Approximately 70% of Republicans still don't believe Biden won legimately. (1 Viewer)

[Amused to Death]

Which gets to the bigger issue: What exactly are we trying to solve here? Restoring people's faith in the electoral system so that they can go back to accepting results that don't go their way? I don't see any sort of policy change achieving that goal, because it's in the interest of Trump and a growing number of Republicans not to solve it. If they did, they wouldn't have any excuses for the elections they did lose. 

This. There are no issues to solve other than the fear Trump and his ilk have sown. 

 

[(HULK)]

I'd bet this forum alone has converted a lot of people into Republicans. Or at least, made them rethink their stance on Democrats. 

I find that unlikely.

While there are a couple left wing people who are a bit too much, there are way too many Trumpists trolls that are a huge turn off.

As an independent actively participating in this forum, my impression is that the Republicans come off as obstinate and resistant to science and facts. That is not appealing to me in the slightest. I can't speak for others though.

 

[Amused to Death]

This. There are no issues to solve other than the fear Trump and his ilk have sown. 

"Today I will detail some of the shocking irregularities, abuses and fraud that had been revealed in recent weeks but before laying out just a small portion of the evidence we have uncovered, and we have so much evidence, I want to explain the corrupt mail-in balloting scheme that Democrats systematically put into place that allowed voting to be altered, especially in swing states, which they had to win. They just didn’t know that it was going to be that tough, because we were leading in every swing state by so much, far greater than they ever thought possible. While it has long been understood that the Democrat political machine engages in voter fraud from Detroit to Philadelphia, to Milwaukee, Atlanta, so many other places. What changed this year was the Democrat party’s relentless push to print and mail out tens of millions of ballots sent to unknown recipients with virtually no safeguards of any kind. This allowed fraud and abuse to occur in a scale never seen before. Using the pandemic as a pretext, Democrat politicians and judges drastically changed election procedures just months, and in some cases, weeks before the election on the 3rd of November."

Narrarator: He never did detail shocking irregularities nor did he ever reveal any evidence of fraud.

 

[dkp993]

I'd bet this forum alone has converted a lot of people into Republicans. Or at least, made them rethink their stance on Democrats. 

Anyone paying attention in this forum should be running away from both parties 

 

[(HULK)]

Anyone paying attention in this forum should be running away from both parties 

Lol, probably accurate.

It's not like it's made me consider dropping my independent status at any point. Never close to that ever.

 

[dkp993]

Narrarator: He never did detail shocking irregularities nor did he ever reveal any evidence of fraud.

“We have a lot of theories we just don’t have the evidence”

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

This. There are no issues to solve other than the fear Trump and his ilk have sown. 

I’d say it was a form of political extortion, but extortionists usually have an end goal in mind. Trump is more like the Joker: some men just want to watch the world burn

 

[The Commish]

So let's come up with a system that is a lot less fallible and subject to concern. At least you are willing to concede that some things could be done better without resorting to mud slings out of frustration. This forum is a sad place sometimes, mainly because it seems to reveal how a lot of people feel in real life but are too civil (or cowardly, or both) to display.

A lot "less fallible" than what?  Can you even outline the process for your state from registering to voting?

 

[KarmaPolice]

Anyone paying attention in this forum should be running away from both parties 

Probably.  I will say I have far more conservatives on ignore, but a lot is posting style, not beliefs.  

I wish there were more to interact with that had a lower % of "libs are bad" posts though.  

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

While there are a couple left wing people who are a bit too much, there are way too many Trumpists trolls that are a huge turn off.

Probably.  I will say I have far more conservatives on ignore, but a lot is posting style, not beliefs.  

I don't know what planet you guys are on. I for one find the incessant use of laughing emojis to be highly persuasive

 

[KarmaPolice]

I don't know what planet you guys are on. I for one find the incessant use of laughing emojis to be highly persuasive

Hey man, there's a good number of cry emojis mixed in there too.   

 

[rustycolts]

Anyone paying attention in this forum should be running away from both parties 

I already have. I'm npa. Down here that means you don't get to vote during the primaries which kind of stinks.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Republicans are not a minority in Florida. They have been increasing the percentage of Republicans for years. This year they have overtaken Democrats % wise. It's very close % wise but about a 100000 more Republicans than Dems. I don't know if this is just a Florida thing or not but I bet Republicans are gaining in a fair amount of places.

https://floridapolitics.com/archives/486696-republicans-end-2021-with-43k-voter-registration-advantage-over-democrats/

Florida does have some unique circumstances. The biggest factor is the ongoing influx of conservative retirees to places like The Villages. They more than cancel out the liberal Northerners (like me) who have moved to South Florida. There's also the fact that Democrats have done such a horrible job mobilizing the Latino vote, while the GOP has done a very effective job of it*. A decade ago, people were predicting that younger Cubans were less reflexively conservative, and meanwhile the state's Latino population was diversifying and would start voting like the rest of US Latinos. Neither of those things have happened. The Cubans, who were very Trump-skeptical in 2016, have come back in droves. And many of the other Latino groups have either been politically inert (Puerto Ricans) or have come from countries with leftist governments (Venezuela) that have made them vote as conservatively as Cubans.

The net effect has been a small but significant shift to the right, a trend that may well continue until the state is solidly red.

* I almost wrote that they've done a "good" job, but I hesitate to use that word to describe a strategy that has relied in part on a firehose of misinformation on Spanish-language radio

 

[LawFitz]

I don't know what planet you guys are on. I for one find the incessant use of laughing emojis to be highly persuasive

Brah, the one guy I see here do this regularly still is your homie @dozer. I do it back to him whenever I see fit. And have no qualms doing so, since he likes it so much.

 

[LawFitz]

Probably.  I will say I have far more conservatives on ignore, but a lot is posting style, not beliefs.  

I wish there were more to interact with that had a lower % of "libs are bad" posts though.  

Weird. I was a registered Democrat for 2+ decades until 2021. Even now, I couldn't bring myself to register as R and instead went with I. But I will say that this forum, moreso than all other places, online and IRL, has made me dislike Democrats. Too much smugness, intolerance and bullying. And if there's one kind of person, I've despised my entire life, it's the bully.

Apologies if that offends. Not you, KP. You are not withstanding to that last sentiment. Others here absolutely are. #### bullies.

 

[LawFitz]

@dozer

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Brah, the one guy I see here do this regularly still is your homie @dozer. I do it back to him whenever I see fit. And have no qualms doing so, since he likes it so much.

I don't consider anyone on this site to be my homie (with the exception of @rustycolts, who is the nicest guy here and I will fight anyone who says otherwise). 

In any event, my comment was not directed at you. I don't respond to your posts about vaccines because that's a subject I choose not to engage on, but I have nothing against you personally and on other topics I find you to be pretty reasonable even when you're completely wrong 

And if you haven't yet noticed the poster who literally has nothing to add to any discussion beyond whines about the moderators and passive-aggressive emojis, consider yourself lucky 

 

[LawFitz]

I don't consider anyone on this site to be my homie (with the exception of @rustycolts, who is the nicest guy here and I will fight anyone who says otherwise). 

In any event, my comment was not directed at you. I don't respond to your posts about vaccines because that's a subject I choose not to engage on, but I have nothing against you personally and on other topics I find you to be pretty reasonable even when you're completely wrong 

And if you haven't yet noticed the poster who literally has nothing to add to any discussion beyond whines about the moderators and passive-aggressive emojis, consider yourself lucky 

I'm the nicest guy here.

Except when some argue my kids or their mom MUST take a Covid vaccine. Or be exposed to gender identity issues before they even know what a girlfriend/boyfriend means.

No offense to Rustycolts, who I am sure is plenty awesome if you vouch. But it's a lot easier to be nice when you aren't being mortared.

 

[ekbeats]

Probably.  I will say I have far more conservatives on ignore, but a lot is posting style, not beliefs.  

I wish there were more to interact with that had a lower % of "libs are bad" posts though.  

Oh man, Have to say, that bothers me my friend.  Only because you are one of my favorite people in here.  Everyone has a voice that deserves to be heard, even if it doesn't sound right.  Don't be a #### like me.

 

[AAABatteries]

True but the people who believe in this stuff most strongly aren’t typical Republicans. They are pro-Trump nativists. White fear is their #1 issue. 

Disagree with this - I think they have a fear of their way of life being replaced but it's not wrapped up in any kind of white replacement theory (for most at least).

 

[rustycolts]

I'm the nicest guy here.

Except when some argue my kids or their mom MUST take a Covid vaccine. Or be exposed to gender identity issues before they even know what a girlfriend/boyfriend means.

No offense to Rustycolts, who I am sure is plenty awesome if you vouch. But it's a lot easier to be nice when you aren't being mortared.

Thanks to @ignatiusjreillybut not sure most folks think that. 

Famine and drought in Africa, natural disasters, climate change all my fault just ask my wife.

 

[The Commish]

I already have. I'm npa. Down here that means you don't get to vote during the primaries which kind of stinks.

  GB

Most of my focus here is local.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

No offense to Rustycolts, who I am sure is plenty awesome if you vouch. But it's a lot easier to be nice when you aren't being mortared.

I think we’re all ignoring the obvious selection bias at play. We pay more attention to conversations we’re directly involved in, and if you express strong sentiments on one side or another you’re going to notice all the vituperative responses from the other side because they’re directed at you, and miss the ones directed at others.

I joked about you not knowing passive-aggressive emoji guy, but why would you? He doesn’t do his schtick with your posts

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Thanks to @ignatiusjreillybut not sure most folks think that. 

Famine and drought in Africa, natural disasters, climate change all my fault just ask my wife.

Just put her in touch with my wife and she’ll explain to her that she’s mistaken and it’s all my fault

 

[roadkill1292]

Anyone paying attention in this forum should be running away from both parties 

And should be supporting election reforms that encourage meaningful participation from third parties.

There's no way around this other than transforming the way we do our electoral business.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

And should be supporting election reforms that encourage meaningful participation from third parties.

There's no way around this other than transforming the way we do our electoral business.

This was the point I was trying to make in the Staunch Moderates thread. I think too many people fall for the fallacy that if we just elected people of good will who are willing to listen to others and join hands and sing "Kumbaya", all our problems could be solved. But many of those problems are driven by structural factors, and if you want to fix them, you need structural reforms. It is still overwhelmingly the case in our system that voting third party means throwing your vote away. If you want to encourage third parties, you need to support reforms that will change that dynamic.

 

[dkp993]

It is still overwhelmingly the case in our system that voting third party means throwing your vote away. If you want to encourage third parties, you need to support reforms that will change that dynamic.

I strongly disagree with these sentiments.  In swings states (of which there are only a handful) this argument holds more weight. But in every other state (ie the majority) this simply isn’t true. The only way for a 3rd party to gain any real traction is via the national debates. To do this we need to reach the 15% threshold. If moderates in those majority pre-decided States put their vote toward the 3rd party the debate threshold is easily obtainable.  Then all it takes is a the right dynamic moderate to speak to the masses and mountains can be moved.  This is how I’ve been using my vote here in Cali. IMO it was actually wasted going to either candidate as it’s only really going to the popular vote, which is functionally worthless.  

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I strongly disagree with these sentiments.  In swings states (of which there are only a handful) this argument holds more weight. But in every other state (ie the majority) this simply isn’t true. The only way for a 3rd party to gain any real traction is via the national debates. To do this we need to reach the 15% threshold. If moderates in those majority pre-decided States put their vote toward the 3rd party the debate threshold is easily obtainable.  Then all it takes is a the right dynamic moderate to speak to the masses and mountains can be moved.  This is how I’ve been using my vote here in Cali. IMO it was actually wasted going to either candidate as it’s only really going to the popular vote, which is functionally worthless.  

I get what you're saying, but think about that for a second: You live in California, which is basically a one-party state when it comes to statewide elections. So yeah, there is more value in voting for a "third" party, but is it even accurate to call it that? We're seeing similar dynamics in Utah, where Dems declined to nominate anyone for Senate and got behind Evan McMullin's independent candidacy, and in Alaska, where Dems used a similar move a few years ago to help an indy get elected governor.

And of course, at the presidential level, the main thing that's driving your behavior is the Electoral College, which is one of the biggest factors propping up the two-party system. The most successful third-party candidate in the last 100 years, Ross Perot, got ZERO electoral votes. Meanwhile, the most successful from an EV standpoint, George Wallace, was a regional candidate. So not only does the EC make it harder for third parties, the ones it does help are niche candidates rather than those with broad support. And if a third-party candidate did ever succeed in getting enough EVs to prevent a majority (which hasn't happened since 1824), it most likely wouldn't matter, because the party that controls the most state delegations in Congress would simply install their guy as president. The Electoral College takes the already infinitesimal odds that a third-party candidate could get elected president and reduces them even further.

In any event, the way for a third party to become viable is not via a single charismatic candidate, but rather by building a broad base of support over a period of time and getting candidates elected at all levels. And that goal of building a broad-based party is infinitely harder in our current winner-take-all system. I'm very curious to see if some of the ongoing experiments in jungle primaries and ranked-choice voting will really have an effect on the two-party duopoly or at least push the parties closer to the center, but I suspect we'll need to try out a lot of stuff before we are able to figure out what can have an impact.

One last thing: I wouldn't recommend investing too much in a "Get On the Debate Stage" strategy, since there's a good chance 2024 will be the first election in 50 years where there are no general election debates

 

[roadkill1292]

Third parties will continue to struggle competitively until we rid ourselves of first past the post voting. And probably single member districts, too (where applicable).

Experiments are already happening, in cities (like New York and St. Louis) and states (the Virginia GOP governor's primary). Voters like it when the winning candidate has greater consensus support.

 

[knowledge dropper]

One thing the Republicans need to do in 2022 and beyond is have observers near all drop boxes in battleground states 24/7

 

[The Commish]

One thing the Republicans need to do in 2022 and beyond is have observers near all drop boxes in battleground states 24/7

Wouldn't it just be easier for them to pay the little guys inside the boxes change the votes more than the Dems are?

 

[knowledge dropper]

Wouldn't it just be easier for them to pay the little guys inside the boxes change the votes more than the Dems are?

They prefer the term “little people” and only the hateful left would think of stuffing them in drop boxes to carry out their nefarious plans. 
 

 

[dozer]

They prefer the term “little people” and only the hateful left would think of stuffing them in drop boxes to carry out their nefarious plans. 
 

Let’s just hope the plan from the hateful left to place midgets in drop boxes doesn’t come to fruition. I’m thinking there may be unforeseen circumstances that the left’s leadership didn’t think of.

Like, are you going to put a little toilet in there? Will they have a cell phone connection inside the drop box?

Election stealing is complicated.

 

[Godsbrother]

It is weird how Republicans did quite well in other races in the battleground states that Trump lost.   

Perhaps the reason he has no proof of fraud is that he actually lost the election and is too much of a whiny baby to admit it.

 

[knowledge dropper]

Let’s just hope the plan from the hateful left to place midgets in drop boxes doesn’t come to fruition. I’m thinking there may be unforeseen circumstances that the left’s leadership didn’t think of.

Like, are you going to put a little toilet in there? Will they have a cell phone connection inside the drop box?

Election stealing is complicated.

Don’t forget about portable AC units in Georgia and heating units in Wisconsin

And it’s “LITTLE PEOPLE” dadgummit.  

 

[knowledge dropper]

It is weird how Republicans did quite well in other races in the battleground states that Trump lost.   

Perhaps the reason he has no proof of fraud is that he actually lost the election is too much of a whiny baby to admit it.

How else do you think they were able to convince down ticket RINO’s to look the other way?

 

[Godsbrother]

How else do you think they were able to convince down ticket RINO’s to look the other way?

Right.  Any Republican that doesn't buy into the "rigged election"  nonsense is a RINO.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Hilary Clinton has still never acknowledged tgat Trump won the 2016 election legitimately.

Let’s completely ignore Jan 6, demands for post-election recounts, and election denial that continues to this day. Do you think there is any meaningful differences between their concession speeches?

Hilliary:

Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans. This is not the outcome we wanted or we worked so hard for and I’m sorry that we did not win this election for the values we share and the vision we hold for our country.

But I feel pride and gratitude for this wonderful campaign that we built together, this vast, diverse, creative, unruly, energized campaign. You represent the best of America and being your candidate has been one of the greatest honors of my life.

(APPLAUSE)

I know how disappointed you feel because I feel it too, and so do tens of millions of Americans who invested their hopes and dreams in this effort. This is painful and it will be for a long time, but I want you to remember this. Our campaign was never about one person or even one election, it was about the country we love and about building an America that’s hopeful, inclusive and big-hearted.

We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought. But I still believe in America and I always will. And if you do, then we must accept this result and then look to the future. Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.

Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don’t just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things; the rule of law, the principle that we are all equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them.

Now Trump:

[00:00] I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack on the United States Capitol.  

[00:06] Like all Americans, I am outraged by the violence, lawlessness, and mayhem.  I immediately deployed the National Guard and Federal law enforcement to secure the building and expel the intruders.  

[00:20] America is and must always be a nation of law and order.  The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy.  

[00:32] To those who engage in the acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country.  And to those who broke the law, you will pay.  We have just been through an intense election, and emotions are high, but now tempers must be cooled and calm restored. 

[00:52] We must get on with the business of America.  My campaign vigorously pursued every legal avenue to contest the election results.  My only goal was to ensure the integrity of the vote.  In so doing I was fighting to defend American democracy.  

[1:11] I continue to strongly believe that we must reform our election laws to verify the identity and eligibility of all voters and to ensure faith and confidence in all future elections.  Now Congress has certified the results.  

[1:28] A new administration will be inaugurated on January 20th.  My focus now turns to ensuring a smooth, orderly, and seamless transition of power.  This moment calls for healing and reconciliation.  

[1:42] 2020 has been a challenging time for our people.  A menacing pandemic has upended the lives of our citizens, isolated millions in their homes, damaged our economy, and claimed countless lives.  

[1:56] Defeating this pandemic and rebuilding the greatest economy on Earth will require all of us working together.  It will require a renewed emphasis on the civic values of patriotism, faith, charity, community, and family.  

[2:12] We must revitalize the sacred bonds of love and loyalty that bind us together as one national family.  

[2:20] To the citizens of our country, serving as your president has been the honor of my lifetime, and to all of my wonderful supporters, I know you are disappointed, but I also want you to know that our incredible journey is only just beginning.  

[2:37] Thank you.  God bless you, and God bless America.

 

[Terminalxylem]

False equivalence or just imperfect analogy?

I forgot that I was in the land of "My side good, their side bad!" that is the PSF. 

Let's go back to the beginning...You're right that it's rather scary that so many people believe things that are demonstrably untrue. And the belief that "my side is way more objective than yours".

How do we start to combat it? I actually have a good article on that very thing.

Thanks for the link. A few paragraphs that were quite helpful to me:

Naïve Realism is the human tendency to form one’s own worldview regarding various subjects, perceived by an individual as the only truth. Accordingly the individual believes that other people’s reluctance to share his or her views arises from ignorance, irrationality, an inability to draw reasonable conclusions from objective evidence, ideological biases, or self-interest. The psychological bias of naïve realism causes people to see the world in a unilateral and simplistic manner. As a result of this bias, people tend to ignore or reject any information that does not fit their pre- existing worldview, which is perceived by them as the only truth. Consequently, they fail to see things from several points of view and may miss opportunities for change and progress

As Ross showed, the best inoculation against naïve realism—the illusion of personal objectivity—is a healthy dose of fact, aggregated from non-biased sources with no skin in the game. But against the backdrop of a highly polarized political landscape, and a media environment flush with disinformation, it is exceedingly difficult to even know where to begin in de-biasing oneself.

Most Americans also agree on one key issue: that democracy is imperiled, and America is at risk of failing.9 While Democrats and Republicans diverge on the exact nature of the threat and how it should be addressed, this rare instance of agreement presents an opportunity for cross-partisan collaboration. For Americans of diverse ideologies and beliefs to find their way to the negotiation table, they must recognize and examine their illusions of personal objectivity, armed with what social psychologists Jay Van Bavel and Dominic Packer referred to as Ross’ Golden Rule: “Proceed from the naïve but charitable assumption that when people respond in ways that are surprising or offensive, it is generally their perceptions, assumptions, and construals, rather than their basic values, that differ from our own.”

 

[Terminalxylem]

I cant think of a single opportunity in mail in voting chain that either doesnt exist with in person voting or at least have a comparable opportunity for problems. 

The above is EXACTLY what we have here in Florida and we have both avenues available. I also know it would be rather simple to completely secure online voting with technology we readily use and trust in our phones. If one can trust it to mive a 100K wire transfer,  i think we can trust it to record a vote. 

Yep. It’s crazy in-person voting, or paper ballots are necessary at all, when 90%+ of transactions proceed electronically. 

 

[FairWarning]

Yep. It’s crazy in-person voting, or paper ballots are necessary at all, when 90%+ of transactions proceed electronically. 

I’m for it except the part about hacking.  

 

[LawFitz]

I’m for it except the part about hacking.  

Distributed ledger technology shld be able to solve for this. In theory.

 

[GordonGekko]

Yep. It’s crazy in-person voting, or paper ballots are necessary at all, when 90%+ of transactions proceed electronically. 

Direct Headline: ‘I Refuse Not to Be Heard’: Georgia in Uproar Over Voting Meltdown

Georgia’s voting fiasco stemmed primarily from the 30,000 new voting machines the state bought last year for $107 million from Dominion Voting Systems, which is based in Denver. The machines bought by the state last year were instantly controversial. Security experts said they were insecure. Privacy experts worried that the screens could be seen from nearly 30 feet away. Budget hawks balked at the price tag.

By Richard Fausset, Reid J. Epstein and Rick Rojas June 11, 2020

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/09/us/politics/atlanta-voting-georgia-primary.html

Direct Headline: Warren, Klobuchar, Wyden, and Pocan Investigate Vulnerabilities and Shortcomings of Election Technology Industry with Ties to Private Equity

Three private equity-owned election technology vendors serve 90% of eligible voters but fail to sufficiently innovate, improve, and protect deteriorating voting systems; Election security experts have noted for years that our nation's voting systems and election infrastructure are under serious threat

Warren December 10, 2019

https://www.warren.senate.gov/oversight/letters/warren-klobuchar-wyden-and-pocan-investigate-vulnerabilities-and-shortcomings-of-election-technology-industry-with-ties-to-private-equity

******

The first problem your partisan logical fallacy bombing ( false dilemma) is going to have is that Stacey Abrams denounced Dominion Voting Systems during the 2020 primaries in Georgia, as part of her strategy to push that as part of a larger overall accusation of GOP voter suppression and to provide cover for her 2018 run for Governor in which she claimed she won but the election was stolen from her.

Amy Klobuchar, who might be on the short list for VP in 2024, and Elizabeth Warren are legitimate fringe POTUS contenders.  You can't have them denounce DVS a year before the 2020 general cycle, then again in the primaries and then pretend they are pure as the driven snow in November 2020 during Election Day. You can't escape the toxicity of those optics forever. You certainly can't ignore that narrative when Trump says, " I didn't trust Dominion, and why should I do that, since Klobuchar, Warren and Abrams all denounced them and said they were a threat to secure elections?"

All of this fuels a new counter narrative that Trump was right to question DVS. And by doing so, he believes he won the 2020 election.

Nothing you say lines up with actual political reality. Nothing. Zero.

 

[GordonGekko]

Yep. It’s crazy in-person voting, or paper ballots are necessary at all, when 90%+ of transactions proceed electronically. 

Direct Headline: Georgia Havoc Raises New Doubts on Pricey Voting Machines

By Nick Corasaniti and Stephanie Saul June 11, 2020

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/us/politics/georgia-voting-machines.html

Direct Headline: Georgia’s June primary raised concerns about Dominion

By Staff Reports December 3, 2020

https://www.dailyadvocate.com/2020/12/03/georgias-june-primary-raised-concerns-about-dominion/

*****

You want to know why paper ballots are necessary at all? How about asking 2024 POTUS contender Stacey Abrams.

Abrams own political arm, the Fair Fight Action group ( already accused of openly skirting campaign finance laws and intentionally making a mockery of the IRS to boot) has always been deeply financially aligned to Georgia's Coalition For Good Governance.

CGG has openly labeled, on public record, DVS as “unauditable" and "unconstitutional.”  CGG's head honcho Marilyn Marks is on record saying DVS is a system built on "a game of who can rig the system the best.”

The more prominent the discussion of the Georgia battleground gets deep dived, the greater the pathway for Trump to say "I don't trust the results of Dominion because I don't trust electronic type voting, why should I and why is that a problem when POTUS candidate and Democrat Stacey Abrams feels the exact same way?"

You can't have Team Blue keep shouting Russian interference in the 2016 election, ride that lie for the next four years, have them shout Abrams was robbed in 2018 for Governor, have Klobuchar and Warren denounce electronic voting systems and specially Dominion in 2019, then magically the 2020 election was somehow pure as the driven snow.

That's just stupid and insulting. What the Democratic Party did to keep denouncing and saying elections are at risk and were being stolen while Trump was in office was totally stupid. As if it couldn't be used against them later. And it's insulting because it's basically telling the American people that they are expected to believe a pathway that completely ridiculous.

Here's your opportunity to address all the points I'm bringing up here. Go on, do it.

 

[Rich Conway]

I’m for it except the part about hacking.  

Agreed.  We should definitely make that illegal.

 

[The Commish]

I’m for it except the part about hacking.  

Hacking systems is a potential problem with in person voting...not unique to mail-in or online votine.  This is rather easy to address with online voting using existing inexpensive technology every single one of us has in our phone.

 

[dozer]

.

 

[Godsbrother]

Trump had a legal right to question the results of the election.   He filed more than 60 court cases and lost all but one.  There were multiple recounts,  audits, and reviews.   All of his claims of a stolen election have either been debunked or unsubstantiated.

There are a lot of people that believe the election was rigged.  They believe this because Trump keeps saying it, he had bigger rallies and more yard signs, films like 2000 mules, etc.   None of it based on facts but instead on theories that are unprovable at best or absurd at worst. 

At this point there is nothing that is going to convince that 70% that Trump lost.   

The ironic thing is that we have far more evidence that Trump was the one that attempted to steal the election.

 

[belljr]

I'm just confused how people are "hacking" a closed system, unless these machines are not.  Just make it so these are not connected to the outside world.  Then you have to physically be present to hack said results.    I work with many closed systems.  This doesnt seem that difficult unless people just dont trust digital

 

[Terminalxylem]

Trump had a legal right to question the results of the election.   He filed more than 60 court cases and lost all but one.  There were multiple recounts,  audits, and reviews.   All of his claims of a stolen election have either been debunked or unsubstantiated.

There are a lot of people that believe the election was rigged.  They believe this because Trump keeps saying it, he had bigger rallies and more yard signs, films like 2000 mules, etc.   None of it based on facts but instead on theories that are unprovable at best or absurd at worst. 

At this point there is nothing that is going to convince that 70% that Trump lost.   

The ironic thing is that we have far more evidence that Trump was the one that attempted to steal the election.

Surely 2020 has been the most investigated/litigated election in the history of the US, and no findings/rulings in favor of Trump.

For the advocates of a rigged election, what would it take to convince you otherwise? If the answer is nothing, why are we even having this discussion?