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.
It depends how deep down the rabbit hole you want to go. Their theories involve martial law, the national guard, the army, locking up Biden.. Basically all that seems to be left for Trump supporters is Qanon theories.
Dude, that's all that was left 10 days ago too. But Trump wanted a spectacle, and there were enough people to fall on their swords for him.
The few times I dipped my toes in the world of Q, I noticed that martial law was a pretty big thing with those guys.
Not sure he's the troll here. I mean by all accounts this was an absurd case in a long line of absurd doomed to fail cases. I don't think celebrating the SC made a lay-up is really trolling. The trolling is the people who put the challenge to the SC in the first place.
You don’t keep the greatest grift of all time going by conceding.
So I assume you’ve seen his tweets since the ruling. That was the other, predictable way for him to go.
He's spent the entire morning complaining about the Supreme Court and the DOJ, and retweeting some loon Todd Starnes. Par for the course, but such a ####### whiner.
That sounds healthy. Just a normal day in a functioning democracy. No signs of a guy who wants to be a dictator.
I don't think this was ever a thing. The charges against him are state charges of securities fraud
Nothing stopping states or individuals from filing 2020 election lawsuits into perpetuity, is there? No one’s getting sanctioned, so why not nuisance lawsuits until the end of time? There’s no mechanism in the legal framework to end this conclusively. One SCOTUS decision just leads to more suits file elsewhere, or even to the Texas AG suing battleground states a second, third, fourth, etc. time.
It's so weird, I'm binge-watching Homeland right now. Just finished wrapping season 7 (spoiler alert!) which involves a storyline where Russian bots spread misinformation about the US in an attempt to destroy our democracy. And here we sit today.....Ilov80s said:
I would think so meant to divide and weaken. Despite the claims of fraud there has not been violence yet. Perhaps it means Americans realize its just sour grapes/poor loser stuff which is grossly magnified by Trump's narcissism and Republicans kowtowing out of fear of his tweets.Ilov80s said:
Yeah in no way do I think that represents a large % of people but it only takes a small number to cause serious problems.
Good...then parler is doing it's job and keeping these morons minimized on their platform. That's exactly what we need. The less oxygen the better. It's already labeled a whacko site, so few rational people will go there anyway. Let them fester and stew on their own. I'm seeing parler related links coming up on facebook etc though, which I find pretty comical. I also see the whackos "tagging" rather normal people in their whacko posts on facebook. I assume that's just an effort to get more attention as they know their nonsense is getting less and less eyes on facebook (thanks to the algorithms ironically enough)Ilov80s said:
My Parler feed is on tilt right now. I follow lots of prominent conservative personalities and many of them are upset to put it nicely. Ever heard of Milo Yiannopoulos? He's blaming the Republican party for destroying his life and career and says he's dedicating the rest of his life to destroying the Republican party. Seems a bit melodramatic, I'd say.Ilov80s said:
This was the point I was trying to make to @fatguyinalittlecoat. This is who we are dealing with. Better we hear their true feelings now. If we want change this needs to be addressed as a country, not as a party. Otherwise we are just burying our heads in the sand.Ilov80s said:
I don't believe that fraud is a big problem, but I do support Trump's right to have his day in court. My hope is that this exercise shows that there are loopholes in the system which could be exploited by an unethical party. For example, we should be saving the envelopes with signatures on them and we should not let random liberal bureaucrats be the judge of signature matches.
Let a computer do it. And when a signature is rejected, it should be evaluated by a group of representatives from both parties.
Explain to us how you think the signature verification process works and who is involved, please.
The same computers that were hacked by Venezuela, Russia, George Soros, Facebook, and Mrs. Peterson's 3rd grade class?
