Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

How Much Voter Fraud Happened In 2020?


Joe Bryant

How much voter fraud do you think happened in 2020?  

464 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Godsbrother said:

The USA is in a very precarious situation right now and the danger is not coming from a foreign enemy.   Abraham Lincoln once said "“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”   Unfortunately I think this be happening now and it is depressing that it is coming from the sitting president of the United States.

 

If political tribalism had a greeting card department, what you wrote above would be in the failed copy bin.  Good God man, you sound like you are filming a western.

The GOP is loyal to Trump in so much as some frat guys will play along with house rules if they think it's the easiest pathway to free beer and #######s from sorority girls with low self esteem.

The long con for Trump is basically muscle memory. It's how he's conducted his entire celebrity career, I don't see the playbook changing. It's like Andy Reid never running the football or putting down cheeseburgers.

The power brokers in the DNC brought this upon themselves in 2012, they kept openly mocking Donald Trump as if he was going to take their horse #### on a plate and smile and call it steak.  That bizarre liberal circle jerk of a movie, The Comey Rule, only got one thing right - Donald Trump can manage public criticism and laugh right back in your face, but one on one dismissal will generate relentless and brutal confrontation.

Look at Trump's rallies and his ability to barnstorm crowds. Not even Reagan could generate this kind of frenzy. As soon as TrumpTV goes up, every major DNC power player is going to get bracketed. How are you going to function when you have people following you and shouting at you with their phone cameras up looking to cancel you at every moment of your public life?  Trump only makes Dan Crenshaw/Nikki Haley look more and more attractive in 2024 and that could turn out to be a 16 year POTUS stretch for Team Red.  That reality is more on the DNC's failure to clean it's own house and less on "Orange Man Bad"

The game is attrition. Pushing voter fraud is due diligence but it's much in line with Trump's established long con playbook and how Mark Burnett has classically driven a narrative.  But you want to film a western I suppose.

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fred_1_15301 said:

Wow - you need to relax a little lol.  None of this is going to happen.

Longshot? Yes. 

Does Trump want to do it? Yes. 

Should that have the entire country freaking out? Yes. 

Is the entire country freaking out? Nope. 

 

Little steps towards a coup in broad daylight. One little step at a time. The GOP obediently sitting quietly while he does it. He'll continue to take more and more until they stand up to him. If they don't put Trump in his place he will do everything he can to steal the election. Go read his Twitter. 70 million people in this country believe every word he's saying. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Commish said:

we are WAY to lazy for civil war

I agree with this. So Trump can steal the election if he wants. He knows the path he needs to take to get there. Look at what he's doing. Who he's fired. His tweets. Everything is moving in that direction. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone watching this “big deal” RNC Trump lawyers news conference?  According to Trump...

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

·

4h

Important News Conference today by lawyers on a very clear and viable path to victory. Pieces are very nicely falling into place. RNC at 12:00 P.M.

 

I’ve only been able to catch a few minutes and haven’t heard anything earth shattering or new yet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GordonGekko said:

 

If political tribalism had a greeting card department, what you wrote above would be in the failed copy bin.  Good God man, you sound like you are filming a western.

The GOP is loyal to Trump in so much as some frat guys will play along with house rules if they think it's the easiest pathway to free beer and #######s from sorority girls with low self esteem.

The long con for Trump is basically muscle memory. It's how he's conducted his entire celebrity career, I don't see the playbook changing. It's like Andy Reid never running the football or putting down cheeseburgers.

The power brokers in the DNC brought this upon themselves in 2012, they kept openly mocking Donald Trump as if he was going to take their horse #### on a plate and smile and call it steak.  That bizarre liberal circle jerk of a movie, The Comey Rule, only got one thing right - Donald Trump can manage public criticism and laugh right back in your face, but one on one dismissal will generate relentless and brutal confrontation.

Look at Trump's rallies and his ability to barnstorm crowds. Not even Reagan could generate this kind of frenzy. As soon as TrumpTV goes up, every major DNC power player is going to get bracketed. How are you going to function when you have people following you and shouting at you with their phone cameras up looking to cancel you at every moment of your public life?  Trump only makes Dan Crenshaw/Nikki Haley look more and more attractive in 2024 and that could turn out to be a 16 year POTUS stretch for Team Red.  That reality is more on the DNC's failure to clean it's own house and less on "Orange Man Bad"

The game is attrition. Pushing voter fraud is due diligence but it's much in line with Trump's established long con playbook and how Mark Burnett has classically driven a narrative.  But you want to film a western I suppose.

Is Crenshaw the guy with the patch that started the go fund me for the wall?  If so I hope that's not who you think the savior of the GOP will be

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Is anyone watching Guiliani right now?  Spouting absolutely insane theories.  No evidence, of course, just accusations.

When someone says they have 60 witnesses, that's not "no evidence".  But the reality is that no one on the right or the left has the ability to think for themselves, so those 60 witnesses are instantly written off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Anyone watching this “big deal” RNC Trump lawyers news conference?  According to Trump...

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

·

4h

Important News Conference today by lawyers on a very clear and viable path to victory. Pieces are very nicely falling into place. RNC at 12:00 P.M.

 

I’ve only been able to catch a few minutes and haven’t heard anything earth shattering or new yet

Right-wing twitter is going nuts over Rudy's performance.  Political folks see what they want to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:
10 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Is anyone watching Guiliani right now?  Spouting absolutely insane theories.  No evidence, of course, just accusations.

When someone says they have 60 witnesses, that's not "no evidence".  But the reality is that no one on the right or the left has the ability to think for themselves, so those 60 witnesses are instantly written off.

Fair enough.  "No evidence that we will allow anyone to review because we know we're completely full of it."

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rich Conway said:

Fair enough.  "No evidence that we will allow anyone to review because we know we're completely full of it."

Just use words correctly.  That's it.  Demand to see the evidence. Claiming there is no evidence is putting forth a fraudulent argument.

  • Laughing 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

When someone says they have 60 witnesses, that's not "no evidence".  But the reality is that no one on the right or the left has the ability to think for themselves, so those 60 witnesses are instantly written off. 

:confused:

Of course it is...until they are seen and give depositions it's just a claim.  Have we as a collective already forgotten what the standards have been since the beginning of this country?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

Just use words correctly.  That's it.  Demand to see the evidence. Claiming there is no evidence is putting forth a fraudulent argument.

No, my words were accurate.  He has produced no evidence.  He claims to HAVE evidence, but he has NOT produced it.

Edited by Rich Conway
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Uwe Blab said:

Summary:   Rudy Giuliani is saying a bunch of things at the podium that he and Trump's legal team refuse to allege under oath in front of a judge. That's it. That's the entire story.

It is all a PR move to keep the base engaged and the gullible into giving their hard earned money to a con-man and his shyster lawyer.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there are all these sworn affadavits, why are they not being interviewed?  That's literally the job of the press.  Interview these people.  If the Trump team won't allow it, that exposes their hand.  The media should be demanding to talk to these people. For the record, they might be doing just this and I'm not aware of it.  I'm just pointing out that this should be the next step.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, shader said:
14 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Is anyone watching Guiliani right now?  Spouting absolutely insane theories.  No evidence, of course, just accusations.

When someone says they have 60 witnesses, that's not "no evidence".

Yes, it is.

When someone produces 60 witnesses, THAT is when you can accurately say that it's not "no evidence."

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

No, my words were accurate.  He has produced no evidence.  He claims to HAVE evidence, but he has NOT produced it.

If someone says they have 60 sworn affidavits (which equals evidence), I tend to believe them.  Perhaps that's naive of me.  If this evidence is never given to a court, or released to the press/public or verified by anyone, then we can call him a liar.  But you said there's no evidence, which is factually untrue unless you're claiming he's lying..  Your "he has not produced it" revision is accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, shader said:

Right-wing twitter is going nuts over Rudy's performance.  Political folks see what they want to see.

Thanks. What specifically are they going nuts for? Has anything new been revealed or is it basically a summary of everything we’ve heard for weeks? I did catch the part where Rudy was bashing the media about how they should be doing this so I guess what I’m asking is is the right just loving the tone and tenor or is there actual new important information

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, shader said:

If there are all these sworn affadavits, why are they not being interviewed?  That's literally the job of the press.  Interview these people.  If the Trump team won't allow it, that exposes their hand.  The media should be demanding to talk to these people. For the record, they might be doing just this and I'm not aware of it.  I'm just pointing out that this should be the next step.

Just a guess, but most likely same as the healthcare plan binder, just blank papers that they throw around

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dkp993 said:

Thanks. What specifically are they going nuts for? Has anything new been revealed or is it basically a summary of everything we’ve heard for weeks? I did catch the part where Rudy was bashing the media about how they should be doing this so I guess what I’m asking is is the right just loving the tone and tenor or is there actual new important information

He's fighting hard for the common man, that's what they are going nuts for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Thanks. What specifically are they going nuts for? Has anything new been revealed or is it basically a summary of everything we’ve heard for weeks? I did catch the part where Rudy was bashing the media about how they should be doing this so I guess what I’m asking is is the right just loving the tone and tenor or is there actual new important information

Dilbert writer Scott Adams: "Rudy is pushing the slaughtermeter up to 98%. He's making a strong case that the fraud is big enough to change the result and the evidence is clear."

:shrug:

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

If there are all these sworn affadavits, why are they not being interviewed?  That's literally the job of the press.  Interview these people.

That's not how the press works. At all.

Otherwise, the Republican party could just produce a million affidavits and then force the press to go on a wild goose chase to track down and interview them all.

In this day and age, an "affidavit" can be little more than a computerized form letter submitted by an anonymous person on the internet. They're not the sacrosanct document that they were in bygone eras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dkp993 said:

Thanks. What specifically are they going nuts for? Has anything new been revealed or is it basically a summary of everything we’ve heard for weeks? I did catch the part where Rudy was bashing the media about how they should be doing this so I guess what I’m asking is is the right just loving the tone and tenor or is there actual new important information

They believe Rudy.  Liberals don't.  That's the difference. When he talks about the evidence, they assume it exists.  Liberals assume he's lying. 

I will give the twittersphere on right one thing, they are growing tired of being told about the evidence too, they want to see it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, shader said:
8 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

No, my words were accurate.  He has produced no evidence.  He claims to HAVE evidence, but he has NOT produced it.

If someone says they have 60 sworn affidavits (which equals evidence), I tend to believe them.  Perhaps that's naive of me. 

Indeed.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, shader said:

If someone says they have 60 sworn affidavits (which equals evidence), I tend to believe them.  Perhaps that's naive of me.  If this evidence is never given to a court, or released to the press/public or verified by anyone, then we can call him a liar.  But you said there's no evidence, which is factually untrue unless you're claiming he's lying..  Your "he has not produced it" revision is accurate.

He’s lying. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

Bottom line, there's only one response to that press conference.  Show your work.  Making fun of him, calling him a liar, or claiming he has no evidence are not proper responses.

Demand to see the work.  That's it.  

I think everyone has been saying that.  Poop or get off the pot, show all this illegal activity.  In the court cases the judges have asked from that and the Trump team hasn't shown anything.  It's time to move on if they don't have anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

Bottom line, there's only one response to that press conference.  Show your work.  Making fun of him, calling him a liar, or claiming he has no evidence are not proper responses.

Demand to see the work.  That's it.  

Nope..the only proper response is that his claims have repeatedly been laughed out of court and that there's nothing to see here, but to each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shader said:

If someone says they have 60 sworn affidavits (which equals evidence), I tend to believe them.  Perhaps that's naive of me.  If this evidence is never given to a court, or released to the press/public or verified by anyone, then we can call him a liar.  But you said there's no evidence, which is factually untrue unless you're claiming he's lying..  Your "he has not produced it" revision is accurate.

Considering who we're talking about, I would agree that blindly taking him at his word is pretty naive.  Looking back at my exact words, "No evidence, just accusations", I'd argue it's clearly implied that it meant "He has produced no evidence."

This feels like a Seinfeld quote: "See, you know how to take the reservation.  You just don't know how to hold the reservation.  And that's really the most important part of the reservation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Uwe Blab said:

Dilbert writer Scott Adams: "Rudy is pushing the slaughtermeter up to 98%. He's making a strong case that the fraud is big enough to change the result and the evidence is clear."

:shrug:

On the flip-side, Rudy is exposing himself to an extreme degree.  If he says all this, and is proven a liar, he's destroyed his reputation.  Pretty high stakes game he's playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

They believe Rudy.  Liberals don't.  That's the difference. When he talks about the evidence, they assume it exists.  Liberals assume he's lying. 

I will give the twittersphere on right one thing, they are growing tired of being told about the evidence too, they want to see it.  

not just liberals.....baffling that we are still doing this.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am listening to I believe attorney Lin Wood. She is attacking the Dominion system and what I heard was that the system COULD have been programmed to flip votes. She is claiming in the middle of the night they stopped counting everywhere and imported hundreds of thousands of votes overnight. I have not heard that there WAS anything done, only that it COULD have been done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

2 minutes ago, Joe Summer said:

That's not how the press works. At all.

Otherwise, the Republican party could just produce a million affidavits and then force the press to go on a wild goose chase to track down and interview them all.

In this day and age, an "affidavit" can be little more than a computerized form letter submitted by an anonymous person on the internet. They're not the sacrosanct document that they were in bygone eras.

This seems like a cop-out.  Saying "these could be computerized letters from anonymous people" is like saying "there could be fraud".  

We shall see over time.  The only response to Rudy should be "prove it".  That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

It is all a PR move to keep the base engaged and the gullible into giving their hard earned money to a con-man and his shyster lawyer.  

Sadly I hope this this is the extent of it. He does have some big loan payments coming up.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shader said:

On the flip-side, Rudy is exposing himself to an extreme degree.  If he says all this, and is proven a liar, he's destroyed his reputation.  Pretty high stakes game he's playing.

I know what you're saying.  I do.  I kinda feel like Rudy has no reputation of note left.  He's kinda in bumbling clown territory now, isn't he?  I get that feel everywhere.  Hard to believe who he was in like 2005.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, yak651 said:

I think everyone has been saying that.  Poop or get off the pot, show all this illegal activity.  In the court cases the judges have asked from that and the Trump team hasn't shown anything.  It's time to move on if they don't have anything.

It's worse than that.  In many of these cases, the Trump lawyers have literally stated that they have no evidence and that the fraud they alleged did not, in fact, exist.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, shader said:

On the flip-side, Rudy is exposing himself to an extreme degree.  If he says all this, and is proven a liar, he's destroyed his reputation.  Pretty high stakes game he's playing.

But see, this really isn't true.  Those who believe him will simply move on to the next conspiracy, never questioning the fact that the last 27 amounted to nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shader said:

On the flip-side, Rudy is exposing himself to an extreme degree.  If he says all this, and is proven a liar, he's destroyed his reputation.  Pretty high stakes game he's playing.

I need your secrets.  How on earth is this true in the world you're living in?  The ONLY people he hasn't destroyed his reputation with are the Trump supporters.  That will continue to be true after his bluff is called.  They won't care even for a second.  They'll just move on to the next lawsuit or conspiracy theory as if THAT'S the one.  Rinse repeat.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn’t the first time they’ve held up a stack of papers saying they have so many signed affidavits alleging fraud and corruption. 
 

The last batch when shared turned out to be a bunch of nothing and nothing of substance. Affidavits such as ‘I saw ballots coming in from military personnel who were voting for Biden. I don’t believe that they would so that’s fraud.’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, shader said:

When someone says they have 60 witnesses, that's not "no evidence".  But the reality is that no one on the right or the left has the ability to think for themselves, so those 60 witnesses are instantly written off. 

They are written off because its Rudy Giuliani making the claims.  If he had all these witnesses and this proof...they would have been presenting as much in these court cases...rather than claiming they have all of it to the media over and over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...