Arizona Election Audit

#2,577
#2,577
Orangeburst said:
You did not say a combo of the two.
Click to expand...

He would be POTUS right now with the 3 states I mentioned even if he lost GA. And he still wins GA with the same suburban percentages as 2016. Biden needed both the Abrams impact AND suburban impact to barely win GA.
 
#2,578
#2,578
BowlBrother85 said:
No, that is not one which can be blamed on Democrats. All of Bush's successes were in foreign policy. The economy was faltering with rising unemployment... and his response (or non-response) to the LA riots in May of 1992 hurt him. And his messaging was all wrong in 1992... he wanted to talk about family values, while the American people wanted to talk about the economy. Bush ran a very poor campaign in 1992.... and he wasn't helped by an inept running mate that couldn't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
How old were you during the Gulf War?
 
#2,579
#2,579
LouderVol said:
For years we heard about how Trump shouldnt be investigated by clearly biased sources. And that made sense, and was true. But now the Trump team is depending on clearly biased investigating of their own.

Two sides of the same coin.
Click to expand...

Election audits SHOULD be routine. If this audit makes no charges of fraud or gross malfeasance, game over. If it does, the claims will have to withstand a very public review and be found true or false. The "Trump team" cannot decide the outcome.

The political weaponization of our media, intel, FBI, and DOJ using foreign propaganda and foreign agents sponsored by the opposition party to remove a president, should NEVER happen.

That seems to me a gulf of distinction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002, Carl Pickens, Orangeburst and 1 other person
#2,580
#2,580
NCFisher said:
Election audits SHOULD be routine. If this audit makes no charges of fraud or gross malfeasance, game over. If it does, the claims will have to withstand a very public review and be found true or false. The "Trump team" cannot decide the outcome.

The political weaponization of our media, intel, FBI, and DOJ using foreign propaganda and foreign agents sponsored by the opposition party to remove a president, should NEVER happen.

That seems to me a gulf of distinction.
Click to expand...
Except the auditors are very clearly on Team Trump, have stated as much, and even started their audit after stating there was fraud.
 
#2,582
#2,582
LouderVol said:
Except the auditors are very clearly on Team Trump, have stated as much, and even started their audit after stating there was fraud.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter; their results will be found true or false. If false, media and Dems will hammer it until next century. If true, you'll find it in a paragraph on page 53 and not hear a peep from Dems.

I've drawn as clear a picture of the difference as possible. Heads should be hanging on the fence of 1600 Penn. but they aren't. More than half of Americans still believe the Steele dossier was a work of fact, not the discredited fiction the DOJ IG report found it in Jan 2017. There are no apologies, no corrective narrative for the gross abuses. This hoax is not politics as usual but a naked power grab by people unconcerned with the necessary constraints of a constitutional republic and under the protective shroud of apparatchik media.

Unlike those responsible - from intel to DOJ - the "Team Trump" won't be able to throw shite on the wall and walk away. They aren't elected or appointed officials who actually pose a danger to liberty.
 
#2,583
#2,583
Orangeslice13 said:
Can they prove it?
Click to expand...
You can use stats to prove whatever you want.

I asked before. How accepting were people of the anti Trump investigations performed by anti Trump people? I seem to recall most here saying the investigations were bs because of the bias.

Same thing applies here.
 
#2,585
#2,585
Orangeslice13 said:
Can they prove it?
Click to expand...
There's likely a difference in proof when working from a conclusion rather than towards one. I just think they're struggling when they've reached a point of evaluating each ballot for panda urine or other such things
 
#2,586
#2,586
utvolpj said:
There's likely a difference in proof when working from a conclusion rather than towards one. I just think they're struggling when they've reached a point of evaluating each ballot for panda urine or other such things
Click to expand...


The whole panda/bamboo story is not even funny anymore. That's what the left does is find any way possible to try to make fun of and discredit the audit. You guys can make fun of this process all you want but this is what all audits should look like. The typical "audits" that are done are just basically an "expert" coming in and certifying that the machines were performing properly at the time of the audit. This audit is checking to make sure absolutely every part of the election results line up. A few of the main things that they are evaluating are

1. Do mail mail-in-ballots ballots have folds? They have record of exactly how many ballots were mailed out and how many were returned. Those numbers should all line up. THIS IS A FACT and not a biased opinion. And yes I realize that there will be some Military ballots etc. That will not have the fold in them but they are supposed to have records of all of this.

2. They are checking to make sure mail-in-ballots have not been filled out by a machine. This is also very easy to verify with the scanner.

3. They may very well be checking the fibers in the paper as well?? It would make sense of They did as they should have record who printed the ballots and what types of paper was being used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#2,588
#2,588
LouderVol said:
You can use stats to prove whatever you want.

I asked before. How accepting were people of the anti Trump investigations performed by anti Trump people? I seem to recall most here saying the investigations were bs because of the bias.

Same thing applies here.
Click to expand...
utvolpj said:
There's likely a difference in proof when working from a conclusion rather than towards one. I just think they're struggling when they've reached a point of evaluating each ballot for panda urine or other such things
Click to expand...

“By can they prove it” I mean can they produce a result that will pass pier review? I doubt it due to bias but I’ve been wrong before
 
#2,590
#2,590
utvolpj said:
There's likely a difference in proof when working from a conclusion rather than towards one. I just think they're struggling when they've reached a point of evaluating each ballot for panda urine or other such things
Click to expand...
Is there any ambiguity with the ballots? No more hanging chads, right?
 
#2,591
#2,591
utvolpj said:
Pretty sure that ship has sailed
Click to expand...
I generally have a wait and see attitude with these things. The muller team was a very biased group that still produced a pier reviewable report. Of course they found nothing but their bias didn’t lead to a faulty report.
 
#2,592
#2,592
  • Like
Reactions: Tyler Durden
#2,593
#2,593
Orangeslice13 said:
I generally have a wait and see attitude with these things. The muller team was a very biased group that still produced a pier reviewable report. Of course they found nothing but their bias didn’t lead to a faulty report.
Click to expand...


61k1VHaYqrL.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-town Vol Fan and Tyler Durden
#2,594
#2,594
Septic said:
Where on the spectrum does "BREAKING EXCLUSIVE" fall? Is this higher or lower than "BREAKING HUGE?"
Click to expand...


I guess that all depends on if your preference is huge or exclusive.
I'm sure you will classify it all as right wing garbage that's a threat to our democracy.
 
#2,597
#2,597
BowlBrother85 said:
I would go as far as to say that a genuine and objective audit of the 2020 Presidential Election would uncover just as many or perhaps even a few more examples of voter fraud in favor of Donald Trump.. then it would in favor of Joe Biden. This Republican narrative that voter fraud only goes in one direction is a provable lie. Google "Bruce Bartman"... and no, that isn't the Cub fan who interfered with a foul ball in 2003.
Click to expand...

You are smoking crack. Mail in ballots post marked 7-10 days after the election provides for common sense evidence of last minute cheating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolinWayne
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top