RedZone Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 I don't blame him....... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZone Posted July 30, 2020 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 Even he knows he is currently getting clobbered. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 False. He was asked a question about delaying it. It was a suggestion not a want And it doesn't matter its not up to him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZone Posted July 30, 2020 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 .....trump will soon cry more than this. Bank on it. 1 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouth Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: False. He was asked a question about delaying it. It was a suggestion not a want And it doesn't matter its not up to him You would've flipped a shit had Obama done the same thing. It's a ridiculous thing to even mention; how about allow people to vote by mail so they don't have to worry about their physical safety? Or would that make too much sense and go against his bullshit widespread fraud narrative? 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zulu1128 Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 "Fraudulent" is obviously just Drumpf doing his usual Drumpfing. That said, most credible studies show about out 3% of all mail never makes it to the intended destination. 3% of 130 million votes seems like a significant number, so "inaccurate" probably isn't a horribly unreasonable assumption. 🤷♂️ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 1 minute ago, zulu1128 said: "Fraudulent" is obviously just Drumpf doing his usual Drumpfing. That said, most credible studies show about out 3% of all mail never makes it to the intended destination. 3% of 130 million votes seems like a significant number, so "inaccurate" probably isn't a horribly unreasonable assumption. 🤷♂️ well there is a pretty significant number of fraud. Heritage foundation has found over 1000 cases of fraud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouth Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 6 minutes ago, zulu1128 said: "Fraudulent" is obviously just Drumpf doing his usual Drumpfing. That said, most credible studies show about out 3% of all mail never makes it to the intended destination. 3% of 130 million votes seems like a significant number, so "inaccurate" probably isn't a horribly unreasonable assumption. 🤷♂️ Mail "not making it" to the destination does not constitute fraud. So, if the ballot never makes it to me - then I can go on Election Day and vote if it's the only option. If the ballot never makes it back to the post office, okay, that's a problem. I'm guessing the odds of that small % being your ballot (not a magazine, or junk mail, or a bill, etc) is going to be very-very small. If that was a study regarding fraud then it would be a severe issue. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Guru Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 4 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: well there is a pretty significant number of fraud. Heritage foundation has found over 1000 cases of fraud Over 4 years. Which would include hundreds of millions of votes. https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/database-swells-1285-proven-cases-voter-fraud-america Although talk of voter fraud may be increasing because of the stakes in the 2020 election, The Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database has been around for four years. With the addition of our latest batch of cases, we are up to 1,285 proven instances of voter fraud. And their database includes voter registration fraud which is not, in fact, voter fraud. Examples include impersonation fraud at the polls; false voter registrations; duplicate voting; fraudulent absentee ballots; vote buying; illegal assistance and intimidation of voters; ineligible voting, such as by aliens; altering of vote counts; and ballot petition fraud. The geniuses at the Heritage Foundation chose an awfully shoddy and even by their own admission "by no means comprehensive" method to count voter fraud. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouth Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: well there is a pretty significant number of fraud. Heritage foundation has found over 1000 cases of fraud How many votes were affected? And how many instances were by "the right," because the last election I can think of that was seemingly stolen was that seat in North Carolina stolen by Republicans, though I don't recall the particulars off the top of my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Guru Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 8 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: well there is a pretty significant number of fraud. Heritage foundation has found over 1000 cases of fraud 1,285 out of countless hundreds of millions. 150,000+ COVID-19 deaths out of 330 million is a "hoax" and "not significant" 😄 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Guru Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 3 minutes ago, DownSouth said: How many votes were affected? Hundreds of millions. They count local, state and federal elections. And they count things that aren't actually voter fraud. It's complete bunk driven by a right-wing think tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngdawg Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 @HSFBfan and other Republicans... So there was this company called Cambridge Analytica that used people's information from Facebook to bombard them with political advertisements supporting Clinton. They were hired by the Clinton campaign and ran 5.9 million ads as opposed to Trump's 66,000. The election was as close as it was because of this. Of course, this was entirely illegal because it stole personal information and used it for profits, but the Clinton campaign used it nonetheless. Happy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 Just now, ngdawg said: @HSFBfan and other Republicans... So there was this company called Cambridge Analytica that used people's information from Facebook to bombard them with political advertisements supporting Clinton. They were hired by the Clinton campaign and ran 5.9 million ads as opposed to Trump's 66,000. The election was as close as it was because of this. Of course, this was entirely illegal because it stole personal information and used it for profits, but the Clinton campaign used it nonetheless. Happy? R u telling me something i didn't know? This information has been public for years She also outspent him by a wide margin And she lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zulu1128 Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 9 minutes ago, DownSouth said: Mail "not making it" to the destination does not constitute fraud. Agreed. That's basically what I said. 🤷♂️ 9 minutes ago, DownSouth said: If the ballot never makes it back to the post office, okay, that's a problem. I'm guessing the odds of that small % being your ballot (not a magazine, or junk mail, or a bill, etc) is going to be very-very small. You're free to guess that I suppose. I'd love to hear some examples of actual steps taken to insure that 3.9 million ballots aren't at risk of being lost along that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
World Citizen Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 30 minutes ago, zulu1128 said: "Fraudulent" is obviously just Drumpf doing his usual Drumpfing. That said, most credible studies show about out 3% of all mail never makes it to the intended destination. 3% of 130 million votes seems like a significant number, so "inaccurate" probably isn't a horribly unreasonable assumption. 🤷♂️ Links? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngdawg Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 11 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: R u telling me something i didn't know? This information has been public for years She also outspent him by a wide margin And she lost. You know what's weird? I accidentally flipped the names. Here's the correct version: So there was this company called Cambridge Analytica that used people's information from Facebook to bombard them with political advertisements supporting Trump. They were hired by the Trump campaign and ran 5.9 million ads as opposed to Clinton's 66,000. The election was as close as it was because of this. Of course, this was entirely illegal because it stole personal information and used it for profits, but the Trump campaign used it nonetheless. Don't believe me? Watch "The Great Hack" on Netflix. The show was produced by Republicans, I believe. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownSouth Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, zulu1128 said: Agreed. That's basically what I said. 🤷♂️ You're free to guess that I suppose. I'd love to hear some examples of actual steps taken to insure that 3.9 million ballots aren't at risk of being lost along that way. Since I don't work for the postal service, I'm not partial to that information. I can assume that Trump being prickly over the thought of giving the Post Office their funding is done intentionally to make that issue more of...an issue (I think I read that the Post Office finally got funding approved). I would hope that IF the effort was ever actually made, that on a nationwide scale, receipts and signatures would be issued upon your ballot getting to the proper voting destination, along with tracking numbers. Nevada and Washington seem to have it down quite well, I'm sure a couple other states can be included too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 Just now, ngdawg said: You know what's weird? I accidentally flipped the names. Here's the correct version: So there was this company called Cambridge Analytica that used people's information from Facebook to bombard them with political advertisements supporting Trump. They were hired by the Trump campaign and ran 5.9 million ads as opposed to Clinton's 66,000. The election was as close as it was because of this. Of course, this was entirely illegal because it stole personal information and used it for profits, but the Trump campaign used it nonetheless. Don't believe me? Watch "The Great Hack" on Netflix. The show was produced by Republicans, I believe. And she still out spent him be a huge margin and still lost. Money doesn't buy elections Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngdawg Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 4 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: And she still out spent him be a huge margin and still lost. Money doesn't buy elections And yet Trump ran more digital advertisements than Hillary. Hillary even won the popular vote from what I remember, but lost to Trump based on the Electoral College. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 3 minutes ago, ngdawg said: And yet Trump ran more digital advertisements than Hillary. Hillary even won the popular vote from what I remember, but lost to Trump based on the Electoral College. Popular vote means nothing zilch. The democrats own 2 of the biggest states in the country ca and NY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngdawg Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 Just now, HSFBfan said: Popular vote means nothing zilch. The democrats own 2 of the biggest states in the country ca and NY So how is this a democracy if popular vote means nothing? America then would be lying to itself and its citizens. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 11 minutes ago, ngdawg said: So how is this a democracy if popular vote means nothing? America then would be lying to itself and its citizens. Because the EC is the only thing that matters. It makes sure every state counts and not just the most populated one Our founding father made sure middle America had a voice 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZone Posted July 30, 2020 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 58 minutes ago, zulu1128 said: "Fraudulent" is obviously just Drumpf doing his usual Drumpfing. ..and this is obviously acceptable to you and WE should accept it too, right..... No big deal....just trump! Will you ever commit to be a trumper????....that's the real question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zulu1128 Posted July 30, 2020 Report Share Posted July 30, 2020 56 minutes ago, DownSouth said: Since I don't work for the postal service, I'm not partial to that information. I can assume that Trump being prickly over the thought of giving the Post Office their funding is done intentionally to make that issue more of...an issue (I think I read that the Post Office finally got funding approved). I would hope that IF the effort was ever actually made, that on a nationwide scale, receipts and signatures would be issued upon your ballot getting to the proper voting destination, along with tracking numbers. Nevada and Washington seem to have it down quite well, I'm sure a couple other states can be included too. I'd be perfectly fine with that. Probably not happening this cycle though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.