Trump Post Election News.

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry if that didn't really come through in text form.

I was mocking the idea that the gop was proping up Trump rather than the other way around.

Sorry, online communication and quoting can be difficult on mobile sometimes.

I got what you meant, and I was agreeing with you and adding to your point, while laughing at the notion that the GOP carried him. That's just hilarious.

I'm fairly confident that had any other republican won the nomination for the 2016 election that Hillary would have won.

Trump came in and shook up the game. He smashed through the primaries and then got in the way of Hillary, who everyone thought was a shoo-in. Candidates that Trump endorses usually get a polling bump, and usually tend to win.

A Trump endorsement is one of the best things that could happen to your campaign if you're a republican. He's carrying them.

And I think it's due to his magic ability to deflect shit. I'm serious, too. You watch those old polls, he was the top of the race that entire time in the 2016 primaries. Most of those guys? All it takes is one slip up, one good attack, and they're out. Trump outlasted all of that and it never hurt him.

He went through 4 years of democrat shit flinging, and even with their cheating the 2020 election was razor thin. Even after two sham impeachments, he still polls well.

Somehow the shit that wrecks other politicians just bounces right off him.
 

Airedale260

Well-known member
We need you establishment RINOs about as much as we need a knife in the back.

You’re nothing more than old Cold War warriors and Bushites that have been holding the party back since Reagan.

Your time is over old man, the party is ours now.

Old? Shit dude I’m not even 40. And believe that if you want, but also be prepared to spend eternity in political exile without us. Because it turns out that half the base and all the swing voters prefer having someone in charge who actually is a functioning adult rather than someone who throws tantrums when things don’t go

I'm guessing this post means that you actually buy there was no election tampering involved in Biden's 2020 'win'?

Given that Trump and Co had ample opportunity to provide evidence of this, and all they mustered was “well some people thought this looked suspicious” my answer is, “None that actually mattered.”

But let me ask this...if the Democrats successfully managed to rig a presidential election, then why the hell did they simultaneously lose seats in the House when they should have won those as well, and then ended up not being able to flip the Senate until January, when that only happened because Georgia voters 1) went “Well, Trump said our votes don’t matter so we won’t bother” and 2) Trump actually managed to drive his opposition to the polls when he wouldn’t shut up about the fact that he was still upset about how the election went despite it being pretty clear that he’d lost because people hated him personally -something his own campaign pollsters admitted was the cause.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Old? Shit dude I’m not even 40. And believe that if you want, but also be prepared to spend eternity in political exile without us. Because it turns out that half the base and all the swing voters prefer having someone in charge who actually is a functioning adult rather than someone who throws tantrums when things don’t go



Given that Trump and Co had ample opportunity to provide evidence of this, and all they mustered was “well some people thought this looked suspicious” my answer is, “None that actually mattered.”

But let me ask this...if the Democrats successfully managed to rig a presidential election, then why the hell did they simultaneously lose seats in the House when they should have won those as well, and then ended up not being able to flip the Senate until January, when that only happened because Georgia voters 1) went “Well, Trump said our votes don’t matter so we won’t bother” and 2) Trump actually managed to drive his opposition to the polls when he wouldn’t shut up about the fact that he was still upset about how the election went despite it being pretty clear that he’d lost because people hated him personally -something his own campaign pollsters admitted was the cause.
They did show evidence. Hell, watch from timestamp...

Totally no fraud guys
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Old? Shit dude I’m not even 40. And believe that if you want, but also be prepared to spend eternity in political exile without us. Because it turns out that half the base and all the swing voters prefer having someone in charge who actually is a functioning adult rather than someone who throws tantrums when things don’t go



Given that Trump and Co had ample opportunity to provide evidence of this, and all they mustered was “well some people thought this looked suspicious” my answer is, “None that actually mattered.”

But let me ask this...if the Democrats successfully managed to rig a presidential election, then why the hell did they simultaneously lose seats in the House when they should have won those as well, and then ended up not being able to flip the Senate until January, when that only happened because Georgia voters 1) went “Well, Trump said our votes don’t matter so we won’t bother” and 2) Trump actually managed to drive his opposition to the polls when he wouldn’t shut up about the fact that he was still upset about how the election went despite it being pretty clear that he’d lost because people hated him personally -something his own campaign pollsters admitted was the cause.
The democrats didn't commit fraud everywhere in every place that held votes.

They did it in a few heavily left wing areas, just enough to tip the balance.

They managed to keep a house majority and squeeze out a tie in the Senate.

That's all they really needed.

And hey. We saw the times article that explained all the shady but legal stuff that happened.

We saw the truck show up with mystery ballots at 3am which they originally denied happened at all.

We watched states bypass their legislatures to change laws from the judicial bench... which even if you ignore all the other evidence, this created enough questionable votes to turn the election.

We have seen dead people on the voter roles.

Crowder recently has uncovered hundreds of voters that don't even live and never have, at the addresses listed (some of them werent even homes, one was under a bypass)

There is tons of evidence. The fact that they got away with it anyways doesn't negate this

They did show evidence. Hell, watch from timestamp...

Totally no fraud guys

Ninja'd!
 

Airedale260

Well-known member
They did show evidence. Hell, watch from timestamp...

Totally no fraud guys


Yes, some random YouTuber who doesn’t actually know what he’s looking at and regurgitates what he’s heard from dubious sources.

I’m talking about the sort of evidence that can’t be refuted in a court of law. Conspiracy theories were spread by the Democrats in 2004 and 2016, and I wasn’t impressed with either of those.

Anyway, this is off topic. My concern is winning in 2022 and 2024. And I genuinely think Trump is going to drag the party down until someone finally gives him the boot.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Yes, some random YouTuber who doesn’t actually know what he’s looking at and regurgitates what he’s heard from dubious sources.

I’m talking about the sort of evidence that can’t be refuted in a court of law. Conspiracy theories were spread by the Democrats in 2004 and 2016, and I wasn’t impressed with either of those.

Anyway, this is off topic. My concern is winning in 2022 and 2024. And I genuinely think Trump is going to drag the party down until someone finally gives him the boot.
So...
Did you actually watch it or dismiss it because it is crowder?
He literally sends an intern over to Nevada to go to addresses that are not real residents.
Hell, Crowder says sue him if he is lying...

He does his own research. He makes sure what he says are true or will state he caan not verify
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Yes, some random YouTuber who doesn’t actually know what he’s looking at and regurgitates what he’s heard from dubious sources.

I’m talking about the sort of evidence that can’t be refuted in a court of law. Conspiracy theories were spread by the Democrats in 2004 and 2016, and I wasn’t impressed with either of those.

Anyway, this is off topic. My concern is winning in 2022 and 2024. And I genuinely think Trump is going to drag the party down until someone finally gives him the boot.
You didn't watch it.

He knows what he's looking at and he's not regurgitating anything. If you had watched it, you'd know that he actually did his due diligence and produced new information through his investigative journalism.

They literally took the public addresses, from the website, which is regularly updated with the most recent records, and went to those places.

Some were not residential areas at all. Some were empty lots. Others were not occupied by the person claimed and never had been.

Can you actually refute this? Dismissing him as "some YouTube guy" doesn't refute anything. Yes, He is largely a comedian and does a lot of stuff that isn't serious, but in this case, he did real investigative journalism and uncovered a bunch of false addresses.

This is real. You don't get to just dismiss it as "some YouTube guy who doesn't know what he's looking at," because if you had watched it, he actually calls the board of elections and asks them about it.

You can't brush this off that easily. If you want to refute it, watch it and offer an actual refutation.
 
Last edited:

lordmcdeath

Well-known member
In every State that doesn't have same day registration, any and every voter on the roles can and is supposed to be challenged before the election if either party thinks they are voting illegally. That is the rule in everyone of those swing states. Every voter could have been challenged for months. If this thing with Crowder was remotely true, the GOP could have gotten them struck from the day after they registered (when they show up on the voter registration).

Anyone can get voter rolls, the fee is small and investigation is clearly not hard if Crowder did it. Pulitzer he isn't.

Trump isn't a problem because he isn't popular or good at deflecting, and beating up on the Media. His problem is that he has no follow through, and never makes sure the actual work is done. He hires and values based on loyalty and usefulness, but not on the sort of nuts and bolts competence that could have caught this sort of thing. So rather than giving his local faithful the resources to take care of this or spinning of a PAC to do the same for each state, he does more bloody add buys and uses half the stop the steal money to pay down campaign debt.

I hate the man for personal reasons (Wrong me, and I shall forgive, Wrong my family and you are dead to me until you at last apologies to them in person.) But I cannot help but recognize his strengths.

He's an improve guy. It makes actually fighting him like punching smoke, but it means anything that takes a plan has to have someone else to catch it or it will fall on the ground. And this was a known thing and wouldn't have been hard. But no, lets blow more money on useless TV ad buys.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
In every State that doesn't have same day registration, any and every voter on the roles can and is supposed to be challenged before the election if either party thinks they are voting illegally. That is the rule in everyone of those swing states. Every voter could have been challenged for months. If this thing with Crowder was remotely true, the GOP could have gotten them struck from the day after they registered (when they show up on the voter registration).

Anyone can get voter rolls, the fee is small and investigation is clearly not hard if Crowder did it. Pulitzer he isn't.

Trump isn't a problem because he isn't popular or good at deflecting, and beating up on the Media. His problem is that he has no follow through, and never makes sure the actual work is done. He hires and values based on loyalty and usefulness, but not on the sort of nuts and bolts competence that could have caught this sort of thing. So rather than giving his local faithful the resources to take care of this or spinning of a PAC to do the same for each state, he does more bloody add buys and uses half the stop the steal money to pay down campaign debt.

I hate the man for personal reasons (Wrong me, and I shall forgive, Wrong my family and you are dead to me until you at last apologies to them in person.) But I cannot help but recognize his strengths.

He's an improve guy. It makes actually fighting him like punching smoke, but it means anything that takes a plan has to have someone else to catch it or it will fall on the ground. And this was a known thing and wouldn't have been hard. But no, lets blow more money on useless TV ad buys.
"If this thing with was remotely true"

Excuse me, but you're going to need to prove that it isn't true.

Because we have plenty of evidence that it is.

Like I told the other poster, "it's some YouTube guy" doesn't refute it. Nor does " investigation is clearly not hard if Crowder did it. Pulitzer he isn't."

So. Go ahead. I'll wait. Actually refute Crowder's claims.
 
Last edited:

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
In every State that doesn't have same day registration, any and every voter on the roles can and is supposed to be challenged before the election if either party thinks they are voting illegally. That is the rule in everyone of those swing states. Every voter could have been challenged for months. If this thing with Crowder was remotely true, the GOP could have gotten them struck from the day after they registered (when they show up on the voter registration).

Anyone can get voter rolls, the fee is small and investigation is clearly not hard if Crowder did it. Pulitzer he isn't.

Trump isn't a problem because he isn't popular or good at deflecting, and beating up on the Media. His problem is that he has no follow through, and never makes sure the actual work is done. He hires and values based on loyalty and usefulness, but not on the sort of nuts and bolts competence that could have caught this sort of thing. So rather than giving his local faithful the resources to take care of this or spinning of a PAC to do the same for each state, he does more bloody add buys and uses half the stop the steal money to pay down campaign debt.

I hate the man for personal reasons (Wrong me, and I shall forgive, Wrong my family and you are dead to me until you at last apologies to them in person.) But I cannot help but recognize his strengths.

He's an improve guy. It makes actually fighting him like punching smoke, but it means anything that takes a plan has to have someone else to catch it or it will fall on the ground. And this was a known thing and wouldn't have been hard. But no, lets blow more money on useless TV ad buys.
How is he wrong, prove him wrong...
I can assure you. You cant.
He went to places that never had buildings, were lawns, places never existed and proved they were not there.
Ot shows there was voter fraud in Nevada.
You have to prove he is lying.
Which you can, because henwluldnt say it if he didn't think it was true, as his lawyer wouldn't let him
 

lordmcdeath

Well-known member
Excuse me, but you're going to need to prove that it isn't true.

Because we have plenty of evidence that it is.

Like I told the other poster, "it's some YouTube guy" doesn't refute it. Nor does " investigation is clearly not hard if Crowder did it. Pulitzer he isn't."

So. Go ahead. I'll wait. Actually refute Crowder's claims.

I refuse to give him views or anyway interact with his video. I loathe him and refuse to help him in anyway. If there is a transcript, I will go through his claims in detail, but until then, bah.

But let us take that he is right as a given for the moment. I was making the argument in the second half that if you accept that Crowder is right as a given, the time to prove it was in bloody October. And that if Crowder could do it shouldn't be hard for the local GOP to do the same. That every state has an established challenge procedure that went unused and that voter rolls are available to anyone for a small fee.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
I refuse to give him views or anyway interact with his video. I loathe him and refuse to help him in anyway. If there is a transcript, I will go through his claims in detail, but until then, bah.

But let us take that he is right as a given for the moment. I was making the argument in the second half that if you accept that Crowder is right as a given, the time to prove it was in bloody October. And that if Crowder could do it shouldn't be hard for the local GOP to do the same. That every state has an established challenge procedure that went unused and that voter rolls are available to anyone for a small fee.
Okay, I will accept this as you conceding the point. Otherwise you'll have to put in the effort to actually consume the source material which you wish to discredit. You don't get to just wave it off and pretend it's not real.

It's real. I'm glad we can agree.

As for your second point, that may indeed be a failing on the local GOP to not confirm those addresses. Though I'm not sure how often political parties go and visit the addresses of residents.

There are 1.82 million registered voters in Nevada. I'm not sure how often either party visits all these addresses. I'm going to assume that it's not often.

None of this Actually refutes the claim that fraudulent votes happened from people who did not live at the reported addresses. Only that it could have been caught sooner if people were paying more attention. That in no ways means it didn't happen. It did.

You haven't disproved...well, Anything.
 
Last edited:

lordmcdeath

Well-known member
I am not. I do not as a rule watch or listen politics on youtube of either side, it pollutes my feed and the audio is always a little suspect. Find me the argument in text form, and by all means we can go. But I'm not going to spend the rest of my life fighting about it or listening to his video over and over to make sure I got the details right. Believe what you choose to.

As for the second. You wouldn't have to visit all of them. All you need is a couple interns, a phonebook, and a map. Maybe a couple days of database work to match addresses vs. known bad addresses like industrial zones, post office boxes, and commercial property. Maybe you have someone go out to double check, but that should cut down the leg work drastically.

I am not currently trying to disprove it. What I am currently say, is that part of the reason that these claims keep getting bounced out of courts like they were DJ Jazzy Jeff is that the legal time to appeal or contest was before the election. And that assumes that the addresses aren't the results of transcription mistakes during data entry, during filling out the form, or anywhere else in the process. Its why they are supposed to be contested before hand.

Its showing up after the fact, acting aggrieved because your side couldn't be bothered to put the slightest bit of effort before hand, despite grandstanding. No one bothered to do the work and I loathe that from all sides.
 
Last edited:

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
I am not. I do not as a rule watch or listen politics on youtube of either side, it pollutes my feed and the audio is always a little suspect. Find me the argument in text form, and by all means we can go. But I'm not going to spend the rest of my life fighting about it or listening to his video over and over to make sure I got the details right. Believe what you choose to.

As for the second. You wouldn't have to visit all of them. All you need is a couple interns, a phonebook, and a map. Maybe a couple days of database work to match addresses vs. known bad addresses like industrial zones, post office boxes, and commercial property. Maybe you have someone go out to double check, but that should cut down the leg work drastically.
In your second paragraph you explained exactly what crowder did. Interns and all.

Concession accepted.

You want it in text? Go do your own research. We are giving you THE DIRECT, PRIMARY SOURCE.

Either consume the content you wish to disprove, or kindly see yourself to the door, because otherwise you're wasting everyone's time.
 

lordmcdeath

Well-known member
In your second paragraph you explained exactly what crowder did. Interns and all.

Concession accepted.

You want it in text? Go do your own research. We are giving you THE DIRECT, PRIMARY SOURCE.

Either consume the content you wish to disprove, or kindly see yourself to the door, because otherwise you're wasting everyone's time.

I'm not trying to fucking disprove Crowder. I'm saying that because Crowder and everyone else can't be bothered to read the damned law, doing this now is fucking pointless.
 

lordmcdeath

Well-known member
In what fucking world is exposing weaknesses in the system, so they can be addressed in the future, worthless?

One. These are all manually entered forms that have been often hand filled out. Anyone of these mistakes could be transcribing errors rather than fraud, which is the whole reason for voter registration and the pre-election process. So the challenges can be made and the fraud separated from mistakes made by either the voter or the government employee entering in hundreds of these forms.

Two, if a procedure for addressing the issue exists and you don't use it, that isn't a weakness, its your own incompetence. If you want to add automatic address verification/validation as a part of the voter registration process and/or just turn the form into something we can submit electronically, to reduce transcription errors. But that isn't what is being preposed by and large.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top