What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Election Deniers Are Bad, Right? (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
There's been a good bit of talk about the negatives of denying the election. And threads like this one

60 Percent Of Americans Will Have An Election Denier On The Ballot This Fall

538 Article on this terrible trend. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/republicans-trump-election-fraud/ There are a lot of election deniers on the ballot. Out of 552 total Republican nominees running for office, we found 201 who FULLY DENIED the legitimacy of the 2020 election. These...
forums.footballguys.com forums.footballguys.com

I admit I've given my Conservative friends a hard time that low key deny / question the 2020 Election.

Read this today from Matt Taiibi: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/memory-holed-the-election-was-hacked

Then video clips here: https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s

What are your thoughts on this?

Edited to add the question: Did you remember this many ultra-high profile people denying the 2016 election results?

I did not.

Mercifully, the January 6th committee hearings in congress were canceled yesterday, presumably because Hurricane Ian’s landfall would have botched ratings. With midterms approaching, Democrats have a lot riding on January 6th and are growing impatient. New York congressman Sean Patrick Maloney, who runs the party’s campaign arm, even grumbled about a lack of indictments.

“I think it’s going to be very hard for people to understand if there aren’t actions by the Justice Department to hold people accountable,” he said.

As with Ukrainegate and impeachment, and Russiagate before that, polls show January 6th remains low on the list of voter concerns (the cratering economy is first). However, the reason it “may be hard for people to understand,” as Maloney says, is that congress has spent too much time blurring lines between election denial and conspiracy to overturn the result. If they just focused on the latter — and they have produced evidence, like Trump asking Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to seize voting machines — the hearings might be more effective, even with Republicans.

But they haven’t been, for a reason made obvious by Matt Orfalea’s damning video — which YouTube incredibly has already demonetized — above. Amid sweeping efforts to punish election denial in the Trump context, both criminally and with censorship, an almost exactly similar denial campaign that inspired four-plus years of blue politics has been dropped down a memory hole.

Led by the losing candidate in 2016, Democratic Party politicians along with law enforcement and intelligence officials and media spent years denying the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency, based on an equally specious/dishonest formulation: “The election was hacked.” Moreover, they instigated removal efforts based on the same declare-guilt-now, prove-it-later mentality that gripped figures like Trump and Rudy Giuliani in 2020. How different really is “Just say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me” from “We just have to dig deeper, do the investigation and find it”?

The January 6th hearings ironically are an outgrowth of the Democrats’ own six-year-long election denial endeavor, involving the same people who pushed attempts to remove Trump based on manufactured theories of foreign collusion. There’s an automatic Boy Who Cried Wolf factor built in to hearings that include the likes of California’s Adam Schiff (“I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now”) or Maryland’s Jamie Raskin (“Donald Trump is the hoax perpetrated on the Americans by the Russians”).

Moreover, congressional Democrats’ successful push for censorship on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube — a campaign that began even before January 6th — reveal that the party considers the act of denial itself illegitimate and ban-worthy, if not criminal. But how can that be if, as the video shows, the party’s own leaders engage in the same behavior? How can declaring the 2020 election illegitimate be prohibited, if saying the same thing about 2016 was and is encouraged?

The two stories obviously aren’t the same. But they’re a lot closer than we’ve been led to believe:
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yes. Election denial is bad, really bad. If they truly believed there was serious election fraud, it would have been better to focus on trying to prove that election fraud and fixing the issues for future elections. Instead all the focus is on trying overturn the results which makes it very obviously partisan.

Trying to brush off threats of Russian interference in elections is also bad. Russian interference is a very real threat. It needs to be recognized and defended against. Not to overturn previous elections but to safeguard future elections.
 
Joe Bryant said:
joffer said:
without public confidence in elections, there’s really no republic
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. Did you remember this many ultra high profile people in 2016 denying the election? https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s
I did not.
Click to expand...
But when that confidence, or lack there of, is based on no provable facts what is one to do? Are we really supposed to make sweeping changes (what those would be would be very party specific anyway) based on sore losers unable to backup the claims (dems in ‘16 and gop in ‘20)?
 
dkp993 said:
But when that confidence, or lack there of, is based on no provable facts what is one to do? Are we really supposed to make sweeping changes (what those would be would be very party specific anyway) based on sore losers unable to backup the claims (dems in ‘16 and gop in ‘20)?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. I don't know what is to be done. I think my main point was surprised that this many high profile people refused to accept the 2016 results. Did you remember this?
 
I think there is a significant difference. Hillary called Donald Trump on election night and conceded. There were no liberal mob who mobbed the Capitol Building on Jan 6, 2017, threatening to hang people if Trump was certified as President.

All election denial is bad and liberals have certainly had their share of bad behavior in regards to this- Stacey Abrams comes to mind and to some extent Hillary as well (although she conceded she certainly questioned the results later on.) But that being said, Trump’s actions, and those of his most loyal followers, after the 2020 election are uniquely awful.

Taibbi’s articles seem devoted to attacking the Democratic establishment. It’s a consistent theme.
 
Joe Bryant said:
dkp993 said:
But when that confidence, or lack there of, is based on no provable facts what is one to do? Are we really supposed to make sweeping changes (what those would be would be very party specific anyway) based on sore losers unable to backup the claims (dems in ‘16 and gop in ‘20)?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. I don't know what is to be done. I think my main point was surprised that this many high profile people refused to accept the 2016 results. Did you remember this?
Click to expand...
I do though I will say the video cut like it is makes it feel bigger then I remember (not saying it wasn’t, just what I remember). But Russian interference was everywhere and a hot topic for sure.
 
Joe Bryant said:
There's been a good bit of talk about the negatives of denying the election. And threads like this one

60 Percent Of Americans Will Have An Election Denier On The Ballot This Fall

538 Article on this terrible trend. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/republicans-trump-election-fraud/ There are a lot of election deniers on the ballot. Out of 552 total Republican nominees running for office, we found 201 who FULLY DENIED the legitimacy of the 2020 election. These...
forums.footballguys.com forums.footballguys.com

I admit I've given my Conservative friends a hard time that low key deny / question the 2020 Election.

Read this today from Matt Taiibi: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/memory-holed-the-election-was-hacked

Then video clips here: https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s

What are your thoughts on this?

Edited to add the question: Did you remember this many ultra-high profile people denying the 2016 election results?

I did not.

Mercifully, the January 6th committee hearings in congress were canceled yesterday, presumably because Hurricane Ian’s landfall would have botched ratings. With midterms approaching, Democrats have a lot riding on January 6th and are growing impatient. New York congressman Sean Patrick Maloney, who runs the party’s campaign arm, even grumbled about a lack of indictments.

“I think it’s going to be very hard for people to understand if there aren’t actions by the Justice Department to hold people accountable,” he said.

As with Ukrainegate and impeachment, and Russiagate before that, polls show January 6th remains low on the list of voter concerns (the cratering economy is first). However, the reason it “may be hard for people to understand,” as Maloney says, is that congress has spent too much time blurring lines between election denial and conspiracy to overturn the result. If they just focused on the latter — and they have produced evidence, like Trump asking Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to seize voting machines — the hearings might be more effective, even with Republicans.

But they haven’t been, for a reason made obvious by Matt Orfalea’s damning video — which YouTube incredibly has already demonetized — above. Amid sweeping efforts to punish election denial in the Trump context, both criminally and with censorship, an almost exactly similar denial campaign that inspired four-plus years of blue politics has been dropped down a memory hole.

Led by the losing candidate in 2016, Democratic Party politicians along with law enforcement and intelligence officials and media spent years denying the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency, based on an equally specious/dishonest formulation: “The election was hacked.” Moreover, they instigated removal efforts based on the same declare-guilt-now, prove-it-later mentality that gripped figures like Trump and Rudy Giuliani in 2020. How different really is “Just say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me” from “We just have to dig deeper, do the investigation and find it”?

The January 6th hearings ironically are an outgrowth of the Democrats’ own six-year-long election denial endeavor, involving the same people who pushed attempts to remove Trump based on manufactured theories of foreign collusion. There’s an automatic Boy Who Cried Wolf factor built in to hearings that include the likes of California’s Adam Schiff (“I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now”) or Maryland’s Jamie Raskin (“Donald Trump is the hoax perpetrated on the Americans by the Russians”).

Moreover, congressional Democrats’ successful push for censorship on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube — a campaign that began even before January 6th — reveal that the party considers the act of denial itself illegitimate and ban-worthy, if not criminal. But how can that be if, as the video shows, the party’s own leaders engage in the same behavior? How can declaring the 2020 election illegitimate be prohibited, if saying the same thing about 2016 was and is encouraged?

The two stories obviously aren’t the same. But they’re a lot closer than we’ve been led to believe:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Trump was impeached for abuse of power / obstruction of justice and then for his role in riots on Jan 6 not because of fraudulent or illegitimate election results in 2016.

My recollection of these people saying the election was " hacked" was primarily referring to Russian interfering with our election and its efforts to boost Trump's candidacy during the run up to the election.
 
Did you all get together and agree on "Russian Interference" as the Official Excuse before you all posted?

I call :bs: on the hypocrisy and fake outrage we got going on today from the left regarding denying elections.
 
Last edited:
The ones we have now are incredibly bad.

They never have any proof.

And they are proven to not care at all what the truth is. Deny no matter what. It's part of the R platform for these clowns.
 
Its a poorly written rant of a crybaby.

The rhetoric of 2016 when Trump won isn't remotely close to the same thing as what happened in 2020 and what the GOP has become. Trying to equate the two is nonsense. There isn't both sides to this story. The GOP is the enemy of American Democracy.

Since your asking.
 
BladeRunner said:
Did you all get together and agree on "Russian Interference" as the Official Excuse before you all posted?

I call :bs: on the hypocrisy and fake outrage we got going on today from the left regarding denying elections.
Click to expand...
I didn't watch the entire video of 3 second clips with no context but I believe this is what the vast majority of the "election hacked " comments come from - Russia interference for whatever reason in favor of Trump in 2016.
 
Last edited:
Joe Bryant said:
dkp993 said:
But when that confidence, or lack there of, is based on no provable facts what is one to do? Are we really supposed to make sweeping changes (what those would be would be very party specific anyway) based on sore losers unable to backup the claims (dems in ‘16 and gop in ‘20)?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. I don't know what is to be done. I think my main point was surprised that this many high profile people refused to accept the 2016 results. Did you remember this?
Click to expand...

many high profile people refused to accept the 2016 results. Did you remember this?
Click to expand...

Um, no, actually I don't.

I don't remember Hillary, Pelosi or any other high-profile Democrat saying that the results were fraudulent. None. Hillary conceded within 24 hours.
 
timschochet said:
I think there is a significant difference. Hillary called Donald Trump on election night and conceded. There were no liberal mob who mobbed the Capitol Building on Jan 6, 2017, threatening to hang people if Trump was certified as President.

All election denial is bad and liberals have certainly had their share of bad behavior in regards to this- Stacey Abrams comes to mind and to some extent Hillary as well (although she conceded she certainly questioned the results later on.) But that being said, Trump’s actions, and those of his most loyal followers, after the 2020 election are uniquely awful.

Taibbi’s articles seem devoted to attacking the Democratic establishment. It’s a consistent theme.
Click to expand...
There's lawsuits and election challenges every cycle. There's people decrying the results every cycle.

There is no comparison to that and 2020 and what the GOP has become. They don't get to defend their particular cancer on the body politic by trying to deflect. Though, granted, trying to get others blamed for your own actions is the mark of a coward, so it does fit.
 
Joe Bryant said:
squistion said:
Um, no, actually I don't.
Click to expand...

I did not know it either. https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s
Click to expand...
Those types of videos are generally not good evidence of anything. They remove pretty much all context for those statements. They could be saying things like "I don't believe Russia hacked our election" and they just cut out the first part.

That being said, I don't believe Russia hacked the 2016 election. That's in the same realm of Dominion counting votes wrong. There is zero proof of either.
 
squistion said:
And I still don't know it after viewing that horribly misleading propaganda YouTube clip with all these quotes taken out of context.

How am I, or anyone, is supposed to take that seriously (with the funny cartoon speed up voices?) No, thank you, I don't think so
Click to expand...

Some of it was dumb for sure. But the actual multiple video clips of people like Hillary Clinton saying the election results were illegitimate was something I had not seen.
 
Joe Bryant said:
squistion said:
And I still don't know it after viewing that horribly misleading propaganda YouTube clip with all these quotes taken out of context.

How am I, or anyone, is supposed to take that seriously (with the funny cartoon speed up voices?) No, thank you, I don't think so
Click to expand...

Some of it was dumb for sure. But the actual multiple video clips of people like Hillary Clinton saying the election results were illegitimate was something I had not seen.
Click to expand...

Context is everything, Joe. Why was she saying that? Because she thought there was voter fraud? No, she has never claimed that. I would like to see the full context of most of these snippets.
 
@Joe Bryant my knee jerks in this thread are why you're pondering this here now. That question at that time was terrible because the people you're wondering about here exist. Facts only matter when they align with the bias and when they don't feelings reign supreme. These people are not worth anyone's time nor energy and they never have. Our mistake was ever attempting to engage them in the first place.
 
squistion said:
Context is everything, Joe. Why was she saying that? Because she thought there was voter fraud? No, she has never claimed that. I would like to see the full context of most of these snippets.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the full clips for all those are available.

You said, "I don't remember Hillary, Pelosi or any other high-profile Democrat saying that the results were fraudulent. None."

I did not remember her doing that either. That's why the video clips with multiple videos of her doing that and claiming the election was illegitimate were surprising to me.
 
The very fact that so many claim to not remember all this is the point. It's been memory holed. You're even being shown video proof, and you don't believe your eyes.
Long after the 2016 election was over, there was a prominent poll which indicated more than 50% of democrats believed the Russians hacked the election via hacking voting machines. I think that may have even been mentioned in the Taibbi piece.
That was absurd, and the fact that so many prominent politicians and celebrities repeated the 'hacked' election talking points so often was the reason for it. It happened, and it happened for a LONG time.
If you want to believe January 6th and Trump's tacit endorsement of it is one of the greatest tragedy's of the current century, you better lay some blame at the feet of everyone you see in that video. If you don't you're simply being a partisan hack.
 
timschochet said:
I think there is a significant difference. Hillary called Donald Trump on election night and conceded. There were no liberal mob who mobbed the Capitol Building on Jan 6, 2017, threatening to hang people if Trump was certified as President.

All election denial is bad and liberals have certainly had their share of bad behavior in regards to this- Stacey Abrams comes to mind and to some extent Hillary as well (although she conceded she certainly questioned the results later on.) But that being said, Trump’s actions, and those of his most loyal followers, after the 2020 election are uniquely awful.

Taibbi’s articles seem devoted to attacking the Democratic establishment. It’s a consistent theme.
Click to expand...
It's fine to think there is a difference, and that Trump's actions since 2020 are worse. I tend to agree. However I think there's a good chance 1/6 never happens without the incessant chirping from the Left between 2016 and 2019 which cast doubt on the 2016 results (not to mention Abrams in Georgia).
And Taibbi does go after Democrats lately, because he goes after those in power. 10 -12 years ago he went after Republicans when they were in power, most prominently around the Occupy Wall Street story and the Financial bailouts.
I personally love that there are still a few real journalists out there who are going to target those in power regardless of their political affiliation.
 
Joe Bryant said:
squistion said:
Context is everything, Joe. Why was she saying that? Because she thought there was voter fraud? No, she has never claimed that. I would like to see the full context of most of these snippets.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the full clips for all those are available.

You said, "I don't remember Hillary, Pelosi or any other high-profile Democrat saying that the results were fraudulent. None."

I did not remember her doing that either. That's why the video clips with multiple videos of her doing that and claiming the election was illegitimate were surprising to me.
Click to expand...

We are getting into another weird semantics discussion. What did she mean by "illegitimate"? She didn't say fraudulent. Context might show she was referring to Russian bots on social media who influenced voters with misleading and false claims about her (again we need context here to see what she was talking about out, not some 5 second sound bite).
 
squistion said:
Joe Bryant said:
squistion said:
Context is everything, Joe. Why was she saying that? Because she thought there was voter fraud? No, she has never claimed that. I would like to see the full context of most of these snippets.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the full clips for all those are available.

You said, "I don't remember Hillary, Pelosi or any other high-profile Democrat saying that the results were fraudulent. None."

I did not remember her doing that either. That's why the video clips with multiple videos of her doing that and claiming the election was illegitimate were surprising to me.
Click to expand...

We are getting into another weird semantics discussion. What did she mean by "illegitimate"? She didn't say fraudulent. Context might show she was referring to Russian bots on social media who influenced voters with misleading and false claims about her (again we need context here to see what she was talking about out, not some 5 second sound bite).
Click to expand...
I disagree with that. Clinton saying Trump is illegitimate is no different that Trump saying he won bigly. They are both saying the same thing different ways.
 
Battersbox said:
The very fact that so many claim to not remember all this is the point. It's been memory holed. You're even being shown video proof, and you don't believe your eyes.
Long after the 2016 election was over, there was a prominent poll which indicated more than 50% of democrats believed the Russians hacked the election via hacking voting machines. I think that may have even been mentioned in the Taibbi piece.
That was absurd, and the fact that so many prominent politicians and celebrities repeated the 'hacked' election talking points so often was the reason for it. It happened, and it happened for a LONG time.
If you want to believe January 6th and Trump's tacit endorsement of it is one of the greatest tragedy's of the current century, you better lay some blame at the feet of everyone you see in that video. If you don't you're simply being a partisan hack.
Click to expand...
Hasn't every major election has some level of this - Obama wasn'tt born here, W didn't win Florida (well that one is probably true :lol: ), etc.

If hardcore MAGA types want an award for taking it the extra step then I guess that was earned.
 
Yankee23Fan said:
timschochet said:
I think there is a significant difference. Hillary called Donald Trump on election night and conceded. There were no liberal mob who mobbed the Capitol Building on Jan 6, 2017, threatening to hang people if Trump was certified as President.

All election denial is bad and liberals have certainly had their share of bad behavior in regards to this- Stacey Abrams comes to mind and to some extent Hillary as well (although she conceded she certainly questioned the results later on.) But that being said, Trump’s actions, and those of his most loyal followers, after the 2020 election are uniquely awful.

Taibbi’s articles seem devoted to attacking the Democratic establishment. It’s a consistent theme.
Click to expand...
There's lawsuits and election challenges every cycle. There's people decrying the results every cycle.

There is no comparison to that and 2020 and what the GOP has become. They don't get to defend their particular cancer on the body politic by trying to deflect. Though, granted, trying to get others blamed for your own actions is the mark of a coward, so it does fit.
Click to expand...
There sure is.
 
Joe Bryant said:
Juxtatarot said:
is calling Trump illegitimate the same thing as not accepting the results of the election?
Click to expand...

That's a fair question. Without having thought much about it, I think it feels like the same thing. But maybe not. What do you think?
Click to expand...

I was thinking about Jimmy Carter. He was in the video. Here’s a longer clip of his answer.

No, I don’t think it’s the same. I don’t think Carter was suggesting Trump should be thrown out and Clinton declared president. Some Democrats felt that way but not like the video seems to give the impression. At least, in my opinion.
 
squistion said:
We are getting into another weird semantics discussion. What did she mean by "illegitimate"? She didn't say fraudulent. Context might show she was referring to Russian bots on social media who influenced voters with misleading and false claims about her (again we need context here to see what she was talking about out, not some 5 second sound bite).
Click to expand...

Not really. You said, "I don't remember Hillary, Pelosi or any other high-profile Democrat saying that the results were fraudulent. None."

Yesterday, I would have agreed with you.

Then I saw a video with a bunch of video clips of Hillary Clinton saying the election was illegitimate. https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s You can try to deflect or dismiss or call that propaganda. But it seemed interesting to me. :shrug:
 
Does anyone understand the difference between the following two statements?

1. The other side cheated in the election, such as by counting votes that weren't cast.
2. Someone (possibly the other side, possibly not) influenced people to vote a certain way.

We know that Russia did the second in 2016. Heck, we can be pretty sure that Russia, China, and many others attempted to do the same in 2012, 2020, and virtually every other election since the advent of the internet. We expect them to try! The US tries to do the exact same thing in other nations' elections. Of course other nations will try to influence ours.

Back to the point of the thread... Russia "interfered" in the 2016 election. Trump won in 2016 and Clinton lost. Both of the previous sentences are true statements. Saying "Russia interfered" is NOT the same thing at all as being an "election denier". It just isn't, and anyone who says otherwise is just trying to deflect from what the GOP has become over the past several years.

Edit: I should note that we'll never know how successful another nation's attempt to interfere actually was. Did Russia influence 6 votes, 26 votes, or 60,000 votes in 2016? Got me. I don't know how many they or China influenced in 2020, 2012, 2008, or 2004 either.
 
A few questions:
1. Who was the 2016 equivalent of Rudy Giuliani or Sydney Powell?
2. Was the 2016 election still a major issue going into the 2018 election? Were many Democrats running on that issue?

If the answer is nobody and no, then it's pretty hard to say the 2016 Democrat reaction is the same as the 2020 Republican reaction.
 
tymarsas said:
then it's pretty hard to say the 2016 Democrat reaction is the same as the 2020 Republican reaction.
Click to expand...

I think this is an important point.

I don't know how many are trying to say they're the same. I'm certainly not.

My point was I did not realize so many ultra high profile people said repeatedly the 2016 election results were illegitimate. https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s

That was legit surprising to me to see the video clips.
 
Last edited:
Joe Bryant said:
squistion said:
We are getting into another weird semantics discussion. What did she mean by "illegitimate"? She didn't say fraudulent. Context might show she was referring to Russian bots on social media who influenced voters with misleading and false claims about her (again we need context here to see what she was talking about out, not some 5 second sound bite).
Click to expand...

Not really. You said, "I don't remember Hillary, Pelosi or any other high-profile Democrat saying that the results were fraudulent. None."

Yesterday, I would have agreed with you.

Then I saw a video with a bunch of video clips of Hillary Clinton saying the election was illegitimate. https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s You can try to deflect or dismiss or call that propaganda. But it seemed interesting to me. :shrug:
Click to expand...

:mellow:

Illegitimate does not mean the same thing as fraudulent, the words are not synonymous. Again, we need to see the context rather than just react from an isolated 5 second clip.
 
Joe Bryant said:
tymarsas said:
then it's pretty hard to say the 2016 Democrat reaction is the same as the 2020 Republican reaction.
Click to expand...

I think this is an important point.

I don't know anyone is trying to say they're the same. I'm certainly not.

My point was I did not realize so many ultra high profile people said repeatedly the 2016 election results were illegitimate. https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s

That was legit surprising to me to see the video clips.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. It wasn't necessarily directed at you. I think there are plenty of people trying to make it equivalent. I also am somewhat surprised regarding Clinton's comments mostly because I haven't paid attention to her since 2016. I've seen them before but I was surprised the first time I saw them. I would've said she completely fell off the map after 2016 (like most losing presidential candidates).
 
Joe Bryant said:
tymarsas said:
then it's pretty hard to say the 2016 Democrat reaction is the same as the 2020 Republican reaction.
Click to expand...

I think this is an important point.

I don't know anyone is trying to say they're the same. I'm certainly not.

My point was I did not realize so many ultra high profile people said repeatedly the 2016 election results were illegitimate. https://youtu.be/uoMfIkz7v6s

That was legit surprising to me to see the video clips.
Click to expand...
I think there are a lot of people saying this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

the moops
60 Percent Of Americans Will Have An Election Denier On The Ballot This Fall
3 4 5
Replies
209
Views
6K
NorvilleBarnes
NorvilleBarnes
GordonGekko
Republican National Committee: "Over 150 Examples Of Democrats Denying Election Results" (10/22/22 11:14 PST)
Replies
15
Views
879
JIslander
J
dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top