An apology

[PAF]

Wings and motorcycles and hot chicks....that's how you get @PAF 's attention @ProBlue33

Like this:

Oh man!!!! Yesiree!!! My mouth is watering for the food AND her!!!!! Except, because I always have to criticize something, why ain't she on an Injun!!!???

[Anti Federalist]

Oh man!!!! Yesiree!!! My mouth is watering for the food AND her!!!!! Except, because I always have to criticize something, why ain't she on an Injun!!!???

Sticking it in their eye...

[PAF]

Sticking it in their eye...

Hells yeah!!!!! THAT'S the way it's done!!!!

And more than typically, the Harley dudes are forced to say "Ok, you get a pass "

[Anti Globalist]

I'm seeing a lot of leftists online saying they're confused as to how turnout this year was worse for Democrats compared to 2020. According to them Harris should have performed better than Biden.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm seeing a lot of leftists online saying they're confused as to how turnout this year was worse for Democrats compared to 2020. According to them Harris should have performed better than Biden.

That's the level of voting that is the normal median.

2020 was an anomaly.

10-15 million fraudulent votes were pumped into the system.

[Occam's Banana]

https://x.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1854629275346866353

[Anti Federalist]

https://x.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1854629275346866353

I expect to that on the front page of the NYT tomorrow.

[Swordsmyth]

I don't see left versus right D and R. I see your entire corrupt government as one crony fraud organization where one hand relies on and feeds the other.

Here's another thing; if I had to "choose" based on history one "side" being worse than the other, in my lifetime republicans have cost more money and destroyed far more rights that democrats.

So, take your letter "R" and shove it where the sun don't shine.

You only push for things that help the left and the globalists, you only push against things that oppose them.

[Swordsmyth]

in my lifetime republicans have cost more money and destroyed far more rights that democrats.

Blatantly false.

[Swordsmyth]

Don't you agree it's better than the feds doing it?

Not when it won't get done.

[Swordsmyth]

Higher than average voter turnout for 2020 was reported way back in 2021. See: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/t...us-data-shows/

Possible reasons for the higher turnout?

1) Nationwide there was no questions asked abstentie voting. So all of a sudden voting was super convenient.

2) Nationwide mass protests and civil unrest natutually resulted in higher voter turnout.

The 2020 turnout level while high, is not unprecedented. From the above linked article.

The Census Bureau’s estimates confirm the general perception that 2020 voter turnout was very high, at 66.8%. This was the biggest turnout in a presidential election since 1992 (67.7%) and more than 5 points higher than the 2016 election.

Notice the huge spike from 1988 to 1992 followed by a even larger crash in voting in 1996. But nobody was crying "conspiracy theory" back then. 1992 was Bill Clinton's first presidential election and 1996 was his second. But to @TheCount's point, why stop stealing? One can argue that it was "harder to steal" this time because we don't have universal mail in voting, but it was also harder to vote this time for the very same reason.

But if anybody really wanted to get to the bottom of this, they could do a follow up study. Each jurisdiction has lists of voters who voted in each election. Find people who the rolls showed voted in 2020 and not in 2024 and do a random phone survey asking the simple question "Did you vote in 2020?" If a significant number say "no" then maybe you have something. But I fit int the catgory of those who voted in 2024 and did not vote in 2020. And I'm willing to bet that you're more likely to find people who voted for someone other than Trump in 2020 and didn't vote in 2024 than those who voted for Trump and then decided to sit this one out.

It was blatant fraud, and it likely was back then as well.

[PAF]

in my lifetime republicans have cost more money and destroyed far more rights that democrats.

Blatantly false.

Show me. Prove me wrong. I'll wait.

[PAF]

Don't you agree it's better than the feds doing it?

Not when it won't get done.

That's your entire goal, just like Trump. He wants to nationalize stuff, you want to bring everything up to the federal level instead of local where it should be.

[Swordsmyth]

That's your entire goal, just like Trump. He wants to nationalize stuff, you want to bring everything up to the federal level instead of local where it should be.

I want to liberate Americans from fraudulent usurpers, you want to enable the total takeover of the nation by the fraudulent usurpers.

[PAF]

I want to liberate Americans from fraudulent usurpers, you want to enable the total takeover of the nation by the fraudulent usurpers.

You have "I" and "you" in the wrong order. I'd fix it, but I'd rather leave it up to you to ponder and learn from your own mistakes.

[Swordsmyth]

You have "I" and "you" in the wrong order. I'd fix it, but I'd rather leave it up to you to ponder and learn from your own mistakes.

Says the guy who wants to ignore the Constitutional mandate to ensure to each state a Republican form of government in order to let the vote fraud machine take permanent power.

[jmdrake]

It was blatant fraud, and it likely was back then as well.

And yet Bill Clinton won both with the spike in turnout and the drop in turnout. You're grasping at straws.

You see bigger spikes and dips in turnout going all the way back to 1789.

https://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present

@Anti Federalist, this is a non story.

[Swordsmyth]

And yet Bill Clinton won both with the spike in turnout and the drop in turnout. You're grasping at straws.

You see bigger spikes and dips in turnout going all the way back to 1789.

https://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present

@Anti Federalist, this is a non story.

The drop in turnout was because Dole was such a bad candidate, Clinton didn't need to cheat as much the second time.

You're coping.

The proof of tens of millions of fraudulent votes was overwhelming already, and all the excuses about people voting against Trump in 2020 are proven nonsense because they didn't turn out to vote against him again.

Biden didn't win the bellwether counties, didn't even campaign, and many other anomalies.
It was fraud and you are protecting it.

[jmdrake]

The drop in turnout was because Dole was such a bad candidate, Clinton didn't need to cheat as much the second time.

You're coping.

The proof of tens of millions of fraudulent votes was overwhelming already, and all the excuses about people voting against Trump in 2020 are proven nonsense because they didn't turn out to vote against him again.

Biden didn't win the bellwether counties, didn't even campaign, and many other anomalies.
It was fraud and you are protecting it.

Bob Dole was running in the 1800s? Because that's where you see the biggest drop. You're grasping at straws. And if you don't think Kamala Harris was "such a bad candidate" you are really kidding yourself in order to keep your conspiracy theory alive. The whole world was talking about Kamala's "word salad" answers to questions. Muslim voters mad at Gaza either said they weren't voting or some even endorsed Trump. It was all in the news before the election that Democrats were concerned black men would not turn out for Kamala Harris, even to the point of Barack Obama "scolding" black men, and we didn't. Bob Dole was a much better candidate than Kamala Harris. She was her own voter suppression.

[TheTexan]

And yet Bill Clinton won both with the spike in turnout and the drop in turnout. You're grasping at straws.

You see bigger spikes and dips in turnout going all the way back to 1789.

https://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present

@Anti Federalist, this is a non story.

Voter turnout was the highest in 120 years and it's a non story?

[jmdrake]

Voter turnout was the highest in 120 years and it's a non story?

Non story in the "OMG it MUST be voter fraud" variety. So all of those other times when voter turnout was even HIGHER there MUST have been voter fraud? Because that's basically the argument. Let's just ignore all other possible explanations other that "the election was stolen" without any attempt at checking the voter rolls first and doing a survey of voters who, according to the rolls, voted in 2020 but not 2024 and see if anything shakes out. Maybe, just maybe, if you make it super easy to mail in vote, more people vote.

[CaptUSA]

Non story in the "OMG it MUST be voter fraud" variety. So all of those other times when voter turnout was even HIGHER there MUST have been voter fraud? Because that's basically the argument. Let's just ignore all other possible explanations other that "the election was stolen" without any attempt at checking the voter rolls first and doing a survey of voters who, according to the rolls, voted in 2020 but not 2024 and see if anything shakes out. Maybe, just maybe, if you make it super easy to mail in vote, more people vote.

See here:



Any time you "increase voter access", you are also increasing system vulnerabilities. Those vulnerabilities will be exploited by both sides and both sides know this. But one side as a BIG advantage over the other in that exploitation. Which is why the D's always push to open the system, while the R's always push to restrict the system. It has nothing to do with getting it right - it's all about gaining advantages.

In 2020, the system had never been more wide open.

//

[TheTexan]

Non story in the "OMG it MUST be voter fraud" variety. So all of those other times when voter turnout was even HIGHER there MUST have been voter fraud? Because that's basically the argument. Let's just ignore all other possible explanations other that "the election was stolen" without any attempt at checking the voter rolls first and doing a survey of voters who, according to the rolls, voted in 2020 but not 2024 and see if anything shakes out. Maybe, just maybe, if you make it super easy to mail in vote, more people vote.

It's certainly strong circumstantial evidence for fraud, yea.

Does it prove anything? Of course not.

Election fraud by its very nature cannot generally be proven, so this is as close to proof as we'll ever get.

[jmdrake]

See here:



Any time you "increase voter access", you are also increasing system vulnerabilities. Those vulnerabilities will be exploited by both sides and both sides know this. But one side as a BIG advantage over the other in that exploitation. Which is why the D's always push to open the system, while the R's always push to restrict the system. It has nothing to do with getting it right - it's all about gaining advantages.

In 2020, the system has never been more wide open.

Of course. But...

It's certainly strong circumstantial evidence for fraud, yea.

Does it prove anything? Of course not.

Election fraud by its very nature cannot generally be proven, so this is as close to proof as we'll ever get.

I already explained how to check this. All states keep records of who votes in every election. And they have to give you that information. That's how polsters come up with their "likely voter" lists, how candidates get signatures for ballot access, and how parties determine who's a "bona fide" democrat or republican. (In Tennessee anyway the GOP determines that if you voted in the last 3 GOP primaries.) So using that list you can contact voters who, according to the records, voted in 2020 and not 2024 and simply ask them "Did you vote in 2020?" If there was ballot stuffing of people who were on the rolls but didn't vote that will show up. It's not like 10 million people who votes were cast for them without their knowledge or consent will be clued in to lie and say "Oh yeah. I voted in 2020" when they really didn't.

[otherone]

It's certainly strong circumstantial evidence for fraud, yea.

Does it prove anything? Of course not.

Election fraud by its very nature cannot generally be proven, so this is as close to proof as we'll ever get.

Biden was the most popular candidate in the history of the world! No coattails, however. I guess folks just checked "Pedo Joe", ignored the rest of the ballot, and called it a day. Time is money, after all, who wants to stand in a voting booth? Oh wait...they were "mail-in" ballots. Maybe they didn't have time in the nursing home to fill out the ballot?

[Swordsmyth]

Bob Dole was running in the 1800s? Because that's where you see the biggest drop. You're grasping at straws. And if you don't think Kamala Harris was "such a bad candidate" you are really kidding yourself in order to keep your conspiracy theory alive. The whole world was talking about Kamala's "word salad" answers to questions. Muslim voters mad at Gaza either said they weren't voting or some even endorsed Trump. It was all in the news before the election that Democrats were concerned black men would not turn out for Kamala Harris, even to the point of Barack Obama "scolding" black men, and we didn't. Bob Dole was a much better candidate than Kamala Harris. She was her own voter suppression.

There is no "drop" to explain, Camela received about as many votes as should have been expected, she clearly didn't suppress the vote from her cult.

Biden has absolutely no explanation for how he achieved what he did while hiding in his basement.

[Madison320]

Not when it won't get done.

Ok, suppose we've already nationalized the elections like you propose. In the swing states that Trump won the "Biden Election Czar" claims that votes were disenfranchised because of id laws and awards the presidency to Harris. Are you ok with that?

[Invisible Man]

There is no "drop" to explain

That's true. But that's precisely the point. Some people are out there claiming that the number of votes counted in 2020 was significantly higher than what the total in 2024 is going to turn out to be.

[Swordsmyth]

That's true. But that's precisely the point. Some people are out there claiming that the number of votes counted in 2020 was significantly higher than what the total in 2024 is going to turn out to be.

It is.
The fraud is obvious.

[Swordsmyth]

Ok, suppose we've already nationalized the elections like you propose. In the swing states that Trump won the "Biden Election Czar" claims that votes were disenfranchised because of id laws and awards the presidency to Harris. Are you ok with that?

How would a law requiring that the states use photo ID to ensure people are eligible and who they say they are allow that?

The Constitution requires the feds to ensure a Republican form of government in the states, the fraudsters will never let go on their own, they will "elect" themselves from now until doomsday.