity of the pandemic as something that would disappear on its own and chided Democratic rival Joe Biden for wearing a protective mask even though the virus has killed more than 210,000 people in the United States and thrown millions out of work...
Trump has continued to play down the respiratory disease’s dangers even after contracting the illness and has been censured by social media platforms for spreading misinformation about it.
“I think this was a blessing from God that I caught it. This was a blessing in disguise,” Trump said in a video posted to his Twitter account on Wednesday...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-coronavirus/trumps-handling-of-coronavirus-pandemic-hits-record-low-approval-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN26T3OF
Regardless of how you feel about Trump's handling of Covid, polls consistently showed that Americans disapproved of the way he handled it. And Covid was one of the top issues of the 2020 election. Given that the election was so close (the Electoral College, not the popular vote), I feel that Trump might've won if he dealt with Covid with more maturity. Just my honest opinion.
-
October 2020 - Trump's handling of coronavirus pandemic hits record low approval: Reuters/Ipsos poll
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-coronavirus/trumps-handling-of-coronavirus-pandemic-hits-record-low-approval-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN26T3OF
Regardless of how you feel about Trump's handling of Covid, polls consistently showed that Americans disapproved of the way he handled it. And Covid was one of the top issues of the 2020 election. Given that the election was so close (the Electoral College, not the popular vote), I feel that Trump might've won if he dealt with Covid with more maturity. Just my honest opinion.
There is no doubt that COVID was a huge reason that the Trump lost the election. The question is whether that was the product of a legitimate failing or the Dems and media relentless propaganda campaign to politicize the situation. It is not clear even until today what exactly Trump could have done differently that he did not do at the time. He shut the entire country down. He promoted development of a vaccine in record time. Governors of the individual states were responsible for the policies of those states. A novel virus is extremely contagious. Everyone was going to get it eventually. A short lockdown was perhaps helpful to better understand who COVID was affecting. It became apparent early on that younger and healthier people were not at any great risk. At that point, these folks should have been allowed to return to work and school and the focus should have been placed on protecting the elderly. People have continued to die under Biden and the media simply ignores it. They don't go into hysterics when there is a meeting at the WH with no masks etc. The pandemic served its purpose. A means to damage Trump. It worked. They moved on once Trump was out of office.
-
If anyone wants more information and sources on this evidence of serious election fraud in the 2020 election, I recommend that you check out my website on the 2020 election:
https://sites.google.com/view/electionfraudin2020/home
Let's take a quick look at some odd facts about Biden's supposed vote total.
* There was a historic disparity between Biden's alleged vote total and his number of counties won. According to the certified results, Biden shattered Barack Obama's 2008 record for number of votes by a whopping 12 million votes, but Biden won 37% fewer counties than Obama won. Obama received 69 million votes while winning 875 counties, but we are asked to believe that Biden won 81 million votes while winning 551 counties, 324 fewer counties than Obama won. Democrats have offered several lame explanations for this massive disconnect ("people move," "huge turnout"). Suffice it to say that never in the history of U.S. elections has there been such a huge disparity between the number of votes and the number of counties won.
. . .
If one shoots down one argument, Griffith will just come up with three other bogus arguments. But instead of playing that game, let's concentrate on Griffith's lead point. How could Biden, with many more votes than Obama, win fewer counties? The answer is simple.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election
In 2008, the vote totals were:
Obama/Biden: 69,498,516 52.9 % of the votes
McCain/Palin: 59,948,323 45.7 % of the votes
In 2020, the vote totals were:
Biden: 81,268,924 51.3 % of the votes
Trump: 74,216,154 46.9 % of the votes
What matters, of course, is not the total number of votes, but the percentage of the votes one gets, compared to their opponent. So, in 2008, for every 100 voters who voted Republican, 116 voted Democratic. In 2020, for every 100 voters who voted Republican, 109 voted Democratic. So, naturally despite getting more than 11,000,000 more votes in 2020 than 2008, the Democrats didn't win as many counties in 2020. Duh...h, who could have figured that? :)
The surprising feature of the 2020 election, was the percentage of voters who could vote who did vote. This was the highest percentage in any American Presidential election, since 1900, when a former Union Army Civil War won the election. Why was the percentage so astoundingly high in 2020? Because of COVID-19 which opened up the number of mail-in ballots that could be submitted (so as to minimize person to person contact). So we didn't have a lot of voters decide at the last minute not to vote like we usually have. Because they were tired from work, felt they were coming down with a cold, had car problems, had a sick child, or all sorts of different reasons.
What is amazing is the high percentage of voter turn out in 1900. Very limited mail-in ballots. Half the population farmers. Most of them would have to travel miles to vote, on foot or horseback, in early November. Not by car. And yet, in 2020, we barely had a higher percentage voter turn out than 1900. Over a century ago, Americans were really dedicated to being good citizens.
On s separate note, Biden did not hold large political rallies with lots of people, as is usually done in Presidential election years, in order to limit the spread of COVID-19. While Trump encourage them to do so. That is why Trump attracted thousands to his rallies, while Biden attracted none to his, or even attempted to hold a rally. So that's why we see videos of thousands of rabid Trump supporters, but none at all for Biden. Duh...h.
* * * * *
Of course, if Griffith wishes to contest this, he will ignore his lead argument, Biden had more votes in 2020 but fewer (as Vice President) in 2008 yet won fewer counties. Griffith will instead seek to change the subject and discuss some other bogus claim he would like to make.
-
If one shoots down one argument, Griffith will just come up with three other bogus arguments. But instead of playing that game, let's concentrate on Griffith's lead point. How could Biden, with many more votes than Obama, win fewer counties? The answer is simple.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election
In 2008, the vote totals were:
Obama/Biden: 69,498,516 52.9 % of the votes
McCain/Palin: 59,948,323 45.7 % of the votes
In 2020, the vote totals were:
Biden: 81,268,924 51.3 % of the votes
Trump: 74,216,154 46.9 % of the votes
What matters, of course, is not the total number of votes, but the percentage of the votes one gets, compared to their opponent. So, in 2008, for every 100 voters who voted Republican, 116 voted Democratic. In 2020, for every 100 voters who voted Republican, 109 voted Democratic. So, naturally despite getting more than 11,000,000 more votes in 2020 than 2008, the Democrats didn't win as many counties in 2020. Duh...h, who could have figured that? :)
The surprising feature of the 2020 election, was the percentage of voters who could vote who did vote. This was the highest percentage in any American Presidential election, since 1900, when a former Union Army Civil War won the election. Why was the percentage so astoundingly high in 2020? Because of COVID-19 which opened up the number of mail-in ballots that could be submitted (so as to minimize person to person contact). So we didn't have a lot of voters decide at the last minute not to vote like we usually have. Because they were tired from work, felt they were coming down with a cold, had car problems, had a sick child, or all sorts of different reasons.
What is amazing is the high percentage of voter turn out in 1900. Very limited mail-in ballots. Half the population farmers. Most of them would have to travel miles to vote, on foot or horseback, in early November. Not by car. And yet, in 2020, we barely had a higher percentage voter turn out than 1900. Over a century ago, Americans were really dedicated to being good citizens.
On s separate note, Biden did not hold large political rallies with lots of people, as is usually done in Presidential election years, in order to limit the spread of COVID-19. While Trump encourage them to do so. That is why Trump attracted thousands to his rallies, while Biden attracted none to his, or even attempted to hold a rally. So that's why we see videos of thousands of rabid Trump supporters, but none at all for Biden. Duh...h.
* * * * *
Of course, if Griffith wishes to contest this, he will ignore his lead argument, Biden had more votes in 2020 but fewer (as Vice President) in 2008 yet won fewer counties. Griffith will instead seek to change the subject and discuss some other bogus claim he would like to make.
What you have highlighted is that there was a statistical outlier in terms of the number of votes cast in the 2020 election. Both Biden and Trump received more votes than any other candidate in history. What is not answered is why? Was there such great enthusiasm for Biden, an elderly white guy who hardly campaigned, that he received tens of millions more votes than Reagan, FDR, JFK, Obama, Clinton or any other candidate in history? That doesn't seem to add up. What happened is that the political establishment changed the voting laws in the months leading up to the election and those changes affected the outcome in a significant way. The vast majority of the votes cast using the alternative methods went to Biden whereas the votes for Trump were cast at the polls. Trump overstates that as "stealing" the election but those changes certainly altered the outcome. If the reverse had occurred, and Trump had won the election based on significant changes made in the election laws in the months preceding the election, the Dems would have revolted and the media would gone on an endless campaign to suggest that Trump's election was not legitimate. Always hypocrisy.
-
What you have highlighted is that there was a statistical outlier in terms of the number of votes cast in the 2020 election. Both Biden and Trump received more votes than any other candidate in history. What is not answered is why? Was there such great enthusiasm for Biden, an elderly white guy who hardly campaigned, that he received tens of millions more votes than Reagan, FDR, JFK, Obama, Clinton or any other candidate in history? That doesn't seem to add up. What happened is that the political establishment changed the voting laws in the months leading up to the election and those changes affected the outcome in a significant way. The vast majority of the votes cast using the alternative methods went to Biden whereas the votes for Trump were cast at the polls. Trump overstates that as "stealing" the election but those changes certainly altered the outcome. If the reverse had occurred, and Trump had won the election based on significant changes made in the election laws in the months preceding the election, the Dems would have revolted and the media would gone on an endless campaign to suggest that Trump's election was not legitimate. Always hypocrisy.
I did answer "Why such a high percentage turnout?". The highest percentage since 1900. The great expansion of allowing mail-in ballots.
"Why the expansion of mail-in ballots?". Because of COVID-19. Going with in person ballots would have exposed more people to COVID-19, just a few months before COVID-19 vaccines first became available. There are thousands of people walking around today, and I might be one of them, who would be dead, if the mail-in ballot option was not available.
"Why did Biden get so many more mail-in ballots then Trump?" Because Biden encourage voters to choose the mail-in ballot option. While Trump told voters to go vote in person. So, naturally, Biden got a lot higher percentage of mail-in ballots.
"Why did Trump attract so many enthusiastic people to show up at his rallies? While Biden attracted so few, indeed, exactly zero?". Because Trump, as was the usual case for both Republican and Democratic Presidential candidates, organized large rallies to show their support for Trump. While, at the same time, Biden did not organized large rallies for himself, indeed, strongly advised people not to come together in large groups for any reason, including showing support for himself. Limiting the spread of COVID-19 was more important than getting a few more votes. No doubt Biden cost himself some votes, suppressed voter enthusiasm for himself, as large rallies have always generated for every candidate for over the last 100 years. But it was the right call. This is my favorite decision Biden has ever made.
Note, Biden was consistent. He choose not to allow large rallies for himself. Because this decision helped limit the spread of COVID-19. This decision also caused Biden to lose votes. Biden also encouraged voters to choose to vote using mail-in ballots. Because this decision helped limit the spread of COVID-19. This decision gained Biden votes. Biden always chose the option to limit the spread of COVID-19, whether it would gain or lose him votes. These decisions were correct.
Just as CTers pretend that certain question have never been answered, "How could the SBT be true? What could possibly have caused JFK's head to go backwards? Why don't LNers ever address these questions?" you try the same gambit and imply that these questions have never been answered. These questions about the 2020 election have been addressed.
The results of the Election of 2000 was altered because of changes in the Election rules implemented in the months leading up to the election. Florida changed the procedures (without any action taken by the Florida State Legislature) to allow an increase to a dozen Presidential candidates. This required changes in the ballots, which either involved using small print, multiple pages for the Presidential election, or butterfly ballots. This resulted in the invalidation of thousands of ballots, due to voter error, which proportionaly cost the Democrats . The Democrats complained a lot about this and took their case to the courts. And lose, which was the correct rulings. But Democrats certainly did not revolt, like storm the Capitol. They complained, but accepted the vote in the end. Gore announced that Bush had won the election and everyone should accept this. Which was the right thing to do. Stuff happens that can swing close elections. That caused the Democrats to lose in 2000, and the Republicans to lose in 2020.
* * * * *
On a separate note, Trump's handling of COVID-19 did not lose him the election. A far greater issue, was Trump telling his supporters not to use mail-in ballots but to vote in person. This cost him millions of votes. Because, on election night, many people intending to vote for Trump decided that they were too tired. Just wanted to go home, get some dinner and go to bed. Or came down with a cold. Or had to take care of a sick child. Or had issues with their automobile. Or had to work late. Or some other issue came up that always costs millions of votes in each Presidential election. Trump would still have lost the popular vote. But just as in 2016, he would have just squeeked by in 2020 in the Electoral College.
Why did Trump do such a bone-headed decision of discouraging mail-in ballots? I am not a mind reader, but I think it was because Trump preferred to win with cleverness, and not to just get an honest win. He thought he would limit his voters from using mail-in ballots. Then, after the election, get the courts to throw out mail-in ballots. He thought he could get the Supreme Court to back this scheme 6-3, with three of the members appointed by him. This scheme did not work out too well. And cost him the election. Sometimes people can be too clever for their own good.
-
I did answer "Why such a high percentage turnout?". The highest percentage since 1900. The great expansion of allowing mail-in ballots.
"Why the expansion of mail-in ballots?". Because of COVID-19. Going with in person ballots would have exposed more people to COVID-19, just a few months before COVID-19 vaccines first became available. There are thousands of people walking around today, and I might be one of them, who would be dead, if the mail-in ballot option was not available.
"Why did Biden get so many more mail-in ballots then Trump?" Because Biden encourage voters to choose the mail-in ballot option. While Trump told voters to go vote in person. So, naturally, Biden got a lot higher percentage of mail-in ballots.
"Why did Trump attract so many enthusiastic people to show up at his rallies? While Biden attracted so few, indeed, exactly zero?". Because Trump, as was the usual case for both Republican and Democratic Presidential candidates, organized large rallies to show their support for Trump. While, at the same time, Biden did not organized large rallies for himself, indeed, strongly advised people not to come together in large groups for any reason, including showing support for himself. Limiting the spread of COVID-19 was more important than getting a few more votes. No doubt Biden cost himself some votes, suppressed voter enthusiasm for himself, as large rallies have always generated for every candidate for over the last 100 years. But it was the right call. This is my favorite decision Biden has ever made.
Note, Biden was consistent. He choose not to allow large rallies for himself. Because this decision helped limit the spread of COVID-19. This decision also caused Biden to lose votes. Biden also encouraged voters to choose to vote using mail-in ballots. Because this decision helped limit the spread of COVID-19. This decision gained Biden votes. Biden always chose the option to limit the spread of COVID-19, whether it would gain or lose him votes. These decisions were correct.
Just as CTers pretend that certain question have never been answered, "How could the SBT be true? What could possibly have caused JFK's head to go backwards? Why don't LNers ever address these questions?" you try the same gambit and imply that these questions have never been answered. These questions about the 2020 election have been addressed.
The results of the Election of 2000 was altered because of changes in the Election rules implemented in the months leading up to the election. Florida changed the procedures (without any action taken by the Florida State Legislature) to allow an increase to a dozen Presidential candidates. This required changes in the ballots, which either involved using small print, multiple pages for the Presidential election, or butterfly ballots. This resulted in the invalidation of thousands of ballots, due to voter error, which proportionaly cost the Democrats . The Democrats complained a lot about this and took their case to the courts. And lose, which was the correct rulings. But Democrats certainly did not revolt, like storm the Capitol. They complained, but accepted the vote in the end. Gore announced that Bush had won the election and everyone should accept this. Which was the right thing to do. Stuff happens that can swing close elections. That caused the Democrats to lose in 2000, and the Republicans to lose in 2020.
* * * * *
On a separate note, Trump's handling of COVID-19 did not lose him the election. A far greater issue, was Trump telling his supporters not to use mail-in ballots but to vote in person. This cost him millions of votes. Because, on election night, many people intending to vote for Trump decided that they were too tired. Just wanted to go home, get some dinner and go to bed. Or came down with a cold. Or had to take care of a sick child. Or had issues with their automobile. Or had to work late. Or some other issue came up that always costs millions of votes in each Presidential election. Trump would still have lost the popular vote. But just as in 2016, he would have just squeeked by in 2020 in the Electoral College.
Why did Trump do such a bone-headed decision of discouraging mail-in ballots? I am not a mind reader, but I think it was because Trump preferred to win with cleverness, and not to just get an honest win. He thought he would limit his voters from using mail-in ballots. Then, after the election, get the courts to throw out mail-in ballots. He thought he could get the Supreme Court to back this scheme 6-3, with three of the members appointed by him. This scheme did not work out too well. And cost him the election. Sometimes people can be too clever for their own good.
Trump never discouraged anyone from voting for him by mail. He pointed out the obvious. Changing the voting laws in the months leading up to the election created difficulties and risks of confirming who was voting. The election rules were changed in most every state in the months before the election using COVID as a pretext. Even Fauci said it was safe to vote in person. And we know that this significantly increased the number of voters. And that the vast majority of those voters who used these alternative methods went for Biden. Why? There was obvious ballot harvesting among minorities and younger folks who vote in much smaller percentages. If Trump had the election rules changed in such a way as to favor himself, resulting in 80-90% of turnout voting for him and deciding the election, there would have been widespread civil unrest among the leftists. Folks such as yourself would be proclaiming the election to have been stolen much as Trump did. The Dems and media would be proclaiming his election as not legitimate. They would be doing and saying many of the same things as Trump after the election.
-
Trump never discouraged anyone from voting for him by mail. He pointed out the obvious. Changing the voting laws in the months leading up to the election created difficulties and risks of confirming who was voting. The election rules were changed in most every state in the months before the election using COVID as a pretext. Even Fauci said it was safe to vote in person. And we know that this significantly increased the number of voters. And that the vast majority of those voters who used these alternative methods went for Biden. Why? There was obvious ballot harvesting among minorities and younger folks who vote in much smaller percentages. If Trump had the election rules changed in such a way as to favor himself, resulting in 80-90% of turnout voting for him and deciding the election, there would have been widespread civil unrest among the leftists. Folks such as yourself would be proclaiming the election to have been stolen much as Trump did. The Dems and media would be proclaiming his election as not legitimate. They would be doing and saying many of the same things as Trump after the election.
Trump’s Attacks on Mail Voting Bolstered ‘Big Lie,’ Jan. 6 Panel Says
https://time.com/6187273/jan-6-hearing-mail-voting-trump/
The House panel presented evidence showing how Trump sowed the seeds for his efforts to overturn the election by waging a crusade against mail ballots. Despite expectations that the raging pandemic would depress in-person voter turnout in 2020, Trump rejected arguments from his own campaign staff to embrace voting by mail—choosing instead to discourage his supporters from voting absentee.
Trump did encourage his supporters to vote in person. Knowing full well he was going to try to get the courts to throw out mail-in ballots. Which was tried but failed when the courts asked "Why didn't you ask the courts to disallow mail-in ballots before the election instead of waiting until afterwards?". Trump's attorneys had no good answer to that question. This was a disaster for Trump, because the odds of a person actually voting go significantly down if they decide to vote in person instead of voting through the mail.
I don't see how voting in person would be just as safe as using mail-in ballots as far as avoiding COVID-19 is concerned. I don't care what Dr. Fauci or anyone else says. While the danger from in person voting was not overwhelming, the danger wasn't zero, either. Without a doubt, some people did avoid catching COVID-19 by deciding to vote through the mail rather than in person.
And, of course, you have not addressed the changes in voting procedures leading up to the 2000 election. Going from simple, one page, large print, non butterfly ballots to ballots that were more confusing to some voters. Changes in voting procedures are very common in elections, when the people running elections think there are valid reasons to do so. This does not invalidate an election. Just as CTers give no concrete example of showing why CE 399 could not have been the bullet that wounded JFK and Connally, no one has shown thousands of mail-in ballots that were fraudulent. They merely suggest that they might have been. I am not impressed with unfounded suggestions. Show me something!
-
Trump’s Attacks on Mail Voting Bolstered ‘Big Lie,’ Jan. 6 Panel Says
https://time.com/6187273/jan-6-hearing-mail-voting-trump/
Trump did encourage his supporters to vote in person. Knowing full well he was going to try to get the courts to throw out mail-in ballots. Which was tried but failed when the courts asked "Why didn't you ask the courts to disallow mail-in ballots before the election instead of waiting until afterwards?". Trump's attorneys had no good answer to that question. This was a disaster for Trump, because the odds of a person actually voting go significantly down if they decide to vote in person instead of voting through the mail.
I don't see how voting in person would be just as safe as using mail-in ballots as far as avoiding COVID-19 is concerned. I don't care what Dr. Fauci or anyone else says. While the danger from in person voting was not overwhelming, the danger wasn't zero, either. Without a doubt, some people did avoid catching COVID-19 by deciding to vote through the mail rather than in person.
And, of course, you have not addressed the changes in voting procedures leading up to the 2000 election. Going from simple, one page, large print, non butterfly ballots to ballots that were more confusing to some voters. Changes in voting procedures are very common in elections, when the people running elections think there are valid reasons to do so. This does not invalidate an election. Just as CTers give no concrete example of showing why CE 399 could not have been the bullet that wounded JFK and Connally, no one has shown thousands of mail-in ballots that were fraudulent. They merely suggest that they might have been. I am not impressed with unfounded suggestions. Show me something!
Trump simply pointed out the risk of mail in voting. That doesn't mean that he didn't want folks to vote for him whatever the means. And suddenly Dr. Fauci's opinion doesn't matter? LOL. The entire country was almost destroyed based on his opinions but when it comes to voting he is suddenly not relevant? Bottom line. The pandemic was used as a pretext to change the voting laws in almost every state in the months leading up to the election. The election was decided based upon those changes (i.e. most of the mail in vote went to Biden). The sheer numbers of votes is a statistical outlier. It points to ballet harvesting. Maybe folks want 30-50 days of mail in ballots, but American elections were held for decades on election day with no issue. There is good cause to do so. Like PA voters not finding out that Fetterman was a vegetable only after voting for him. In fact, the vote tallies were counted faster in some places when they used pencils than today where it takes weeks or months to count the votes for some reason. It is a system fraught with risk of abuse. If the laws had been changed in such a way as to break the election to Trump, there would have been civil war and riots unleashed by radical Dems.
-
Trump simply pointed out the risk of mail in voting. That doesn't mean that he didn't want folks to vote for him whatever the means.
The time to prevent mail-in ballots was to go to the courts before the November elections and convince the courts not to allow mail-in ballots. That way, people would know that if they wanted their votes to count, it would have to be in person voting.
Not to do what Trump did, wait until after the election before then telling the courts, for the first time, that mail-in ballots should not be counted. The judges, even judges appointed by Trump, pointed this out to Trump's lawyers. The time to do that was before November 7, not afterwards. Sometimes it does not pay to be sneaky.
And suddenly Dr. Fauci's opinion doesn't matter? LOL. The entire country was almost destroyed based on his opinions but when it comes to voting he is suddenly not relevant? Bottom line. The pandemic was used as a pretext to change the voting laws in almost every state in the months leading up to the election. The election was decided based upon those changes (i.e. most of the mail in vote went to Biden). The sheer numbers of votes is a statistical outlier. It points to ballet harvesting. Maybe folks want 30-50 days of mail in ballots, but American elections were held for decades on election day with no issue. There is good cause to do so. Like PA voters not finding out that Fetterman was a vegetable only after voting for him. In fact, the vote tallies were counted faster in some places when they used pencils than today where it takes weeks or months to count the votes for some reason. It is a system fraught with risk of abuse. If the laws had been changed in such a way as to break the election to Trump, there would have been civil war and riots unleashed by radical Dems.
In November 2020, before vaccines were made available to the public, any close contact between people had some danger. There was nothing magical about people getting together for the purpose of voting that would prevent the spread of COVID-19. You have not provided the exact Dr. Fauci quote but I imagine it would be something to the effect that the danger of getting COVID-19 while voting was not great enough to make it inadvisable for people to vote in person, if there was no other voting option, for that person. But I am certain that Dr. Fauci would have recommended voting by mail over voting in person, if one had a choice.
But if you have a quote from Dr. Fauci that says otherwise, that says voting person and voting by mail are both equally safe, let's hear it.
-
The time to prevent mail-in ballots was to go to the courts before the November elections and convince the courts not to allow mail-in ballots. That way, people would know that if they wanted their votes to count, it would have to be in person voting.
Not to do what Trump did, wait until after the election before then telling the courts, for the first time, that mail-in ballots should not be counted. The judges, even judges appointed by Trump, pointed this out to Trump's lawyers. The time to do that was before November 7, not afterwards. Sometimes it does not pay to be sneaky.
In November 2020, before vaccines were made available to the public, any close contact between people had some danger. There was nothing magical about people getting together for the purpose of voting that would prevent the spread of COVID-19. You have not provided the exact Dr. Fauci quote but I imagine it would be something to the effect that the danger of getting COVID-19 while voting was not great enough to make it inadvisable for people to vote in person, if there was no other voting option, for that person. But I am certain that Dr. Fauci would have recommended voting by mail over voting in person, if one had a choice.
But if you have a quote from Dr. Fauci that says otherwise, that says voting person and voting by mail are both equally safe, let's hear it.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/16/dr-fauci-plans-to-vote-in-person-how-to-vote-safely-during-pandemic.html
But 79-year-old White House advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci said it’s safe to vote in person — in fact, he is going to try to vote in person, his schedule permitting, he told Yahoo! News Thursday.
“If one does the polling process carefully and prudently, I think it would be fine for people to go to the polls, who feel that that’s something that they want to do,” Fauci told Yahoo! News.
-
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/16/dr-fauci-plans-to-vote-in-person-how-to-vote-safely-during-pandemic.html
But 79-year-old White House advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci said it’s safe to vote in person — in fact, he is going to try to vote in person, his schedule permitting, he told Yahoo! News Thursday.
“If one does the polling process carefully and prudently, I think it would be fine for people to go to the polls, who feel that that’s something that they want to do,” Fauci told Yahoo! News.
Yes, but not everyone would end up doing this "as carefully and prudently" as Dr. Fauci would.
Would all voters know the proper type of mask to use, as Dr. Fauci would?
Would all voters know how to wear such a mask properly, with minimum gaps between the face and mask, as Dr. Fauci would?
Would all voters even be able to get ahold of the type of mask that Dr. Fauci would believe to be sufficient, as I assume Dr. Fauci did?
Would all voters carry disinfectant with them so they could immediately clear their hands after exchanging ballots with others?
Dr. Fauci said it would be find for him to vote in person, which I think it would be correct. But I don't hear him saying everyone should vote in person, whether they followed the proper procedures or not, or even knew the proper procedures sufficiently or not, or had the proper mask and disinfectant or not.
I think, that if pressed on the issue, Dr. Fauci would advise most voters to only vote in person:
* if they knew what sort of mask and disinfectant to bring
* was able to get ahold of these items
* knew exactly how to use these items, particularly the mask
* were really keen on voting the traditional way, in person.
otherwise, for God's sake, use a mail-in ballot. Don't needlessly give yourself an extra chance to catch the virus before the vaccine becomes generally available within a few months, and for the most vulnerable, within a few weeks.
* * * * *
Yes, an expert rock climber might say "As long I am careful and prudent, I can safely scale this 100 foot cliff" doesn't mean that I can safely do so as well. Just because he can do so safely doesn't mean that everyone can do so. Or that he is advising everyone to give it a go.
-
Yes, but not everyone would end up doing this "as carefully and prudently" as Dr. Fauci would.
Would all voters know the proper type of mask to use, as Dr. Fauci would?
Would all voters know how to wear such a mask properly, with minimum gaps between the face and mask, as Dr. Fauci would?
Would all voters even be able to get ahold of the type of mask that Dr. Fauci would believe to be sufficient, as I assume Dr. Fauci did?
Would all voters carry disinfectant with them so they could immediately clear their hands after exchanging ballots with others?
Dr. Fauci said it would be find for him to vote in person, which I think it would be correct. But I don't hear him saying everyone should vote in person, whether they followed the proper procedures or not, or even knew the proper procedures sufficiently or not, or had the proper mask and disinfectant or not.
I think, that if pressed on the issue, Dr. Fauci would advise most voters to only vote in person:
* if they knew what sort of mask and disinfectant to bring
* was able to get ahold of these items
* knew exactly how to use these items, particularly the mask
* were really keen on voting the traditional way, in person.
otherwise, for God's sake, use a mail-in ballot. Don't needlessly give yourself an extra chance to catch the virus before the vaccine becomes generally available within a few months, and for the most vulnerable, within a few weeks.
That is bizarre logic. There are undoubtedly some risks from every human activity. People going to the polls might be at risk of being struck by lightning if they leave their house to vote or be at risk of a traffic accident. That is not justification for changing the voting laws in every state. Fauci - who told Americans it was unsafe to do about anything else - indicated it was safe enough to vote in person. Are we not to "listen to the science" when the science varies from a desired outcome? As an octogenarian, Fauci found it safe enough to vote in person himself. It was reasonably safe for others.
There was insufficient justification to use the pandemic as a pretext to change the voting laws in every state. That was done strictly for political reasons to influence the outcome. And the results confirm this. The vast majority of votes that were cast using these alternative methods went to one candidate. The changes not only allowed those who would normally have voted at the polls to do so by mail, but it increased by tens of millions the number of folks who voted. A statistical outlier that changed the outcome of the election. Why did tens of millions of new voters emerge in this election? It wasn't because it was safer to vote by mail. They didn't vote in previous election even before there was a pandemic. Why did they vote in margins of 70-90% for the same candidate? It was the result of ballot harvesting among young people and minority communities that was enable by the false pretext that voting in person was too risky. That explains the statistical outliers of the 2020 election. And it is good cause for concern.
-
. . .They didn't vote in previous election even before there was a pandemic. Why did they vote in margins of 70-90% for the same candidate? It was the result of ballot harvesting among young people and minority communities that was enable by the false pretext that voting in person was too risky. That explains the statistical outliers of the 2020 election. And it is good cause for concern.
The voting percentages were higher in 2020 than any other Presidential election since 1900 because, feeling tired at the end of the day, having car problems, discouraged by seeing lines at their polling places, having to work late, starting to come down with a cold, having to deal with a sick child, did not prevent a person's vote from being cast, if they had already mailed their ballot in. So much for that mystery.
-
The voting percentages were higher in 2020 than any other Presidential election since 1900 because, feeling tired at the end of the day, having car problems, discouraged by seeing lines at their polling places, having to work late, starting to come down with a cold, having to deal with a sick child, did not prevent a person's vote from being cast, if they had already mailed their ballot in. So much for that mystery.
You believe that tens of millions of new votes can be attributed to voters who were too "tired" or "had car problems" that kept them from voting in prior elections? LOL. What a coincidence that all these tired folks voted in overwhelming numbers for the same candidate. Suppose the Republicans had changed the voting laws in significant ways just before the election in ways that increased the typical voting pattern by tens of millions of votes almost all of which went to Trump and that was the difference in the election? Imagine the outcry.
-
You believe that tens of millions of new votes can be attributed to voters who were too "tired" or "had car problems" that kept them from voting in prior elections? LOL. What a coincidence that all these tired folks voted in overwhelming numbers for the same candidate. Suppose the Republicans had changed the voting laws in significant ways just before the election in ways that increased the typical voting pattern by tens of millions of votes almost all of which went to Trump and that was the difference in the election? Imagine the outcry.
Yes I do. If 100 million intend to vote in person, it's quite believable that only 80 million will vote. And some of them weren't that tired. They just decided, what the hell. You of all people should understand how easy it is to give up on Democracy.
-
Yes I do. If 100 million intend to vote in person, it's quite believable that only 80 million will vote. And some of them weren't that tired. They just decided, what the hell. You of all people should understand how easy it is to give up on Democracy.
We could have 100% voter turnout if someone filled out the ballots and cast them for people who wouldn't otherwise vote. That is not promoting "democracy" but the opposite. All voting should be in person absent some compelling reason like military service. It is not a strenuous task. Aren't you concerned that someone might be too tired to seal the envelope on their mail in ballot or get a paper cut and bleed to death?