OK, now we descend into the STOLEN election

[dr_st]

democrats have to be a big-tent party that spans from social-democrat and liberal to soft conservative (which isn't terrible stable), while the Republicans have become more and more radicalized since the 1960s.

Right. So the Republican party became "radicalized" and the Democratic party has not. That's how you see it. Others will beg to differ. Of course, when you are deep in the left (resp. right), everything even a tad right (resp. left) from center may seem "radical".

For this reason, the priority of Democrats should be to repair the political system - namely, get rid of the electoral college (or at least get rid of the "winner takes all" rule for the electors) and add DC and Puerto Rico as states in the senate to balance it better. The first thing might be possible if Texas turns blue at some point in the future, cause if the Democrats can claim Texas with "winner takes all" in place, Republicans can not get the presidency again.

Your idea of "repairing" the political system seems too much like rigging it in favor of Democrats as opposed to the current situation, which is rigged (at least in some ways) in favor of Republicans.

Although I do agree that if the long-term goal is to break the two-party system in favor of a multi-party system, then certain steps you suggested may point in the right direction. However, in the short-term you will be putting too much power into the hands of a party which will naturally want to keep it for as long as possible.

[Ibthink]

Right. So the Republican party became "radicalized" and the Democratic party has not. That's how you see it. Others will beg to differ. Of course, when you are deep in the left (resp. right), everything even a tad right (resp. left) from center may seem "radical".

You can probably ask every political scientist in the world if the Democratic party is "radical" and they would all tell you it isn't.

By its nature, it can't be, because it has to be "big tent" (aka encompassing many different political groups) to be able to compete with the Republicans. That is why the party is already starting to fight amongst them self a few days after victory (liberal-conservatives blaming progressives for weak election results in the house, progressives responding in kind). But the party establishment is completely dominated by moderate politicians - Biden is a moderate, Kamala Harris is a moderate, Nancy Pelosi is a moderate, Chuck Schumer is a moderate. They would all be in centrist political parties if they were in Europe. A big tent structure requires compromise to make it work.

Meanwhile, the Republicans that used to have a liberal wing in the 60s do not have one anymore - they are a very monolithic party in terms of their ideology, since the political polarization has profited their party. Probably why the few moderate Republicans left campaigned for Biden this year.

The "everything is relative" point of view is useless in this case. Yes, if you are far-right, the Democrats are the extremists from your point of view - for everyone else, not so much. Unless you are a Republican and paint the Democrats as "radicals" to gain voters through fear campaigns (but even in this case, such an individual would still know that it isn't actually true.

Your idea of "repairing" the political system seems too much like rigging it in favor of Democrats as opposed to the current situation, which is rigged (at least in some ways) in favor of Republicans.

I don't think these measures would rig as much as they would level the playing field - especially since from a pro-democracy point of view, giving more people a voice can not be wrong. After all: America was founded, because people demanded representation for taxation. Citizens in Puerto Rico and DC are Americans, but don't have a voice in the senate. And blue voters in red states have their votes ignored - just like red voters in blue states.

But you have a point - they are merely band-aid measures. Implementing them might get rid of the gridlock situation though and enable further, more fundamental change for the better (such as something like ranked choice voting) down the line.

[Saucey]

Ross Perot should of became president and we wouldn't of have this issue at all.

[cadillacmike68]

Right. So the Republican party became "radicalized" and the Democratic party has not. That's how you see it. Others will beg to differ. Of course, when you are deep in the left (resp. right), everything even a tad right (resp. left) from center may seem "radical".

You can probably ask every political scientist in the world if the Democratic party is "radical" and they would all tell you it isn't.

By its nature, it can't be, because it has to be "big tent" (aka encompassing many different political groups) to be able to compete with the Republicans. That is why the party is already starting to fight amongst them self a few days after victory (liberal-conservatives blaming progressives for weak election results in the house, progressives responding in kind). But the party establishment is completely dominated by moderate politicians - Biden is a moderate, Kamala Harris is a moderate, Nancy Pelosi is a moderate, Chuck Schumer is a moderate. They would all be in centrist political parties if they were in Europe. A big tent structure requires compromise to make it work.

Meanwhile, the Republicans that used to have a liberal wing in the 60s do not have one anymore - they are a very monolithic party in terms of their ideology, since the political polarization has profited their party. Probably why the few moderate Republicans left campaigned for Biden this year.

The "everything is relative" point of view is useless in this case. Yes, if you are far-right, the Democrats are the extremists from your point of view - for everyone else, not so much. Unless you are a Republican and paint the Democrats as "radicals" to gain voters through fear campaigns (but even in this case, such an individual would still know that it isn't actually true.

Your idea of "repairing" the political system seems too much like rigging it in favor of Democrats as opposed to the current situation, which is rigged (at least in some ways) in favor of Republicans.

I don't think these measures would rig as much as they would level the playing field - especially since from a pro-democracy point of view, giving more people a voice can not be wrong. After all: America was founded, because people demanded representation for taxation. Citizens in Puerto Rico and DC are Americans, but don't have a voice in the senate. And blue voters in red states have their votes ignored - just like red voters in blue states.

But you have a point - they are merely band-aid measures. Implementing them might get rid of the gridlock situation though and enable further, more fundamental change for the better (such as something like ranked choice voting) down the line.

PR residents, (Notice that I said PR RESIDENTS, NOT PR CITIZENS, there is no such thing as a PR Citizen, All persons born in PR since 1905 are Natural Born US citizens), DO NOT PAY federal income taxes. Even you, if you moved there and because a US citizen would not have to pay federal income taxes.

I already stated the facts on DC. States have senators, territories and districts do not.

I just love all these non citizens from afar telling us how we should run our nation.

[dr_st]

You can probably ask every political scientist in the world if the Democratic party is "radical" and they would all tell you it isn't.

You should first ask those political scientists who they vote for, or which agendas they support. You'll be surprised (well, no, you won't) how the definition of 'radical' will align according to party lines.

By its nature, it can't be, because it has to be "big tent" (aka encompassing many different political groups) to be able to compete with the Republicans.

The process of radicalization is not that everyone suddenly becomes radical. It's typically when radical ideologies that used to be on the fringes slowly become more and more mainstream.

Meanwhile, the Republicans that used to have a liberal wing in the 60s do not have one anymore - they are a very monolithic party in terms of their ideology

Monolithic and radical are not the same thing. Besides, I would say that the Republican party is not as monolithic as you think. And never mind that along quite a few axes in the 'conservative-liberal' scale of the US, the exiting Republican president is probably the most 'liberal' candidate you've seen from that party in recent decades.

The "everything is relative" point of view is useless in this case. Yes, if you are far-right, the Democrats are the extremists from your point of view - for everyone else, not so much.

The same of course holds true for the way the 'far left' views Republicans. Since you are at least as far left as I am right, I say this explains the slightly different perspectives.

I don't think these measures would rig as much as they would level the playing field - especially since from a pro-democracy point of view, giving more people a voice can not be wrong. After all: America was founded, because people demanded representation for taxation. Citizens in Puerto Rico and DC are Americans, but don't have a voice in the senate. And blue voters in red states have their votes ignored - just like red voters in blue states.

Some of your suggestions seem not to be as much pro-Democracy as they are pro-Democratic party. Why stop at DC? Maybe we should take it one step further - and give every big blue metropolitan in a red state an individual voice in the senate? Some of them are bigger than DC, after all.

[Ibthink]

Some of your suggestions seem not to be as much pro-Democracy as they are pro-Democratic party. Why stop at DC? Maybe we should take it one step further - and give every big blue metropolitan in a red state an individual voice in the senate? Some of them are bigger than DC, after all.

DC is not in a state, unlike other cities, and does not get any representation in the senate at all. More than 670,000 people live in DC that are not represented in the senate - 100,000 people more than in the least populous state, Wyoming.

Citizens in these other cities get a chance to elect senators - they might not get their preferred choice due to the rest of the state voting differently, but at least they have a chance. In some cases, like say Atlanta, Georgia, they might be the swing vote.

I just love all these non citizens from afar telling us how we should run our nation.

Might be annoying for you, but America is the biggest Western power and the way it is governed affects us as well. Also, I am not telling you to do anything, I am merely expressing my opinion on the matter.

Anyway, back to the topic of election rigging: https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020 ... ark-money/

[cadillacmike68]

Some of your suggestions seem not to be as much pro-Democracy as they are pro-Democratic party. Why stop at DC? Maybe we should take it one step further - and give every big blue metropolitan in a red state an individual voice in the senate? Some of them are bigger than DC, after all.

DC is not in a state, unlike other cities, and does not get any representation in the senate at all. More than 670,000 people live in DC that are not represented in the senate - 100,000 people more than in the least populous state, Wyoming.

Citizens in these other cities get a chance to elect senators - they might not get their preferred choice due to the rest of the state voting differently, but at least they have a chance. In some cases, like say Atlanta, Georgia, they might be the swing vote.

I just love all these non citizens from afar telling us how we should run our nation.

Might be annoying for you, but America is the biggest Western power and the way it is governed affects us as well. Also, I am not telling you to do anything, I am merely expressing my opinion on the matter.

Anyway, back to the topic of election rigging: https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020 ... ark-money/

Do you mean that you DO NOT like the US being energy independent and thus having more oil available for you other western nations to buy, thus increasing the effective global supply and easing global prices????? Naval (and commercial) ships (except nuclear powered subs and carriers) use a Lot of oil to get around. So do aircraft. This is one of the things that makes rep OC's statements so stoooooooopid.

I had to add a lot of extra "o"s on that one.

[RealBlackStuff]

This is one of the things that makes rep OC's statements so stoooooooopid.

I had to add a lot of extra "o"s on that one.

Maybe do some self-home-schooling and brush up on your spelling?
Republicans and Democrats alike will benefit from it!

[ajkula66]

One aspect of the story which hasn't been mentioned so far from what I can tell...

Democrats and Republicans - well, most of them in Congress, not necessarily the voters - are members of the same "uniparty". Having lived under both GWB and Obama I'll say that the difference in their policies was minimal. Both of them were extremely corporate-friendly and happy to engage in/start conflicts elsewhere in the world that had little to do with country's real interest IMO.

I detest "business as usual" politics in DC.

That's why I had high hopes in the Tea Party movement.

That's why I actually got a kick of of the new kids on the block like AOC.

Trump had a huge mandate but realistically accomplished very little of what he was elected to do. I would say the same thing about Obama.

Uniparty won in both cases.

However, the times they are-a-changin'

Republican part of the swamp is under misconception that it will be "business as usual" if/when Biden takes office. But it won't. The country has moved in a direction that I personally loathe over the past few months - although the movement had started much earlier - and I honestly can't wait to get out of here altogether. RINOs will have a tough time accepting that reality, to their own peril.

Democratic part of the swamp is scared from being primaried by the newly empowered left side of their party, and will move - already has in many respects - further in that direction that anyone imagined possible even five years ago.

I want no part of that. My kids may just have to work on becoming fluid in their parents' language for a couple of years.

[rkawakami]

Trump had a huge mandate but realistically accomplished very little of what he was elected to do. I would say the same thing about Obama.

I believe that is true, but I think the reason why Obama did not get much done was that the Republicans blocked a lot of legislation under his watch.

[cadillacmike68]

Trump had a huge mandate but realistically accomplished very little of what he was elected to do. I would say the same thing about Obama.

I believe that is true, but I think the reason why Obama did not get much done was that the Republicans blocked a lot of legislation under his watch.

They were Both blocked by congress. Obama had a sizeable majority in his first 2 years and all he got done was the (un)affordable care act. and we all know what bunch of lies and mess mess that has turned out to be. Trump had a very small majority his first 2 years and was stymied by RINOs.

[ajkula66]

Trump had a huge mandate but realistically accomplished very little of what he was elected to do. I would say the same thing about Obama.

I believe that is true, but I think the reason why Obama did not get much done was that the Republicans blocked a lot of legislation under his watch.

Obama chose to get closer to Wall Street and away from Main Street once in office. I've heard this complaint from many people, including Dem operatives who held fundraisers for him when he was running for the first term.

Whoever coined the term "swamp" in order to describe DC politics in general was on the money. Many found that out the hard way, Including David Stockman 40+ years ago...his book on the failure of "Reagan Revolution" is a sobering must-read for anyone holding their conservative values dear...IMO, that is.

[BillMorrow]

I believe that is true, but I think the reason why Obama did not get much done was that the Republicans blocked a lot of legislation under his watch.

They were Both blocked by congress. Obama had a sizeable majority in his first 2 years and all he got done was the (un)affordable care act. and we all know what bunch of lies and mess mess that has turned out to be. Trump had a very small majority his first 2 years and was stymied by RINOs.

EXACTLY right, mike..!
trump was stymied by nearly EVERY democrat party member and the near entire (fake) news media, the near entire entertainment industry, his (trumps) naivete about just how deep and against him was the DC swamp..
trump is, IMHO a patriot.. a crass, potty mouth, coarse, etc. PATRIOT..
obama, on the other hand, was and remains a great speaker, the ANTI-patriot, socialist, opportunist, globalist, etc..
whose policies were all aimed at the destruction of the USA as founded and we remained, more or less, through the TR administration to wilson..

but we digress, i think, from election theft..

it is now coming out that this "dominion software" fiddled with votes to the favor of biden..
face it, the left had 4 years to work up to this moment and finally get rid of trump..

i am not a programmer like we have today, but i DID write all the software to run my small business in california using a compiled basic with a lot of good monitor calls..
and any programmer knows how this dominion application could easily be screwed around with to install biden..

that together with the graveyard vote, the corrupt mail in ballots, etc. have thrown this election into chaos, which is what the left wants, IMO..

i suggest biden is still one of the two candidates and is NOT president elect..
all this support of biden calling himself that is psychological programming (PsyOps) of the people to believe that..

[BillMorrow]

AND..

Trump had a huge mandate but realistically accomplished very little of what he was elected to do. I would say the same thing about Obama.

not so accurate,
trump got the wall up (400+ miles of it) and that alone is helping keep drugs OUT of the USA..
trump fixed the VA..
trump get the economy humming like a swiss watch.. lowest unemployment for black and hispanic workers, wages going UP without big brother mandating it..
trump got THREE constitutionalist supreme court justices confirmed..
trump moved the US embassy to jerusalem..
trump is nominated for FOUR nobel peace prizes.. FOUR..!
trump has mideast peace going between several arab nations and israel..
trump is killing the iranian theocracy which just might free the iranian people..
trump made the USA energy independent..
trump lowered fed taxes on EVERYONE, not just the so called RICH..
trump established the SPACE FORCE..!
there are so many more TRUMP accomplishments to list but you all can go check them out on duckduckgo.com.. i would not trust googles search results on anything IRT trump..
ALL while hades was being rained down on him and most anyone associated with his administration..

[ajkula66]

AND..

Trump had a huge mandate but realistically accomplished very little of what he was elected to do. I would say the same thing about Obama.

not so accurate,

I'll agree to some of these points...not on all of them. Most of my disagreements would have nothing tho do with the topic of election fraud, though, so I'll leave them out of this thread and perhaps for a different one.

I will say this, though: for *my own, personal, selfish-if-you-will* purposes a Trump administration works *far* better than a Biden one, even with all the disappointments with the current administration that I've accumulated over the past 8-9 months.

[BillMorrow]

AND..


not so accurate,

I'll agree to some of these points...not on all of them. Most of my disagreements would have nothing tho do with the topic of election fraud, though, so I'll leave them out of this thread and perhaps for a different one.

I will say this, though: for *my own, personal, selfish-if-you-will* purposes a Trump administration works *far* better than a Biden one, even with all the disappointments with the current administration that I've accumulated over the past 8-9 months.

sorry to hear that, george..
i would be interested in listening to those..

another point is biden is JUST SO CORRUPT it is amazing he is not under indictment.. his son, hunter, IS being investigated, or so said the FBI when they were pressed..
my god, the guy is a druggie bag man and it is all public knowledge..!
and yet trump was impeached (another bit of that hades rainstorm) for a telephone call asking the ukrainians to investigate hunters ties with that oligarch's energy company..

[ajkula66]

another point is biden is JUST SO CORRUPT it is amazing he is not under indictment..

Sadly, there's nothing amazing about that. Biden has been a part of the swamp for decades and *they* never get indicted for anything.

[rkawakami]

trump got the wall up (400+ miles of it) and that alone is helping keep drugs OUT of the USA..

The southern border is just under 2,000 miles long. He's got a way to go. And Mexico has not put a penny (or peso) into it. At the moment most of the money is coming out of the DoD's budget, which may not be legal. A former CBP commissioner has stated (2019) that a vast majority of drug smuggling (90%) is through ports-of-entry, not going over/under any border wall.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46824649
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/06/71071219 ... ico-border

trump fixed the VA..

Trump has taken credit of some programs/advances that started under Obama's administration. Trump has expanded some eligibility requirements.
https://apnews.com/article/375515aecedb ... 2eb9c54eb6

trump get the economy humming like a swiss watch..

Again, taking credit for something which was started before he even assumed office.

lowest unemployment for black and hispanic workers,

This is true.

wages going UP without big brother mandating it..

I'd say that wages ALWAYS goes up, but probably not matching the increase in cost-of-living.

trump got THREE constitutionalist supreme court justices confirmed..
trump moved the US embassy to jerusalem..

No argument there.

trump is nominated for FOUR nobel peace prizes.. FOUR..!

I really don't see ANY significance in a NOMINATION. You can get one or more of your friends to nominate. Obama won one in 2009. Let me know when Trump wins one, then I'll concede you this as a debate point.

trump has mideast peace going between several arab nations and israel..
trump is killing the iranian theocracy which just might free the iranian people..

If peace in the Mid-East can be obtained, it will be good for everyone involved.

trump made the USA energy independent..

Ah, how? My understanding is that we are still importing oil. We're going in the right direction but still not there yet.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete ... ependence/

trump lowered fed taxes on EVERYONE, not just the so called RICH..

The individual tax rate percentages (i.e., brackets) may have gone down for everyone, and the standard deductions gone up, but the personal exemptions and some itemized deductions have disappeared. However the corporate tax rate has been dropped from 35% to 21% and are PERMANENT, while the personal rates are only in effect for 10 years. Does that sound fair? Is that beneficial to the individual taxpayer or to business? A larger exemption for estate tax ($11.2M in 2018, versus $5.6M in 2017). That sounds like it favors the rich to me. The pass-through business standard deduction of 20% ends in 2025. That's enough time for Trump to benefit because, oh yeah, many of his businesses are structured that way. Sure some small mom-and-pop operations can take advantage of this, but so can the ultra-rich.
https://www.thebalance.com/trump-s-tax- ... ou-4113968

trump established the SPACE FORCE..!

Uh, okay.

there are so many more TRUMP accomplishments to list but you all can go check them out on duckduckgo.com.. i would not trust googles search results on anything IRT trump..
ALL while hades was being trained down on him and most anyone associated with his administration..

My explanation for that is that Trump has brought this down on himself.

[rkawakami]

I will say this, though: for *my own, personal, selfish-if-you-will* purposes a Trump administration works *far* better than a Biden one, even with all the disappointments with the current administration that I've accumulated over the past 8-9 months.

Biden hasn't even taken office yet. Please re-visit this in four years if you're still in the US. Give the man a chance...

[ajkula66]

I will say this, though: for *my own, personal, selfish-if-you-will* purposes a Trump administration works *far* better than a Biden one, even with all the disappointments with the current administration that I've accumulated over the past 8-9 months.

Biden hasn't even taken office yet. Please re-visit this in four years if you're still in the US. Give the man a chance...

Any presidency affects more than just the life in the U.S.

For certain things that matter a lot *to me* - a very high level of importance - I know for a fact that Biden will be worse than Trump. His record on that particular issue speaks volumes.

[rkawakami]

another point is biden is JUST SO CORRUPT it is amazing he is not under indictment.. his son, hunter, IS being investigated, or so said the FBI when they were pressed..

I know we're getting off topic here, but I feel that I must respond. Assuming that your definition of "corrupt" matches the dictionary's:

adjective: corrupt
1. having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.

I guess I should start referring to Trump as corrupt too. I've resisted so far but if the shoe fits.... In the four years of his term, he has funneled money to his business, and by extension, to himself, since he has not divested himself from his businesses like previous presidents have (i.e., blind trusts). I know some of you will say, "yeah, but it's not a LEGAL requirement!". That's BS. And there's always the retort that, "He doesn't even take a salary. He donates the money." Again, misdirection. He's getting plenty of money from other sources (US taxpayers).

It's dishonest not to reveal your business ties when the Secret Service is spending taxpayer money at Mar-a-Lago and other Trump properties.
It's dishonest not to release your tax returns so the public (voters) and Congress knows who you may be indebted to or the sources of your income.
It's dishonest when you continue to lie about a stolen election (back on topic) when you and your lawyers are offering no proof of it at all.
It's dishonest when you say the crowd size of your inauguration was bigger than any other, when anyone who has at least 20-200 vision could see differently.
It's dishonest when you say that China and others are paying tariffs for goods coming into the country. It's the U.S. businesses that pay tariffs, and indirectly, the U.S. consumer when those business raise prices to cover their costs. It's Econ 101 people.
Basically, it's dishonest when you continue to lie about everything big and small, when facts say otherwise.

Has Biden lied? Yes, he's gone back on some things he's said. So has Trump. Biden has been in the pockets of Big Banks. We don't know if Trump is because we haven't seen his tax returns, but given past history, it's probable. Trump has normalized dishonesty, and for that, I feel sorry for him and his believers. I can't understand when people who are much less wealthy than him can support his policies when he's screwing almost the entire country. Well, except the rich. It reminds me of the following:

Don't believe them when they tell me
There ain't no cure
The rich stay healthy
While the sick stay poor

[rkawakami]

Any presidency affects more than just the life in the U.S.

Undoubtedly.

For certain things that matter a lot *to me* - a very high level of importance - I know for a fact that Biden will be worse than Trump. His record on that particular issue speaks volumes.

I can't claim to know your personal stake in this matter. Which is why I started that other thread which will hopefully detail life after 45 and under 46's first two years.

[ajkula66]

For certain things that matter a lot *to me* - a very high level of importance - I know for a fact that Biden will be worse than Trump. His record on that particular issue speaks volumes.

I can't claim to know your personal stake in this matter. Which is why I started that other thread which will hopefully detail life after 45 and under 46's first two years.

Fair enough. I suspect that the "other" thread will be an interesting one to watch and participate in...

[cadillacmike68]

This is one of the things that makes rep OC's statements so stoooooooopid.

I had to add a lot of extra "o"s on that one.

Maybe do some self-home-schooling and brush up on your spelling?
Republicans and Democrats alike will benefit from it!

Ummmmmm, it was Deliberate, get it??

[dr_st]

I can't understand when people who are much less wealthy than him can support his policies when he's screwing almost the entire country.

There's a lot in the post I could reply to, but I choose only this one since this goes beyond Trump - it is a claim I often see raised against the government in Israel, and probably in either countries too.

Can you try to understand that some people actually disagree with you that his policies are screwing the country? That some people actually think his policies are good? We have a couple of those in this very thread, so it shouldn't be too difficult to believe.

[bgx]

I can't understand when people who are much less wealthy than him can support his policies when he's screwing almost the entire country.

There's a lot in the post I could reply to, but I choose only this one since this goes beyond Trump - it is a claim I often see raised against the government in Israel, and probably in either countries too.

Can you try to understand that some people actually disagree with you that his policies are screwing the country? That some people actually think his policies are good? We have a couple of those in this very thread, so it shouldn't be too difficult to believe.

We all very well understand people "think his policies are good", e.g. because they see their own tax going down.
It does not mean they are not getting screwed (they win 10$ while rich people win 10000000000$ and the country as a whole get poorer and people need to directly pay for more things in the process. Poor needs to pay 100$ more, but indirectly, they dont see it in the tax, and rich need to pay let say 1000$indirect more)!

So now, do the math and see who is screwed is who is not

[cadillacmike68]

There's a lot in the post I could reply to, but I choose only this one since this goes beyond Trump - it is a claim I often see raised against the government in Israel, and probably in either countries too.

Can you try to understand that some people actually disagree with you that his policies are screwing the country? That some people actually think his policies are good? We have a couple of those in this very thread, so it shouldn't be too difficult to believe.

We all very well understand people "think his policies are good", e.g. because they see their own tax going down.
It does not mean they are not getting screwed (they win 10$ while rich people win 10000000000$ and the country as a whole get poorer and people need to directly pay for more things in the process. Poor needs to pay 100$ more, but indirectly, they dont see it in the tax, and rich need to pay let say 1000$indirect more)!

So now, do the math and see who is screwed is who is not

Once you refine your math get back with us.

And biden won't raise taxes on those making less than $400K - yeah right...

[cadillacmike68]

So exactly HOW does a voting machine "flip" votes.

...
...
...
...
...

That's right, it was PROGRAMMED to do so!

Thew manual recount in GA will tell us.

Needs to be ones in NV, AZ. And in WI, MI, PA after illegal votes are culled first.

[bgx]

Sure, let the process go along. Manual recount everywhere where it makes sense (with close margin), check if dead people voted (e.g. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/12/poli ... index.html), check maiden name voting, check weird glitch in reporting trump vote count, etc.

Do everything well.

And when there is indication of vast fraud, come back to us and complain.

Because so far, what we see is a monkey shouting and fools protesting around, based on nothing concrete but the sadness of the monkey losing the election.

[mpcook]

Back to the topic and here are some data. This is the Biden vote count vs. 2016 Clinton count by state, so it shows how much the Democratic count (for President) increased vs. last election.

State Flip 2020 vs 2016 vote count
Georgia 221,000
Minnesota 188,000
Michigan 159,000
Texas 152,000
Arizona 110,000
North Carolina 98,000
Pennsylvania 85,000
New Hampshire 54,000
Wisconsin 43,000
Iowa 9,000
Nevada 4,000

This is a lot of votes to be accounted for by fraud. So far, the only verified fraud is an arrest of a man who voted for Trump using his mother's ballot (she had passed before the lection). So far, no court has ruled in Trump's favor to reverse any counted votes, and no unfrivolous charge has been brought to a court that could make a difference (i.e., one that has actual evidence).