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? (2 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
Mile High said:
Marc E. Elias

@marceelias

·

45m

BREAKING: Pennsylvania court DENIES Republican effort to decertify the 2020 general election results in Pennsylvania. Trump and his allies are now 1-53 in post election litigation.

https://mobile.twitter.com/marceelias
Click to expand...
Serious question for Trump supporters, what does this number need to be before you agree there is no evidence, no smoke, nothing?   1-100, 1-1000, 1-10,000?  Is there a number?  Keep in mind the "1" isn't a victory of any sort.

 
2Squirrels1Nut said:
Serious question for Trump supporters, what does this number need to be before you agree there is no evidence, no smoke, nothing?   1-100, 1-1000, 1-10,000?  Is there a number?  Keep in mind the "1" isn't a victory of any sort.
Click to expand...
Trump supporters are hanging it all (from a judiciary perspective) on this current Supreme Court case.  The Marc Elias number is a number that only democrats seem to care about.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoonation said:
People are living out of their head if they think the United States Supreme Court is going to a) hear this Texas case and b) make a ruling that would disenfranchise tens of millions of voters and effectively blow up American representative democracy.

Yet, there are millions of Americans who actually believe not only a) but b).
Click to expand...
I disagree with you on A, but agree with you on B.  Of course I'm not a supreme court justice, and neither are you.  I coincidentally have been reading an Alexander Hamilton biography over the last month so I'm more interested in constitutional law than I usually would be.  I find it a fascinating argument, but the supreme court may find it completely un-fascinating, may do as you say and never hear this case.

We shall see.  But I don't know why you'd think it's crazy that they'd even listen to the case.  

 
shader said:
Trump supporters are hanging it all (from a judiciary perspective) on this current Supreme Court case.  The Marc Elias number is a number that only democrats seem to care about.  
Click to expand...
Well since Lou Dodds told Stephen Miller they should pay Marc Elias half a billion dollars to quit beating them in court,  I'm glad Marc Elias is our lawyer. 

 
shader said:
I disagree with you on A, but agree with you on B.  Of course I'm not a supreme court justice, and neither are you.  I coincidentally have been reading an Alexander Hamilton biography over the last month so I'm more interested in constitutional law than I usually would be.  I find it a fascinating argument, but the supreme court may find it completely un-fascinating, may do as you say and never hear this case.

We shall see.  But I don't know why you'd think it's crazy that they'd even listen to the case.  
Click to expand...
Because the case is complete nonsense, both procedurally and substantively and an assault on democracy?  And every single one of those Justices knows it and the stain it would leave on the Court if they even entertained it?

But, we shall see indeed.

 
  • Love
Reactions: JAA
Mile High said:
Sea Duck said:
7-10 states may join the Texas lawsuit *IF* the Supreme Court agrees to hear it

So, add Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and South Dakota to the list of state AGs who oppose the Constitution.
Click to expand...
All these states wanting to disenfranchise  voters in Democratic states should all agree to not except government funding generated from Democratic states out of principle. 
Click to expand...
States that Trump won want to make it so states he lost he really won.

 
  • Sad
Reactions: JAA
zoonation said:
Because the case is complete nonsense, both procedurally and substantively and an assault on democracy?  And every single one of those Justices knows it and the stain it would leave on the Court if they even entertained it?

But, we shall see indeed.
Click to expand...
If what you're saying is true, they won't hear it.  

 
shader said:
Trump supporters are hanging it all (from a judiciary perspective) on this current Supreme Court case.  The Marc Elias number is a number that only democrats seem to care about.  
Click to expand...
This is consistent with what we’ve seen in the Trump era.  Lots of wild, baseless claims from conservatives, which are then refuted by courts/Democrats with facts/evidence. And of course Conservatives don’t care that their claims were debunked/dismissed, they just move onto the next crazy conspiracy theory with zero accountability for their prior craziness.  

But “both sides”....

 
Witz said:
Brad Heath

@bradheath

Seventeen states filed a brief in the Supreme Court just now in support of Texas' request that the justices throw out the results of the presidential election in four other states that didn't support President Trump.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bradheath/status/1336763665580765187
Click to expand...
Trump laid this all out before the election that he couldn't lose under any circumstance unless there was foul play.   No evidence of foul play, doesn't matter.  We're going to try and sue to take away the power from the American people.  It makes me sick. 

 
shader said:
If what you're saying is true, they won't hear it.  
Click to expand...
Look at their record.  If you’re down 1 run with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th, and your teams next hitter is a guy hitting .018 (1/53), are betting money that he’s going to get a base hit to win the game?  

 
tommyGunZ said:
This is consistent with what we’ve seen in the Trump era.  Lots of wild, baseless claims from conservatives, which are then refuted by courts/Democrats with facts/evidence. And of course Conservatives don’t care that their claims were debunked/dismissed, they just move onto the next crazy conspiracy theory with zero accountability for their prior craziness.  

But “both sides”....
Click to expand...
I mean ... Sidney Powell is just gone now. Like she was never around.

 
tommyGunZ said:
Look at their record.  If you’re down 1 run with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th, and your teams next hitter is a guy hitting .018 (1/53), are betting money that he’s going to get a base hit to win the game?  
Click to expand...
ok?  Not sure what the point is that you're making.  I'm not betting or making predictions here.  

 
2Squirrels1Nut said:
Trump laid this all out before the election that he couldn't lose under any circumstance unless there was foul play.   No evidence of foul play, doesn't matter.  We're going to try and sue to take away the power from the American people.  It makes me sick. 
Click to expand...
It's sad we are going through this all because one man....one freaking human being, can't come to grips that he is going to lose. Being a loser is the worst thing someone can be in his worldview. And we are stuck dealing with his insecurities and inability to cope.  

 
shader said:
Trump supporters are hanging it all (from a judiciary perspective) on this current Supreme Court case.  The Marc Elias number is a number that only democrats seem to care about.  
Click to expand...
:shrug:

Trump seemed to care quite a bit about some of those 50+ lawsuits, considering the fact that his own personal lawyers filed them.

 
shader said:
ok?  Not sure what the point is that you're making.  I'm not betting or making predictions here.  
Click to expand...
No point, other than the fact that anyone not in the Cult-of-Trump should agree with @zoonation that the Texas suit likely just more of the same garbage and not worthy of Judge Judy’s time, much less the SCOTUS.  

 
Sea Duck said:
:shrug:

Trump seemed to care quite a bit about some of those 50+ lawsuits, considering the fact that his own personal lawyers filed them.
Click to expand...
His own lawyers filed "some of them".  That may not matter much, but his personal lawyers haven't filed 50+ lawsuits.

 
Bamboo Bill said:
It's sad we are going through this all because one man....one freaking human being, can't come to grips that he is going to lose. Being a loser is the worst thing someone can be in his worldview. And we are stuck dealing with his insecurities and inability to cope.  
Click to expand...
If it was just one man, we wouldn’t be dealing with this.  Trump isn’t the issue; the fact that he is supported by 75 million Americans is the problem and it’s not going away anytime soon.  I’m in my mid-40s, and unfortunately I feel we will be dealing with Trump supporters for the rest of my life.  

 
tommyGunZ said:
No point, other than the fact that anyone not in the Cult-of-Trump should agree with @zoonation that the Texas suit likely just more of the same garbage and not worthy of Judge Judy’s time, much less the SCOTUS.  
Click to expand...
With all due respect to zoonation, I'm not really all that interested in his opinion regarding whether the SCOTUS will hear the case.  He stated his opinion, great.  We'll see what happens.  Maybe he's right, heck if I know.

But last night when this suit was filed, I was assured that this is a ploy by the corrupt TX attorney general.  Now 17 other states have thrown their support behind it.  So forgive me if I don't immediately believe the opinions of the left on breaking news.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bamboo Bill said:
It's sad we are going through this all because one man....one freaking human being, can't come to grips that he is going to lose. Being a loser is the worst thing someone can be in his worldview. And we are stuck dealing with his insecurities and inability to cope.  
Click to expand...
And the politicians who swore an oath to protect this country and the Constitution have instead sold us all out to serve him.  

 
tommyGunZ said:
If it was just one man, we wouldn’t be dealing with this.  Trump isn’t the issue; the fact that he is supported by 75 million Americans is the problem and it’s not going away anytime soon.  I’m in my mid-40s, and unfortunately I feel we will be dealing with Trump supporters for the rest of my life.  
Click to expand...
At this rate there won't be 50 united states in 20 years. Right now there is a good divide of states to leave in groups.  The Northeast,  Upper midwest  and  west /southwest. The red states in the south and mid American can stay together or split. 

 
tommyGunZ said:
If it was just one man, we wouldn’t be dealing with this.  Trump isn’t the issue; the fact that he is supported by 75 million Americans is the problem and it’s not going away anytime soon.  I’m in my mid-40s, and unfortunately I feel we will be dealing with Trump supporters for the rest of my life.  
Click to expand...
Yep except I'm older so will probably be dead sooner. So I got that going for me. 

 
shader said:
Sea Duck said:
:shrug:

Trump seemed to care quite a bit about some of those 50+ lawsuits, considering the fact that his own personal lawyers filed them.
Click to expand...
His own lawyers filed "some of them".  That may not matter much, but his personal lawyers haven't filed 50+ lawsuits.
Click to expand...
This is quite a stretch to downplay Trump/Republican complicity, innit?

I mean, Trump didn't file the Texas lawsuit, but he openly endorsed it to the point where he said the case was the "big one". Shouldn't that count? What about all the other cases that Trump endorsed? What about the cases where Trump was named as a plaintiff, even if his lawyers didn't technically file it? Do we count Sidney Powell because she gave a press conference as part of Trump's legal team and because Trump endorsed her lawsuit? Or do we NOT count Sidney because Trump said she was working on her own?

It really seems like we're getting into "distinction without difference" territory here. But I'm certainly not opposed to being pedantic for accuracy's sake. I'd be fine with saying "Trump is 0-for-11 while his supporters, allies, former lawyers and other sundry Republicans are 1-for-42" (or whatever the exact numbers are).

 
Dickies said:
Doug B said:
I mean ... Sidney Powell is just gone now. Like she was never around.
Click to expand...
Did the Clintons get to her?
Click to expand...
Not yet.

...

Actually, she's still working some angles and is still filing some things. Going to court. Preparing for a post-Trump media career, I would bet. You can still find news items about Powell, but they're well removed from Page 1 now.

 
The sad thing is that assuming the SCOTUS decides to not hear the Texas case it will not change the mind of most Republicans that Biden stole the election from Trump.   The ballots in Georgia were counted three times, once by hand, and that wasn't enough proof for them.

Bottom line:  the only person they trust to tell the truth is Donald Trump.  

 
Godsbrother said:
The sad thing is that assuming the SCOTUS decides to not hear the Texas case it will not change the mind of most Republicans that Biden stole the election from Trump.   The ballots in Georgia were counted three times, once by hand, and that wasn't enough proof for them.

Bottom line:  the only person they trust to tell the truth is Donald Trump.  
Click to expand...
Which is the scariest part, because the truth has no normative meaning to Trump and hasn't for many years.  the "truth" is whatever is in his interests.  it is a feature of malignant narcissism.  

 
Godsbrother said:
The sad thing is that assuming the SCOTUS decides to not hear the Texas case it will not change the mind of most Republicans that Biden stole the election from Trump.   The ballots in Georgia were counted three times, once by hand, and that wasn't enough proof for them.

Bottom line:  the only person they trust to tell the truth is Donald Trump.  
Click to expand...
I read a bunch of posts on r/conservative about how recounting all the fake ballots obviously won't change the result.

 
But wait....there’s more! Trump wants to join in as well!

Mike Dunford

@questauthority

Trump has filed his motion to intervene at the Supreme Court. This is likely to be an interesting read, given that the whole "hi, I'm a private person wishing to sue states directly in the Supreme Court" thing is a complex needle to thread. https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No. 22O155 Original Motion to Intervene.pdf

https://mobile.twitter.com/questauthority/status/1336779140985393153

 
Witz said:
But wait....there’s more! Trump wants to join in as well!

Mike Dunford

@questauthority

Trump has filed his motion to intervene at the Supreme Court. This is likely to be an interesting read, given that the whole "hi, I'm a private person wishing to sue states directly in the Supreme Court" thing is a complex needle to thread. https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No. 22O155 Original Motion to Intervene.pdf

https://mobile.twitter.com/questauthority/status/1336779140985393153
Click to expand...
Yeah I just saw this pop in.  I don't know how this works with the president joining in with states.  

There's another document added in as well (I believe the defendants filed this one) making a total of 3 for the day.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163237/20201209155924009_2020-12-9 Texas Scotus Amici Brief- FINAL.pdf

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JAA said:
So how many times has Biden won PA now?
Click to expand...
There should be a law similar to charging those who bring false charges in a criminal case.  Every time you waste the courts time the other candidate gets to add those votes again on their total.

 
  • Love
Reactions: JAA
Mile High said:
At this rate there won't be 50 united states in 20 years. Right now there is a good divide of states to leave in groups.  The Northeast,  Upper midwest  and  west /southwest. The red states in the south and mid American can stay together or split. 
Click to expand...
I mean, I live in a border city.  I'm open to a Canadian annexation if Ontario is down with it.  hmu

 
Witz said:
But wait....there’s more! Trump wants to join in as well!

Mike Dunford

@questauthority

Trump has filed his motion to intervene at the Supreme Court. This is likely to be an interesting read, given that the whole "hi, I'm a private person wishing to sue states directly in the Supreme Court" thing is a complex needle to thread. https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No. 22O155 Original Motion to Intervene.pdf

https://mobile.twitter.com/questauthority/status/1336779140985393153
Click to expand...
Trump's intervention request asks for the Court to award him costs to file as a plaintiff in intervention which is completely on brand.

 
Witz said:
But wait....there’s more! Trump wants to join in as well!

Mike Dunford

@questauthority

Trump has filed his motion to intervene at the Supreme Court. This is likely to be an interesting read, given that the whole "hi, I'm a private person wishing to sue states directly in the Supreme Court" thing is a complex needle to thread. https://supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No. 22O155 Original Motion to Intervene.pdf

https://mobile.twitter.com/questauthority/status/1336779140985393153
Click to expand...
I read this and was thinking - who could his lawyer be in this one?  Its John Eastman from Chapman University.  This is the guy who made the news a while back by writing an OpEd in Newsweek taking the position that Kamala Harris is constitutionally ineligible to be VP.  His argument was generally not well received in the legal community.

 
Steve Tasker said:
Mile High said:
At this rate there won't be 50 united states in 20 years. Right now there is a good divide of states to leave in groups.  The Northeast,  Upper midwest  and  west /southwest. The red states in the south and mid American can stay together or split. 
Click to expand...
I mean, I live in a border city.  I'm open to a Canadian annexation if Ontario is down with it.  hmu
Click to expand...
I don't appreciate how many people want to sacrifice the millions of us trapped in red states, GB.

 
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
2K
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: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top