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?  

471 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

3 hours ago, Milkman said:

There's nothing stopping these swing states from certifying their electoral votes for Trump regardless of Biden winning some of those states. 

Pennsylvania 

Wisconsin 

Michigan 

Georgia 

Nevada

Arizona 

 

It just depends how far Trump wants to take this charade. He could throw the country into civil war if he takes it all the way and steals the election. 

This is my biggest fear.  I foolishly thought McConnell, Graham and other prominent republicans would have ended this nonsense by now.  With Barr changing the rules and Pilger resigning in protest it gives them a path to steal America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Pennsylvania has a Democratic Governor and Secretary of State. They could certify one slate of electors for Biden right?

Then the State Legislature (Republican I think?)could approve a different set of electors in favor of Trump. Correct?


While I look for further information, let's start here -- KDKA-TV is Pittsburgh's CBS affiliate:

Quote

 

Pa. Legislature To Follow Tradition Of Awarding Electoral Votes To Popular Vote Winner

State Senate majority leader Jake Corman said Republican lawmakers will honor the wishes of the voters, awarding electoral votes to the popular vote winner.

HARRISBURG (KDKA) — For months, there has been talk swirling that if Joe Biden wins Pennsylvania, Republicans in the state legislature could bypass the popular vote and appoint electors who are favorable to President Trump.

The electors award Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes.

On Friday, State Senate majority leader Jake Corman said Republicans will honor the wishes of the voters.

“Our role is to monitor the process, our role is to provide oversight and call out questions where they might need asked, but certainly want to stay with the tradition of the popular vote winner getting the electors,” Senator Corman said.

Corman says the vote is certified by the state and the governor appoints the electors.

He says the legislature will follow the law.

 

When Corman said follow "the law" ... I would like to know the particular statute(s) he is thinking of. Will have to look later unless someone else in the house can respond.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Milkman said:

Pennsylvania has a Democratic Governor and Secretary of State. They could certify one slate of electors for Biden right?

Then the State Legislature (Republican I think?)could approve a different set of electors in favor of Trump. Correct?

There is similar situations in NC, MI, and WI.  

 

Trump is crazy guys. He could spite send us into a civil war by accusing the Democratics of stealing the election while in fact HE STEALS THE ELECTION. 

Give that Trump is a narcissist, most of what he says about others is really of projection of what he himself is thinking or doing.  So yeah, you aren’t crazy to have these fears.

Edited by Alex P Keaton
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Juxtatarot said:

Tim mentioned a stat that 70% of Republicans  don't believe the election was free and fair.  I suspect this number will go down in time. (I'm assuming no wide spread fraud is found.)  But by how much?  This is going to be a terrible situation for our country for many years.  I have no idea what the solution is.

Well, based on a small sample size (this forum + real life conversations), so far actual facts haven’t swayed the 70% yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Where did I say that it was officially debunked?  
1) I’m posting an actual analysis, not wild suppositions

2) This is the hard work - actually digging into the list of 14,000 - that people publicly making fraud accusations should have done

3) Reactions like yours are why it feels so pointless to even bother with facts.  The facts just get dismissed

4) I would love to see an investigation into all 14,000 examples.  Would you accept the results?

Regarding #4, yes of course. I was just pointing out that CNN didn't actually do that. I was posting an actual analysis of their analysis.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TwinTurbo said:

Regarding #4, yes of course. I was just pointing out that CNN didn't actually do that. I was posting an actual analysis of their analysis.

As far as courts go, they will want to see an actual list that could be verified of deceased people that had votes accredited to them. A list of 12,000 dead people on a voter registration list is proof that the list is outdated and needs to be updated, nothing more. A judge will only care if any dead people cast any ballots. The rest is just window dressing. The side making the accusations of fraud have to provide the evidence. A simple assertion of something COULD have happened that MAY have been illegal is proof of nothing. That’s similar to me making allegations that my neighbor was drunk driving because I saw him driving near a liquor store. 

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

4 hours ago, Alex P Keaton said:

4) I would love to see an investigation into all 14,000 examples.  Would you accept the results?

The list of 14,000 dead Michigan voters -- while it existed, because the link lasted a very short time -- has been explored by several parties from several different angles. There's nothing there at all.

Even if -- just for the heck of it -- we throw out 14,000 votes for Biden in Michigan, he's still ahead by over 130,000 votes in that state.

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

4 minutes ago, Doug B said:
4 hours ago, Alex P Keaton said:

4) I would love to see an investigation into all 14,000 examples.  Would you accept the results?

The list of 14,000 dead Michigan voters -- while it existed, because the link lasted a very short time -- has been explored by several parties from several different angles. There's nothing there at all.

Even if -- just for the heck of it -- we throw out 14,000 votes for Biden in Michigan, he's still ahead by over 130,000 votes in that state.

Sure, but what if — and hear me out here — what if someone were to print out that list off 130,000 voters, and then claim that all of those voters are dead. Shouldn't the liberal media be obligated to investigate all 130,000 names to prove that the accusation is false?

Edited by Joe Summer
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 4
  • Thinking 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on poking around multiple articles from multiple sites and talking heads discussing things on TV, it seems like Team Trump is potentially going to try to make a case that only votes counted on Election Day should be considered valid and that all the absentee ballots and mail in votes counted at 12:01 AM 11/4 and later should be excluded. Of course, that aligns at the point that at which Trump would be considered ahead in the count. 

What makes little sense is the majority of mail in ballots were received days or weeks before Election Day, and the fact that many states had rules that did not allow them to be counted before Election Day is getting lost in the narrative. But that doesn’t really matter as the propaganda is meant to stir the pot and further the perception that things were sketchy and the election was stolen from Trump. Of course, plenty of states legally allow counting ballots past Election Day, yet Team Trump appears to be trying to claim that is unconstitutional. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:

Based on poking around multiple articles from multiple sites and talking heads discussing things on TV, it seems like Team Trump is potentially going to try to make a case that only votes counted on Election Day should be considered valid and that all the absentee ballots and mail in votes counted at 12:01 AM 11/4 and later should be excluded. Of course, that aligns at the point that at which Trump would be considered ahead in the count. 

What makes little sense is the majority of mail in ballots were received days or weeks before Election Day, and the fact that many states had rules that did not allow them to be counted before Election Day is getting lost in the narrative. But that doesn’t really matter as the propaganda is meant to stir the pot and further the perception that things were sketchy and the election was stolen from Trump. Of course, plenty of states legally allow counting ballots past Election Day, yet Team Trump appears to be trying to claim that is unconstitutional. 

All states count ballots past election day. Always have, always will.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:

Based on poking around multiple articles from multiple sites and talking heads discussing things on TV, it seems like Team Trump is potentially going to try to make a case that only votes counted on Election Day should be considered valid and that all the absentee ballots and mail in votes counted at 12:01 AM 11/4 and later should be excluded. Of course, that aligns at the point that at which Trump would be considered ahead in the count. 

What makes little sense is the majority of mail in ballots were received days or weeks before Election Day, and the fact that many states had rules that did not allow them to be counted before Election Day is getting lost in the narrative. But that doesn’t really matter as the propaganda is meant to stir the pot and further the perception that things were sketchy and the election was stolen from Trump. Of course, plenty of states legally allow counting ballots past Election Day, yet Team Trump appears to be trying to claim that is unconstitutional. 

Wow, shocking.  Never saw that coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Drunken Cowboy said:

All states count ballots past election day. Always have, always will.

The stuff I saw/heard that they are prepared to argue is totally nonsensical. Like in person voters were treated unfairly compared to mail in voters, and that alone is enough to either void the election results or discredit pro Democratic ballots that were cast by mail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Joe Summer said:

Sure, but what if — and hear me out here — what if someone were to print out that list off 130,000 voters, and then claim that all of those voters are dead. Shouldn't the liberal media be obligated to investigate all 130,000 names to prove that the accusation is false?

Agreed 100%. That's where it gets into "probable cause" for me. Anyone can allege anything without grounds. Showing something to a judge somewhere that actually establishes grounds -- that's a much steeper climb. As it should be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:

Based on poking around multiple articles from multiple sites and talking heads discussing things on TV, it seems like Team Trump is potentially going to try to make a case that only votes counted on Election Day should be considered valid and that all the absentee ballots and mail in votes counted at 12:01 AM 11/4 and later should be excluded. Of course, that aligns at the point that at which Trump would be considered ahead in the count. 

What makes little sense is the majority of mail in ballots were received days or weeks before Election Day, and the fact that many states had rules that did not allow them to be counted before Election Day is getting lost in the narrative. But that doesn’t really matter as the propaganda is meant to stir the pot and further the perception that things were sketchy and the election was stolen from Trump. Of course, plenty of states legally allow counting ballots past Election Day, yet Team Trump appears to be trying to claim that is unconstitutional. 

Banana republic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Doug B said:


While I look for further information, let's start here -- KDKA-TV is Pittsburgh's CBS affiliate:

When Corman said follow "the law" ... I would like to know the particular statute(s) he is thinking of. Will have to look later unless someone else in the house can respond.

Awesome thank you!

Keep in mind Corman is committing political suicide if he goes against Trump's wishes. If Trump wants Pennsylvania's electoral votes and he keeps his followers convinced that the election was stolen from him, any Republicans that oppose him is done. 

Trump it seems to be setting this all up. He's going to hold a gun to the GOP head right at the end. Their choices will be A) break away from Trump and commit political suicide or B) follow along with Trump stealing the election and start a civil war. 

Edited by Milkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Joe Summer said:

Sure, but what if — and hear me out here — what if someone were to print out that list off 130,000 voters, and then claim that all of those voters are dead. Shouldn't the liberal media be obligated to investigate all 130,000 names to prove that the accusation is false?

As I posted a few minutes ago, it will be the GOP’s job to show in excruciating detail evidence of voter fraud or irregularities that impacted the election in each state. Many of the battleground states will go through recounts or audits, so pointing to a software glitch that was corrected and the vote totals were as reported is evidence of nothing. 

That’s what a lot of people swarming to FB or Twitter don’t get. Just because someone made a chart with how many registered voters are in a state and how many voted, that doesn’t make the data on the charts accurate. It just means someone is eager to further a conspiracy theory. Just because DJT Jr. posts a video of someone destroying ballots doesn’t make that a legit video (in this case they were destroying sample ballots that were not used to cast votes). But those all are used to “prove” the election was stolen when in fact they haven’t proven anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:
9 minutes ago, Drunken Cowboy said:

All states count ballots past election day. Always have, always will.

The stuff I saw/heard that they are prepared to argue is totally nonsensical. Like in person voters were treated unfairly compared to mail in voters, and that alone is enough to either void the election results or discredit pro Democratic ballots that were cast by mail. 

I think it's reasonable to complain that some counties in Pennsylvania will allow you to fix an error on your ballot, while others will not. I know that won't change the outcome but it seems like something that should be looked at by the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 2Squirrels1Nut said:

This is my biggest fear.  I foolishly thought McConnell, Graham and other prominent republicans would have ended this nonsense by now.  With Barr changing the rules and Pilger resigning in protest it gives them a path to steal America.

Yep. I think they are going to do it. I think Trump is stealing the election and taking over the country. If and when that happens it could easily start a civil war. I don't see how it doesn't. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Keep in mind Corman is committing political suicide if he goes against Trump's wishes. If Trump wants Pennsylvania's electoral votes and he keeps his followers convinced that the election was stolen from him, any Republicans that oppose him is done. 

Trump it seems to be setting this all up. He's going to hold a gun to the GOP head right at the end. Their choices will be A) break away from Trump and commit political suicide or B) follow along with Trump stealing the election and start a civil war. 

I disagree that's it's as dire as all that. I disagree that any state-level Republicans that stand against Trump are toast. And really ... is certifying the state's election "standing against Trump"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Milkman said:

Yep. I think they are going to do it. I think Trump is stealing the election and taking over the country. If and when that happens it could easily start a civil war. I don't see how it doesn't. 

IMO, this is a bit of a stretch. In fact, I would go so far as to say this is really reaching. For Team Trump to be successful, he will have to overturn outcomes in 4 or 5 states. That would entail getting through courts, appellate courts, state Supreme Courts, and the SCOTUS. States have the right and power to run their elections as they see fit. It is not a SCOTUS issue. The courts so far have shut down Trump’s legal claims before they have even started. There is nothing to show anything to overturn the results in multiple states. And these are elections being run or with oversight of GOP leadership. Not sure how you can allege fraud by your own party in terms of skewing the results. Were all the Republican election officials, observers, and judges in multiple states all in on it?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Doug B said:

Agreed 100%. That's where it gets into "probable cause" for me. Anyone can allege anything without grounds. Showing something to a judge somewhere that actually establishes grounds -- that's a much steeper climb. As it should be.

that's because with social media, we are now living in a 'prove me wrong' society. people make outlandish statements and say 'prove me wrong' to put the burden on the other person, as opposed to actually proving that they themselves are right. it's awful.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maik Jeaunz said:

that's because with social media, we are now living in a 'prove me wrong' society. people make outlandish statements and say 'prove me wrong' to put the burden on the other person, as opposed to actually proving that they themselves are right. it's awful.

That might fly on social media, but let's see if that gets anything past a judge's initial review of a case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Doug B said:

I disagree that's it's as dire as all that. I disagree that any state-level Republicans that stand against Trump are toast. And really ... is certifying the state's election "standing against Trump"?

I hope you're right but I'm concerned. This guy has done whatever he wants for 4 years now. If he gets caught he just claims fake news and his followers believe him without investigating anything so he gets off. Not sure how many followers will follow him off this cliff but I do know he's a con man and he has tens of millions of Americans fooled right now. That carries an incredible amount of political power. He can wreck almost any Republican's re-election chances 2 years from now. 

Edited by Milkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Milkman said:

I hope you're right but I'm concerned. This guy has done whatever he wants for 4 years now. If he gets caught he just claims fake news and his followers believe him without investigating anything so he gets off. Not sure how many followers will follow him off this cliff but I do know he's a con man and he has tens of millions of Americans fooled right now. That carries an incredible amount of political power. He can wreak almost any Republican's re-election chances 2 years from now. 

I suspect this is all for positioning for future elections. If Trump can cast enough doubt that he was robbed, he can lock down future votes for the GOP that you can’t trust the Dems, the media, or the election process. None of my that could be true at all and there may not have been any fraud, but if that’s all that people remember, then Trump did all Republicans a solid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:
54 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Yep. I think they are going to do it. I think Trump is stealing the election and taking over the country. If and when that happens it could easily start a civil war. I don't see how it doesn't. 

IMO, this is a bit of a stretch. In fact, I would go so far as to say this is really reaching. For Team Trump to be successful, he will have to overturn outcomes in 4 or 5 states. That would entail getting through courts, appellate courts, state Supreme Courts, and the SCOTUS. States have the right and power to run their elections as they see fit. It is not a SCOTUS issue. The courts so far have shut down Trump’s legal claims before they have even started. There is nothing to show anything to overturn the results in multiple states. And these are elections being run or with oversight of GOP leadership. Not sure how you can allege fraud by your own party in terms of skewing the results. Were all the Republican election officials, observers, and judges in multiple states all in on it?

I agree with the Three Eyed Fish.  While I understand the fear, and feel it to an extent myself too, it basically would have to mean for this to happen that conservative equals corrupt, and I don’t buy that. Too many judges, including those on the Supreme Court, would have to blatantly be operating on the fringes of the law, or just flat out rewriting it.  We’re seeing absolutely no signs of this at this point.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:

Based on poking around multiple articles from multiple sites and talking heads discussing things on TV, it seems like Team Trump is potentially going to try to make a case that only votes counted on Election Day should be considered valid and that all the absentee ballots and mail in votes counted at 12:01 AM 11/4 and later should be excluded. Of course, that aligns at the point that at which Trump would be considered ahead in the count. 

What makes little sense is the majority of mail in ballots were received days or weeks before Election Day, and the fact that many states had rules that did not allow them to be counted before Election Day is getting lost in the narrative. But that doesn’t really matter as the propaganda is meant to stir the pot and further the perception that things were sketchy and the election was stolen from Trump. Of course, plenty of states legally allow counting ballots past Election Day, yet Team Trump appears to be trying to claim that is unconstitutional. 

This is even funnier when you consider that Gore was 202 votes ahead of Bush in Florida at the end of Election Day in 2000. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump can't steal the election any more than Biden could.  There are likely rogue people from both sides doing whatever they can to help their side win, but at the end of the day, no one could have or would have done enough to actually sway this election.

Biden won, Trump will be out in January and there is nothing anyone can do about it.  The people have elected their President and the courts will uphold the rule of law.  Any extremely rare instances where this isn't the case will be too insignificant to matter.

Hand wringing about Trump and accusations about Democrats are all unfounded and unnecessary worries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Roy L Fewks said:

I think it's reasonable to complain that some counties in Pennsylvania will allow you to fix an error on your ballot, while others will not. I know that won't change the outcome but it seems like something that should be looked at by the courts.

First, it wasn't errors on ballots.  It was errors on the return envelope that had inside it the privacy envelope, which had inside it the ballot.  Second, it would appear (based on the complaint filed in court by Trump's attorneys) that the majority of the counties in PA that refused the instructions of the Secretary of State (given to all counties BEFORE election day) to allow  those corrections were Republican majority counties.  Since we know that the vast majority of mail-in ballots were from Democrat voters, it seems to me that what Trump's attorneys have shown is that the Republican counties have attempted to interfere in the election by refusing to accept ballots that were probably for Biden by ignoring the Secretary of State's instructions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, apalmer said:

First, it wasn't errors on ballots.  It was errors on the return envelope that had inside it the privacy envelope, which had inside it the ballot.  Second, it would appear (based on the complaint filed in court by Trump's attorneys) that the majority of the counties in PA that refused the instructions of the Secretary of State (given to all counties BEFORE election day) to allow  those corrections were Republican majority counties.  Since we know that the vast majority of mail-in ballots were from Democrat voters, it seems to me that what Trump's attorneys have shown is that the Republican counties have attempted to interfere in the election by refusing to accept ballots that were probably for Biden by ignoring the Secretary of State's instructions.

It would be funny if the result of all this is that they end up broadening Biden's margin as a result of corrections / adjustments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gr00vus said:

It would be funny if the result of all this is that they end up broadening Biden's margin as a result of corrections / adjustments.

What's funnier is that the guy who is behind is in court arguing that late ballots which are being held in limbo shouldn't be counted. If I were behind, I'd be looking for a Hail Mary from those ballots, not arguing against counting them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, apalmer said:

What's funnier is that the guy who is behind is in court arguing that late ballots which are being held in limbo shouldn't be counted. If I were behind, I'd be looking for a Hail Mary from those ballots, not arguing against counting them.

Is that what he's saying? I thought he's arguing that nothing should have been counted past Nov 3 (regardless of when it was mailed, received etc.). It's obvious that continuing the count isn't helping him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the reporting on the election in PA is accurate, they only received about 1,000 ballots that arrived in the 3-day grace period that were post marked by 11/3. That doesn’t mean DJT won’t claim that there were millions of ballots that were late, but at least it doesn’t sound like there were very many to worry about (and they should have been kept separate anyway).

The one lawsuit Trump will likely win is the overreach of the PA SC to allow the 3 day grace period (which ignored net he state law that said only the state legislature could do that). Given that, the GOP would have to prove that tons of ballots arrived late. Certainly he will claim that any counting after 11/3 should discredit those votes, but I don’t see how they could argue that. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:

If the reporting on the election in PA is accurate, they only received about 1,000 ballots that arrived in the 3-day grace period that were post marked by 11/3. That doesn’t mean DJT won’t claim that there were millions of ballots that were late, but at least it doesn’t sound like there were very many to worry about (and they should have been kept separate anyway).

The one lawsuit Trump will likely win is the overreach of the PA SC to allow the 3 day grace period (which ignored net he state law that said only the state legislature could do that). Given that, the GOP would have to prove that tons of ballots arrived late. Certainly he will claim that any counting after 11/3 should discredit those votes, but I don’t see how they could argue that. 

It was made very clear by the media and state officials that you needed to get your ballot mailed as early as possible and I think that is why there were very few that arrived after November 3rd, certainly less than 40,000.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:

If the reporting on the election in PA is accurate, they only received about 1,000 ballots that arrived in the 3-day grace period that were post marked by 11/3. That doesn’t mean DJT won’t claim that there were millions of ballots that were late, but at least it doesn’t sound like there were very many to worry about (and they should have been kept separate anyway).

The one lawsuit Trump will likely win is the overreach of the PA SC to allow the 3 day grace period (which ignored net he state law that said only the state legislature could do that). Given that, the GOP would have to prove that tons of ballots arrived late. Certainly he will claim that any counting after 11/3 should discredit those votes, but I don’t see how they could argue that. 

But the GOP instituted a law that they can't even begin to open the envelops of the ballots receive by mail until 7am on election day. There is no way any state is going to accurately open and count all vote by mail ballots in 17 hours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dkp993 said:

I agree with the Three Eyed Fish.  While I understand the fear, and feel it to an extent myself too, it basically would have to mean for this to happen that conservative equals corrupt, and I don’t buy that. Too many judges, including those on the Supreme Court, would have to blatantly be operating on the fringes of the law, or just flat out rewriting it.  We’re seeing absolutely no signs of this at this point.  

If it's decided by a judicial decision then you're right. The problem is it could to be decided by a political decision. If that happens we are all screwed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Milkman said:

If it's decided by a judicial decision then you're right. The problem is it could to be decided by a political decision. If that happens we are all screwed. 

I’m not sure if it’s cool to copy and past another persons post from another site but there are some pretty interesting theories about how this could go down positively for Trump out there.  I’m not steeped enough in this arena to know if there real possibilities or not but it is fascinating.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

I’m not sure if it’s cool to copy and past another persons post from another site but there are some pretty interesting theories about how this could go down positively for Trump out there.  I’m not steeped enough in this arena to know if there real possibilities or not but it is fascinating.  

Read it on twitter haha but it's true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Milkman said:

Read it on twitter haha but it's true. 

Not Twitter but another forum.  And as I said I’m not at all saying it’s true, I don’t know how to know if it’s true or not. I just don’t have enough knowledge in this area to know if it is or isn’t a possibility. Would love to post it here to get some thoughts but not sure if it’s cool to.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Not Twitter but another forum.  And as I said I’m not at all saying it’s true, I don’t know how to know if it’s true or not. I just don’t have enough knowledge in this area to know if it is or isn’t a possibility. Would love to post it here to get some thoughts but not sure if it’s cool to.  

Summary of what is being bandied about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Not Twitter but another forum.  And as I said I’m not at all saying it’s true, I don’t know how to know if it’s true or not. I just don’t have enough knowledge in this area to know if it is or isn’t a possibility. Would love to post it here to get some thoughts but not sure if it’s cool to.  

People post things from other places here all the time. Why would that be a problem. Toss it between these so it's clear it's not your post:

 

Edited by Sideshow Bob
Stupidity, apparently
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Not Twitter but another forum.  And as I said I’m not at all saying it’s true, I don’t know how to know if it’s true or not. I just don’t have enough knowledge in this area to know if it is or isn’t a possibility. Would love to post it here to get some thoughts but not sure if it’s cool to.  

Yeah me either but some very smart people are concerned. 270 seems out of reach for Trump but if he can muddy up the waters enough that Biden doesn't get to 270 either then he can win and it might be legal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Blinky the Three Eyed Fish said:


The one lawsuit Trump will likely win is the overreach of the PA SC to allow the 3 day grace period (which ignored net he state law that said only the state legislature could do that). Given that, the GOP would have to prove that tons of ballots arrived late. Certainly he will claim that any counting after 11/3 should discredit those votes, but I don’t see how they could argue that. 

They MAY win that, but there is precedent in PA law. A few years ago (I'm too lazy to look it up) the Court had allowed late ballots to be counted when a natural disaster (I think it was a flood) interfered with the ability to cast them on election day.  Neither party questioned that. 

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...