2020 Presidential Race

[Orangeslice13]

I don’t like Trump and I voted Biden but I’m not for undermining our democratic process to get the desired outcome.

I simply want proof. So far, the investigations have come up empty.

I’m in wait and see mode myself. I personally think there’s fraud but nowhere near enough to overturn this election. I’d like to see problems identified and eliminated for the future though

 

[calban]

I'm not sobbing at all, my life will go on and actually the next few years are going to be very entertaining and will give me a lot of stuff to laugh at.
It's clear dems cheated, it's also clear you all are good with it

How is it clear? Where's the evidence? It's only clear in a persons mind who lives in delusion as their leader does.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I don’t like Trump and I voted Biden but I’m not for undermining our democratic process to get the desired outcome.

I simply want proof. So far, the investigations have come up empty.

You've actually inferred that since you don't have access to proof, proof doesn't exist, and explicitly stated that since you don't have evidence, fraud didn't occur.

It's absurd on its face, but that's exactly what you've stated.

...

So let me repeat- it didn’t happen because there is no evidence, no proof of it happening. Not bc I can’t see it happening but bc as of now - it didn’t happen. And it didn’t happen bc there is no evidence of it happening.

...

 

[Orangeslice13]

No, I said that it was being reported that he had recanted... and that was reported by The Washington Post. That would certainly call his credibility into question. However, his credibility is only important while we have to take his word for whatever he is claiming. If he has actual proof of fraud, then that would override concerns over his credibility. Once again, it sounds like his allegations concern something he overheard other people talking about doing... rather than what he observed them doing. But if he does have proof that these people actually followed through on what they were saying and committed fraud, then he should reveal his proof.

It's the kind of allegation which people make when they want to accuse someone else of misconduct, but have no proof, and want to make it as tough as possible to be accused of lying about it:

Accuser: "I heard Bob and Mike talking about selling crack cocaine."

Investigator: "Did you see Bob and Mike selling crack cocaine?"

Accuser: "No. I just heard them say they were going to sell crack cocaine."

Investigator: "Do you have any proof that Bob and Mike discussed selling crack cocaine?"

Accuser: "No, but they did talk about doing it."

This is how you shift the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. The accuser can't prove that Bob and Mike sold crack cocaine... but Bob and Mike can't prove that they didn't.

Or.....

Accuser “I see guys that look like they’re selling drugs and they we’re talking about doing it”
investigator. “I’ll check it out.

Investigator then goes and does his/her job.

 

[newyorkvol]

I’m in wait and see mode myself. I personally think there’s fraud but nowhere near enough to overturn this election. I’d like to see problems identified and eliminated for the future though

Agree. I don’t think it’s too much to ask given the significant changes that were made to election methods because of the pandemic to take time to verify that indeed nothing untoward occurred. The waiting and arguing is just another bitter pill of 2020, but likely won’t change anything.

 

[MarcoVol]

Your guy admitted they cheated, is that not evidence enough?

 

[Orangeslice13]

Agree. I don’t think it’s too much to ask given the significant changes that were made to election methods because of the pandemic to take time to verify that indeed nothing untoward occurred. The waiting and arguing is just another bitter pill of 2020, but likely won’t change anything.

Pretty much

 

[MarcoVol]

You've actually inferred that since you don't have access to proof, proof doesn't exist, and explicitly stated that since you don't have evidence, fraud didn't occur.

It's absurd on its face, but that's exactly what you've stated.

Yes until it’s proven, it didn’t happen.

I’m well aware of my position. Thanks

 

[Grand Vol]

Interesting. Also black/Asian/female, all about identity politics

Real question here, but do Indians identify as "Asians"? I know they're from Asia, but do they actually use the term to describe their race?

 

[titansvolsfaninga]

I knew you all would come up with some dumb answer so I will help:
Dems are lazy so they find it easy to vote by mail
Much easier to cheat

Do you have any idea of how many ballots I've printed this year? Lazy? You don't know nothing....
Plus it is a full blown pandemic, and I don't want to chance catching the cooties from a trumper.

 

[volinbham]

Or.....

Accuser “I see guys that look like they’re selling drugs and they we’re talking about doing it”
investigator. “I’ll check it out.

Investigator then goes and does his/her job.

Seems the USPS and WaPo would have the burden of proof showing the affidavit with the recant if we are to believe them over the actual person saying it didn't happen but for some reason that proof is not required.

 

[GSD82]

Did he say that or no?

 

[AM64]

I’m not sure a notary would be an issue if you eliminate the ability to vote in person once a ballot is requested.

The notary would be to insure that filling in the blank ballot was done by the rightful ballot holder. Without that step, I could request a ballot and turn it over to you or somebody else to complete. I get the choice to vote or not to vote, and you may convince me that your candidates are the best choice, but I still don't get to hand my ballot over to you or have you physically by my side guiding my hand. There are steps during in person voting to make sure the person appearing and picking up the ballot fills it in on his own.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Or.....

Accuser “I see guys that look like they’re selling drugs and they we’re talking about doing it”
investigator. “I’ll check it out.

Investigator then goes and does his/her job.

In reality, a detective would tell the accuser they were going to check it out... but they would never take the time to do it, with such little to work with.

 

[VolnJC]

There have always been absentee, not mail-in. If there wasn't fraud then someone missed a huge opportunity. I don't believe it turned the election though

My thinking too some fraud but the Dems saw an opportunity and ran with it.. they mailed out millions of ballots some people got like a dozen...The Dems also added into the stimulus to allow paid vote harvesting A Nonprofit With Ties to Democrats Is Sending Out Millions of Ballot Applications. Election Officials Wish It Would Stop. — ProPublica

 

[GSD82]

Do you have any idea of how many ballots I've printed this year? Lazy? You don't know nothing....
Plus it is a full blown pandemic, and I don't want to chance catching the cooties from a trumper.

lol @ full blown pandemic

 

[Orange_Crush]

No, I said that it was being reported that he had recanted... and that was reported by The Washington Post. That would certainly call his credibility into question. However, his credibility is only important while we have to take his word for whatever he is claiming. If he has actual proof of fraud, then that would override concerns over his credibility. Once again, it sounds like his allegations concern something he overheard other people talking about doing... rather than what he observed them doing. But if he does have proof that these people actually followed through on what they were saying and committed fraud, then he should reveal his proof.

It's the kind of allegation which people make when they want to accuse someone else of misconduct, but have no proof, and want to make it as tough as possible to be accused of lying about it later:

Accuser: "I heard Bob and Mike talking about selling crack cocaine."

Investigator: "Did you see Bob and Mike sell crack cocaine?"

Accuser: "No. I just heard them say they were going to sell crack cocaine."

Investigator: "Do you have any proof that Bob and Mike ever discussed selling crack cocaine?"

Accuser: "No, but they did talk about doing it."

This is how you shift the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused. The accuser can't prove that Bob and Mike sold crack cocaine... but Bob and Mike can't prove that they didn't at least talk about it.

I quoted it, BB.

You posted several times that he recanted and then questioned his credibility because of it. You were filleted because of doing that and it was pointed out repeatedly that his recanting was sourced only by anonymous sources and he denied recanting. You still pressed it.

Then you slept on it, apparently realized how ignorant you looked, and apparently tried to smooth all that over with the "no big deal" post.

So, let us just remind you that trying to assassinate his credibility with the supposed recant was making a big deal of it. Heck, you're making a big deal of it now, in defense of making a big deal of it last night, immediately after posting today that it's no big deal.

Make up your mind.

 

[AM64]

You get what you vote for. These folks in here who voted for him don’t realize what’s coming, especially if they win the senate. Socialized healthcare, green new deal, lockdowns, mask mandates, job killing regulations, attacks on religious freedom, etc. etc.

You have to appreciate how the dems cut the Green party out of elections so that the greenies didn't siphon voters from the dems, and then throw them a bone after raping them. Nothing rigged about that.

 

[BowlBrother85]

I quoted it, BB.

You posted several times that he recanted and then questioned his credibility because of it. You were filleted because of doing that and it was pointed out repeatedly that his recanting was sourced only by anonymous sources and he denied recanting. You still pressed it.

Then you slept on it, apparently realized how ignorant you looked, and apparently tried to smooth all that over with the "no big deal" post.

So, let us just remind you that trying to assassinate his credibility with the supposed recant was making a big deal of it. Heck, you're making a big deal of it now, in defense of making a big deal of it last night, immediately after posting today that it's no big deal.

Make up your mind.

I posted that it had been reported that he had recanted, and it was reported by The Washington Post. It does call his credibility into question. However, his credibility is only important while we have to take his word for what he is alleging. If he has proof of this fraud then that overrides any concerns over his credibility. If he has proof... then show us the proof. If not, then nothing will come from his allegations. That is reality.

 

[volinbham]

I posted that it had been reported that he had recanted, and it was reported by The Washington Post. It does call his credibility into question. However, his credibility is only important while we have to take his word for what he is claiming. If he has proof of this fraud then that overrides any concerns over his credibility. If he has proof... then show us. If not, then nothing will come from his allegations. That is reality.

you are shifting burden of proof to the accused.

The WaPo story is an allegation - they should have to prove it (using your argument several posts above). He is being accused of recanting - why shouldn't the accuser have to prove it? Allegedly there is documentation; let's see it.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I posted that it had been reported that he had recanted, and it was reported by The Washington Post. It does call his credibility into question. However, his credibility is only important while we have to take his word for what he is alleging. If he has proof of this fraud then that overrides any concerns over his credibility. If he has proof... then show us the proof. If not, then nothing will come from his allegations. That is reality.

Then own the fact that you were and are making a big deal of it.

 

[OldVolMan]

If true, that doesn't help perception of this election.

I have seen very little that helps the perception of this election.

 

[rocytop2624]

Perpetual victim....why is the strong man always the victim? Is the strong man that weak?

Why is Trump Racist? He overturned Bidens crime bill that put blacks in jail for small crimes and he funded black colleges and had a platinum plan his grandchild is Jewish I am sick of the racist label that's just being lazy.

 

[BowlBrother85]

you are shifting burden of proof to the accused.

The WaPo story is an allegation - they should have to prove it (using your argument several posts above). He is being accused of recanting - why shouldn't the accuser have to prove it? Allegedly there is documentation; let's see it.

Sure.. if Wapo has a copy of an affidavit where he recanted then yeah, show it... but where did this start? With Richard Hopkins allegations of fraud. If he can prove this fraud, then let's see the proof. The question of whether or not Hopkins recanted is irrelevant once we see his proof of fraud. Hopkins' credibility is only important while we have to take his word for whatever he is alleging.

Once again, Hopkins is not alleging that he observed fraud. He is alleging that he observed other people discussing fraud. It will be hard for him to prove fraud actually occurred... but if he has proof? Then by all means, let's see the damn proof. We all know where this is going. Hopkins can't prove $hit.

 

[AM64]

I guess that’s why there are now three FBI probes in Michigan and one in PA looking into the matter. So apparently there’s more than zero, nada, zilch. Now, I don’t know if anything comes of it and maybe wouldn’t be enough votes to change the outcome, but that’s why we investigate things like this...so it doesn’t become a bigger problem in future elections. There’s only so long you can ask people to turn a blind eye to nefarious activities. Do you not think the American people deserve completely fair and easily certifiable elections?

The amazing part of all this is that rules appear better officiated at a sporting event than during an election. At a football game, officials independent of the teams oversee plays and call penalties on the spot - even eject players on occasion for egregious violations. By comparison elections are run by elected officials - partisan officials, and the proceedings are witnessed by party affiliates - like spectators watching their team play. There doesn't seem to be much observers can do except fill out a grievance - apparently having about the same impact as an unhappy spectator at a football game. Not much oversight at all over who counts the ballots.