Proof of the election fraud

#2,232
#2,232
I feel confident I can say nothing is going to be decided legally on the Volnation forums on voter fraud.....but the armchair devils advocate back and forth is giving me a headache. People all see the numbers, and the numbers do not lie. they also have no explanation. History won't be as willfully blind as many midwits and echo chambers are now.



20 million voters came out of nowhere and then dissappeared the same year as record voter turnout, in the middle of a plague. Ok.... sure.... fool yourself if you like, but don't request I join your delusions. I'll await proper investigations and courts finally looking at evidence before dismissing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol and CagleMtnVol
#2,235
#2,235
hUTch2002 said:
And is where the right loses credibility. She wasn’t saying undocumented workers vote. She was saying families of undocumented workers vote. I’m going to guess she means people here legally.
Click to expand...
Specifically names undocumented and their families that vote...she names both...not sure how that can be taken wrong?
 
#2,236
#2,236
whodeycin85 said:
Specifically names undocumented and their families that vote...she names both...not sure how that can be taken wrong?
Click to expand...
It’s what the left does to Trump all the time (spinning what he said to fit a narrative), I guarantee you she’s not referring to both voting. She has a few screws loose but she’s not going to get on camera and admit to voter fraud. People see what they want to see.
 
#2,237
#2,237
hUTch2002 said:
It’s what the left does to Trump all the time (spinning what he said to fit a narrative), I guarantee you she’s not referring to both voting. She has a few screws loose but she’s not going to get on camera and admit to voter fraud. People see what they want to see.
Click to expand...
I'm listening a few times for a twist...had she mentioned families alone and didn't specify undocumented workers first and then families...I guess correct Grammer would have been "who both voted"...but she speaks pretty specific and even moreso that asylum seekers are not undocumented..they have asylum paperwork for thier hearing..so undocumented means what? And if just means families that is not clear at all.
 
#2,238
#2,238
whodeycin85 said:
I'm listening a few times for a twist...had she mentioned families alone and didn't specify undocumented workers first and then families...I guess correct Grammer would have been "who both voted"...but she speaks pretty specific and even moreso that asylum seekers are not undocumented..they have asylum paperwork for thier hearing..so undocumented means what? And if just means families that is not clear at all.
Click to expand...
It’s because she used a plural “families” that it maybe sounds like she’s referring to both but it’s clear to me she’s not.

I’m talking to undocumented workers and, more importantly, families of undocumented workers, who do vote. The “who” in that sentence clearly (at least to me) refers to families.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#2,239
#2,239
hUTch2002 said:
It’s because she used a plural “families” that it maybe sounds like she’s referring to both but it’s clear to me she’s not.

I’m talking to undocumented workers and, more importantly, families of undocumented workers, who do vote. The “who” in that sentence clearly (at least to me) refers to families.
Click to expand...
She needs to clarify IMO but I can see it that like that as well..shes not one to really mince words...IRC she expresses herself clearly but says dumb stuff...but I see what your saying...I just disagree
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#2,240
#2,240
whodeycin85 said:
She needs to clarify IMO but I can see it that like that as well..shes not one to really mince words...IRC she expresses herself clearly but says dumb stuff...but I see what your saying...I just disagree
Click to expand...
I agree the wording does leave room to interpret multiple ways. I don’t agree that it, as the Tweeter claimed, confirms Dems are flooding illegals to vote/voter fraud.

I get it though. If you want viewers on social media you can’t have middle of the road takes. You see it here in the PF all the time. If you post extreme views you get likes from one side and replies from the other. If you post down the middle you get far less response.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77
#2,241
#2,241
hUTch2002 said:
I agree the wording does leave room to interpret multiple ways. I don’t agree that it, as the Tweeter claimed, confirms Dems are flooding illegals to vote/voter fraud.

I get it though. If you want viewers on social media you can’t have middle of the road takes. You see it here in the PF all the time. If you post extreme views you get likes from one side and replies from the other. If you post down the middle you get far less response.
Click to expand...
Yes I don't agree with the flooding votes. Altho Casey in PA wanting illegal votes counted gives it some legitimacy... Social media is a detriment to society
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#2,242
#2,242
Sgt_Nick_Fury said:
You do know you don't know what you think you know right? You know talking points, but as the evidence never actually was tried you only know what you have been told. Told by a media that is the most lying in history, and an administration taht was the most corrupt. And yet every single rally was empty for Biden before 2020 and yet he got 80 million votes. Do you actually believe that? Or are you too more interested in semantics and talking points than any actual truth? You continue ask people to iognore their eyes, experiences, and the missing 20 million voters in 2024.
Click to expand...
I know you don’t know what he knows you don’t know, you know what I mean?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and whodeycin85
#2,243
#2,243
McDad said:
I'd rather you call me the worst insult imaginable than call.me a lawyer...even metaphorically.

I'm asking questions trying to decide something unknown. In my business, getting as much factual data as possible...whether I agree or not...is imperative for success.
Click to expand...
Huh. I didn’t know male strippers cared that much about data. Whatever gets the bucks in the string though, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and McDad
#2,247
#2,247
McDad said:
Cali has slightly less than 40M ppl.
Click to expand...

BigOrangeMojo said:
20MM didnt disappear. 155M voted in 2020 and 151.55M have been counted so far this year with CA only being 88% counted. Going to end up in the 153s...
Click to expand...
Nothing would make me happier than for there to be a reason to recount the entire state of California's ballots.

A recount may take until Christmas to complete.

That state is so incompetent on so many levels
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#2,250
#2,250
Smokey'sHandler said:
Nothing would make me happier than for there to be a reason to recount the entire state of California's ballots.

A recount may take until Christmas to complete.

That state is so incompetent on so many levels
Click to expand...
Saw something on Babylon Bee I think that California has just certified their electors for the election of Calvin Coolidge.
Yes they are that far behind 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and BigOrangeMojo
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top