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.

How Much Voter Fraud Happened In 2020? (5 Viewers)

How much voter fraud do you think happened in 2020?

  • I voted for Biden and I think Voter Fraud was rampant - enough to impact the outcome.

    Votes: 8 1.7%

  • I voted for Biden and I think Voter Fraud was real - enough to maybe impact the outcome.

    Votes: 4 0.8%

  • I voted for Biden and I think Voter Fraud was minimal - not enough to make a real impact

    Votes: 65 13.7%

  • I voted for Biden and I think Voter Fraud was virtually non existent - no impact at all

    Votes: 269 56.9%

  • I voted for Trump and I think Voter Fraud was rampant - enough to impact the outcome.

    Votes: 26 5.5%

  • I voted for Trump and I think Voter Fraud was real - enough to maybe impact the outcome.

    Votes: 23 4.9%

  • I voted for Trump and I think Voter Fraud was minimal - not enough to make a real impact

    Votes: 14 3.0%

  • I voted for Trump and I think Voter Fraud was virtually non existent - no impact at all

    Votes: 8 1.7%

  • I voted for a 3rd party or didn't vote and I think Voter Fraud was rampant - enough to impact the ou

    Votes: 7 1.5%

  • I voted for a 3rd party or didn't vote and I think Voter Fraud was real - enough to maybe impact the

    Votes: 11 2.3%

  • I voted for a 3rd party or didn't vote and I think Voter Fraud was minimal - not enough to make a re

    Votes: 20 4.2%

  • I voted for a 3rd party or didn't vote and I think Voter Fraud was virtually non existent - no impac

    Votes: 18 3.8%
  • Total voters
    473
Doug B said:
The Republican Board of Canvassers members don’t have to worry about getting primaried. Why are they carrying Trump’s water again?

Really wish I knew what was going in n behind the scenes in cases like these. How is political leverage being applied here - specifically? Threatened job loss or career ruin? Physical threats? What?
Click to expand...
I don't think you can underestimate tribal loyalty, not to mention fear of the socialist boogeyman.

I do wonder what is being said behind the scenes, whether the prominent Republicans are urging them to vote Yes or vote No.

 
Doug B said:
The Republican Board of Canvassers members don’t have to worry about getting primaried. Why are they carrying Trump’s water again?

Really wish I knew what was going in n behind the scenes in cases like these. How is political leverage being applied here - specifically? Threatened job loss or career ruin? Physical threats? What?
Click to expand...
Only Shinkle is.   Van Langevelde has pretty clearly stated that he believes his duty is to certify.    The Michigan Supreme Court has taken up this issue multiple times, and has said the board of canvassers has only ministerial powers.  They have no authority to question the results of the counties or perform investigations.   

Shinkle and his wife are both outspoken Trump supporters.   

 
Doug B said:
Well, going by what the rover just posted...it looks like one of the Republicans will certify. If I understand right, that one Republican is all that’s needed. Four people on the board, three needed to certify.
Click to expand...
I have watched the whole hearing and tend to agree that one Republican seems to be leaning / siding with certification as the only option they have under the law. That would make the vote a minimum of 3-1. 

 
the rover said:
Only Shinkle is.   Van Langevelde has pretty clearly stated that he believes his duty is to certify.    The Michigan Supreme Court has taken up this issue multiple times, and has said the board of canvassers has only ministerial powers.  They have no authority to question the results of the counties or perform investigations.   

Shinkle and his wife are both outspoken Trump supporters.   
Click to expand...
I watched for about 30 mins and I would be shocked if Shinkle will vote to certify so Van Langevelde needs to vote to certify.

 
Pennsylvania Supreme Court b-slaps Trump campaign, overturning one of their rare lower-court victories from earlier this month.

rawstory.com/2020/11/pennsylvania-supreme-court-shoots-down-trumps-lawsuit-and-overturns-one-of-his-wins/

 
apalmer said:
Just for the record, a couple of Trump Wannabes have filed a lawsuit in PA attempting to declare that mail-in voting violates the PA Constitution. I'm ashamed to say that one of them, Mike Kelly, is my Congressman (of course, I've been ashamed to say that from the day he was elected). The other was Trump's hand-picked (and unsuccessful) candidate to try and unseat Connor Lamb. 
Click to expand...
They and a few others are trying to join the appeal in the Third Circuit of the case thrown out on Saturday.
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1330978279415828483

 
Tom Hagen said:
I'm not an attorney but it looks like the Trump team was given a 5,200 word limit on their motion and filed a separate motion to use 6,500 words instead. Is that common?

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Document-1.pdf
Click to expand...
Yes.  Word limits have generally replaced page limits (due to people screwing with fonts and line spacing to cram more content into each page).   Requests for overlength briefs are pretty common and usually only a showing of good cause is necessary.

 
apalmer said:
Just for the record, a couple of Trump Wannabes have filed a lawsuit in PA attempting to declare that mail-in voting violates the PA Constitution. I'm ashamed to say that one of them, Mike Kelly, is my Congressman (of course, I've been ashamed to say that from the day he was elected). The other was Trump's hand-picked (and unsuccessful) candidate to try and unseat Connor Lamb. https://triblive.com/news/pennsylvania/suit-challenges-expansion-of-mail-in-voting-in-pennsylvania/ and https://www.wpxi.com/news/top-stories/congressman-kelly-sean-parnell-file-lawsuit-get-mail-in-ballots-thrown-out-election-results/N4554N5P3VEUNATVSMJXMQXVUY/

I haven't read the Complaint, but they appear to be arguing that allowing mail-in voting violates the provision of the PA Constitution that says 

Claiming that allowing votes to be delivered early and then opened and counted on election day violates this seems like a major stretch to me (they seem to be arguing that each time a ballot was filled out early transforms that day into an "election day"). 

They claim that the Act which allowed this year's voting violates the absentee provisions of the Constitution (arguing a pandemic is not an illness):

My off the cuff legal analysis is that this provision GUARANTEES absentee voting to a class of voters. It IS NOT a prohibition to allowing other voters to do so. They also seem to be overlooking the section of the PA Constitution that provides 

If voting by mail is a method prescribed by law (and it was), then it's Constitutional. Case closed. Don't know why Kelly's legal training didn't cover this--oh, wait, maybe it's because he didn't get that training in order to become a car salesman.  The PA courts need to slap these guys with sanctions for a frivolous suit.
Click to expand...
What’s hilarious is this guy actually voted by mail this year, so his own vote would be nullified. So when he voted he obviously believed it was legit. That in and of itself should be enough for his complaint to get tossed.

 
the rover said:
Only Shinkle is.   Van Langevelde has pretty clearly stated that he believes his duty is to certify.    The Michigan Supreme Court has taken up this issue multiple times, and has said the board of canvassers has only ministerial powers.  They have no authority to question the results of the counties or perform investigations.   

Shinkle and his wife are both outspoken Trump supporters.   
Click to expand...
 Not just outspoken supporters, his wife signed one of the affidavits alleging fraud.

 
GroveDiesel said:
What’s hilarious is this guy actually voted by mail this year, so his own vote would be nullified. So when he voted he obviously believed it was legit. That in and of itself should be enough for his complaint to get tossed.
Click to expand...
Both were nominated by way of the PA primary election last spring, which was conducted under the same law.  Guess their nominations were invalid?

 
If what I’m reading from lawyers I trust on Twitter is correct, if you are a true believer that there was massive fraud and Trump really won the election, you should be absolutely furious at Trump right now for hiring the most utterly incompetent lawyers possible.

This entire thing in PA is a total clown show and they are going to get absolutely destroyed. They weren’t going to win regardless because their proposed remedies grossly exceed anything they remotely have proof for, but they’ve mishandled the entire thing every step of the way.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GroveDiesel said:
If what I’m ready from lawyers I trust on Twitter is correct, if you are a true believer that there was massive fraud and Trump really won the election, you should be absolutely furious at Trump right now for hiring the most utterly incompetent lawyers possible.

This entire thing in PA is a total clown show and they are going to get absolutely destroyed. They weren’t going to win regardless because their proposed remedies grossly exceed anything they remotely have proof for, but they’ve mishandled the entire thing every step of the way.
Click to expand...
Yes the GOP legal work, if you want to call it that, has been an abomination. But no one on the Trump side here seems to care.

Beyond that, it should be clear that the primary goal of all of this isn't a specific court room or hearing, its just the chaos. Thats all its been. Chaos raises money.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Yes the GOP legal work, if you want to call it that, has been an abomination. But no one on the Trump side here seems to care.

Beyond that, it should be clear that the primary goal of all of this isn't a specific court room or hearing, its just the chaos. Thats all its been. Chaos raises money.
Click to expand...




“This is a slush fund. That’s the bottom line,” said Paul S. Ryan, a longtime campaign finance attorney with the good government group Common Cause. “Trump may just continue to string out this meritless litigation in order to fleece his own supporters of their money and use it in the coming years to pad his own lifestyle while teasing a 2024 candidacy.”

The Democratic National Committee and Biden’s campaign are also raising money for a legal fight over the outcome of the election. Most of the money is for the DNC’s legal account, though some of it will be routed to the party’s general fund, which doesn’t face the same spending restrictions. It could then be used to pay for ads, for example, if Republicans try to get ballots tossed out with minor — and correctible — errors, according to a DNC official.

Trump’s approach is far different.

The first few days after the election, money that was purportedly for the legal fight primarily went to Trump’s campaign for debt payment, as well as the RNC, as first reported by The Wall Street Journal. But on Monday, Trump launched Save America, his new PAC, which is now poised to get the largest share in many cases.

Save America is a type of campaign committee that is often referred to as a “leadership PAC,” which has higher contribution limits — $5,000 per year — and faces fewer restrictions on how the money is spent. Unlike candidate campaign accounts, leadership PACs can also be tapped to pay for personal expenses.

A detailed breakdown of how contributions are split up shows that 60% of any donation now goes to Save America PAC. The next 40% goes to an RNC account. It’s only once a donor reaches the maximum contribution limit for each group — $5,000 for Trump’s PAC and $35,000 for the RNC — that money will spill into legal accounts for Trump and the RNC, according to campaign finance attorneys who have reviewed the details of the arrangement.
Click to expand...
Link

 
I see they cited a case.
They're also looking for a TRO to "prevent the effects "of certifying. Is it correct that you can't ask a District Court for a TRO?

 
Sorry,  same as  right above. Trying to get the Third Circuit to send them back to District Court with Second Amended Complaint I think they want the TRO from the DC not Appeals, but maybe that's wrong.

 
Mystery Achiever said:
Sorry,  same as  right above. Trying to get the Third Circuit to send them back to District Court with Second Amended Complaint I think they want the TRO from the DC not Appeals, but maybe that's wrong.
Click to expand...
It seems pretty strange to ask a court of appeals for an injunction that you didn't ask for in the trial court, but the rule (FRAP 8) is somewhat vague.  Here's the full motion/brief -- https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-3371_Documents-1.pdf.

 
Mystery Achiever said:
Sorry,  same as  right above. Trying to get the Third Circuit to send them back to District Court with Second Amended Complaint I think they want the TRO from the DC not Appeals, but maybe that's wrong.
Click to expand...
In order to obtain injunctive relief from the court of appeals, they need to show that their claims are likely to prevail.  They got bounced on lack of standing and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, so their claims have no chance of success.  

 
the rover said:
He really should be disbarred.  An embarrassment to the profession.
Click to expand...
Rudy is probably in on the grift.  Trump recognizes him as someone who can rile up the base.  I guarantee that donations doubled right after that crazy press conference.  Trump is paying (prepaying) Rudy a lot of money to keep this thing going.  I feel sorry for the people that are scraping together whatever they can for the 'cause' even though they can't really afford it.

 
CletiusMaximus said:
It seems pretty strange to ask a court of appeals for an injunction that you didn't ask for in the trial court, but the rule (FRAP 8) is somewhat vague.  Here's the full motion/brief -- https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-3371_Documents-1.pdf.
Click to expand...
The DNC should use this brief as a campaign ad for every election at every level for the next 50 years.  It's truly remarkable. 

Here is your President's legal position,  certified by legal counsel,  and now made part of the public record as if he said it at a podium:

All the votes in Pennsylvania were fine,  except the votes for president.  The ballots as to every other race are not being challenged. Which,  for the rest of everything argued makes literally no sense at all on any level.  It also means that the President of the United States is certifying that election fraud that doesn't effect him personally isn't worth pursuing,  nor are those elections worth protecting. So for all you,  let's vet everything guys,  your president disagrees. 

Democratic conspirators worked in tandem to make sure that more Biden votes were counted than Trump votes because they knew where the votes were coming from,  the demographics of the area,  and they had knowledge of the different campaign positions of Trump and Biden. Which means,  in essence,  everyone knows Biden was going to get more black votes,  and the fact that they actually allowed those votes to be counted is a violation of Pennsylvania law.  That's a bold claim by them.  Should help the GOP for years. 

And then my favorite.  They want access to all of the votes they deem questionable or at least a representative sample of them so that they can then research to determine if their mathematical formulae that they have been using to speak numbers in press conferences are actually correct.  They believe they are but they have...... no proof at all and want the court to give them access so that they can find the proof. 

Which,  I mean to be fair,  we do try as much as we can.  We just usually don't have press conferences saying we have all the proof and then,  hope no one reads too deep when we ask the court to help us find the proof we said we had. 

Oh, and their final main point.  They actually do have proof.  They have thousands of affidavits.  Yup. They literally pled that.  

That's your President.  Election integrity only matters when it affects me,  you can't count the votes of people who don't support me,  we have a ton of proof but we need the court to help us find it. And actually we have all the proof we need with these 700 pages of affidavits that have already been summarily rejected when reviewed by the court as nothing more than the childish fantasies of narcissists full of sound and fury and signifying nothing. 

Remarkable.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Republican Officials In New Mexico County Refuse To Certify Election Results
2
Replies
61
Views
1K
roadkill1292
roadkill1292
L
McCarthy and McConnell Wanted ‘Son of a B*tch’ Trump Out of Politics After Jan. 6 Riot,
2 3
Replies
124
Views
3K
ignatiusjreilly
ignatiusjreilly
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: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top