IMO, the Fix is in
- Thread starter OrangeShogun
- Start date
I’ll try to dig in to all your points when I have more time. I will offer you this. You obviously cant help but look at things through the lens of an experienced attorney. Don’t blame you. Sometimes it is helpful to take off your attorney hat and look at things through the eyes of the Jury. You may say the Jury (voters) spoke and they chose Biden. My original post was about gut feeling and my gut says there is no way Biden got monumentally more votes than Obama ever did and my gut (and 20 years in Electronic Discovery) tells me if anyone really wanted to know the truth, then the electronic evidence would not have been stonewalled at every turn in the courts and ignored by the FBI. It's the same insulted feeling I got when the FBI refused to examine the DNC server in 2016. The FBI does not allow 3rd parties to do their forensic examinations for them. If they care about the truth. Please don’t tie me to the “Kraken”. This was never even defined by powell or anyone else that I know of.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
She released said “kraken”. It was more like chuckie. Nothing but junk. This summarizes it best.
Or this:
The reason I don't take the attorney hat off for this sort of thing is that election challenges are inherently legal matters. A challenge either has merit or it doesn't, and the courthouse is where that is generally sorted out. What's offered in court is real, because it can be vetted, meet basic rules of evidence and therefore reliability, and can be cross-examined by an adversary. What's not offered in court is posturing, and if it's not being offered in court, there's a reason for it.
A few points on this. First, we don't allow pure fishing expeditions. If you want to compel the production of evidence, there has to be a valid legal proceeding to which it would be relevant. I'm not aware of any such proceeding, civil or criminal.
Second, I understand the gut feelings. I get them too, but we can't overturn elections and bend the Constitution on them alone. I understand why some doubt that Biden got more votes than Obama did, but so did Trump. It was a very high turnout election. We had mail-in balloting and a massively polarizing incumbent president on the ticket.
I only did it, because you're sorta making her points and arguments.
PecosBill
1,000+ Posts
Biden 80M+
Trump 73M+
Registered but chose not to vote 80M+
Plenty of room for larger voter results.
Increased voter turnout can been counted in county voting results including the down ballot races which exceeded some POTUS results.
People turn 18 every day for 4 years and a smaller number die. Probably 12M-15M net new voters every 4 years.
Trump was an unpopular incumbent.
Trump 73M+
Registered but chose not to vote 80M+
Plenty of room for larger voter results.
Increased voter turnout can been counted in county voting results including the down ballot races which exceeded some POTUS results.
People turn 18 every day for 4 years and a smaller number die. Probably 12M-15M net new voters every 4 years.
Trump was an unpopular incumbent.
I certainly see that it appears that I am simply parroting her. But I was calling for significant discovery on voting systems within 24 hours of the “Midnight shutdown” that we had never seen before and was apparently only needed in swing states. This was before she coined that hokey phrase. I do support her efforts but would have preferred her to say we are going to “Release the electronic evidence”
I definitely understand not allowing Fishing exercises, But dont you think the admission that at least a couple “glitches” occurred makes this less of a fishing exercise?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Anyone remember Antium(sp?) County in Michigan? This was that infamous county where 5k vote were registered incorrectly for Biden then switched back to Trump. They used Dominion. The County (and State) claimed it was human error but a court allowed the Kraken crowd direct access to analyze the voting machines. The Kraken team presented a big report that claimed a massive error rate (65%) and all sorts of improprieties. Of course, it was written by the same guy that submitted affidavits confusing MI with MN and had charts showing the exact same townships with vastly different voting rates this election based on his analysis. Guiliani pointed to that analysis as the "smoking gun". Anyone know how that concluded?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
I didn't realize that many of the conservative sites that pushed the "stolen election" conspiracy have been offering retractions under threat of lawsuit from Dominion. Here is American Thinker which started the Dominion Voting System snowball.
All states? Can't really require that, but all counties, yes. I don't have a problem with expired IDs within reason. I'm not going to accept grandma's 1956 driver's license when she looked like Elizabeth Taylor, but I wouldn't throw her out of the polling place if it has been expired for a few years either. I'd say that if it has been current within the last ten years, I'd let it slide. And I have no problem with the IDs given out without a fee.
No, he was not.
It depends on the scope of the lawsuit and the glitch as well as what's being asked for. Does a glitch in Antrim County, Michigan justify a major investigation of voting machines in Antrim County, Michigan? Maybe so, and I think that case might actually still be pending. Does it justify something similar in Pennsylvania and Georgia? No.
75million people disagree with them about Trump.
I personally have the First Lady rated number 1 by a large margin (probably an unsurmountable lead), just saying. You are welcome to all the Michelle Obama you want.
75million people disagree with them about Trump.
I personally have the First Lady rated number 1 by a large margin (probably an unsurmountable lead), just saying. You are welcome to all the Michelle Obama you want.
Most first ladies (even Republicans) are humanized by the media in ways, and so long as they aren't blatantly political or do something really stupid, they usually don't get negative press. Melania never got those courtesies.
I am guessing the CNN pollster asked the following question:
"If Melania Trump dropped your babies on their heads and blew up a nuclear bomb at your grandma's house, would you find her favorable or unfavorable?"
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
She did not help herself AT ALL. Anti bullying? I don’t care do you? Cruella’s Christmas? It was like she was trying to be that way.
You're relying on spin. She was relatively ordinary as a first lady - other than being hot.
Last edited:
Extremely hot. You are doing her a disservice yourself.
I actually had meant to use that in a response to iatrogenic and forgot to either delete it or finish my point and then typed my response to Barry mindlessly.
I've generally defended Melania - the nude pictures from the '90s, the ugly and partisan spin (that even most Democratic politicians left alone), and the smears on her accent. Like I've said before, the nude pictures are due to a cultural difference between Europe and the United States. Nudity just isn't viewed the same way here.
But you can't possibly know that, and that's the problem with it. The only check on it is the signature, and frankly that isn't a very reliable measure (both in favor and against verification). My signature doesn't always look the same. Young voters, very old voters, and voters whose first language reads backwards (at least for us) frequently don't have consistent signatures. And of course, if someone turns in a fraudulent ballot, there's virtually no way to track it to the wrongdoer.
Do I think that means there's enormous fraud? No, but it's probably not irrelevant either. Furthermore, you don't eliminate tens of thousands of voters by having in-person ballots (as the nation generally has had since the beginning with only a few exceptions). Those people still have a right to vote, and I don't mind increasing polling places or whatever it takes to enable them within reason. I don't mind making Election Day a national holiday and giving employment protections for people to be able to vote.
Two things. First, we should have a uniform election date, and I mean a real one. Texas has two "uniform election dates," and that's BS. They don't know what "uni" means. Second, yes I know it can be a hassle to vote, but I don't think we're asking too much to expect people to go to that trouble once every two or four years if they care to have a say, especially if we make it a national holiday and give employment protections to people.
I don't think this is as big of a factor as you assume. You can still look at those resources and vote in person. I did the same research when voting in person. I just made a list of the candidates I wanted to vote for.
Respectfully, I just don't think that's true. I'm sure plenty of mail-in voters are informed, but do I think they're more informed in general and in-person voters? No. It just doesn't make a lot of sense that the group more motivated to show up would be less informed.
I think you assume that there's a parallel between extremism and voting. I'm not sure that's true. Look at the most extreme elements of the Trump base - the QAnon and alt-Right weirdos and their sympathizers. Look at the most extreme elements of the Democratic base - Antifa and BLM rioters and their sympathizers. Ten years ago, those people weren't your average loyal Republicans and Democrats. They were largely political non-participants.
I think the biggest reason you don't see a lot of moderate politicians elected anymore is that you don't see a lot of moderate people anymore. You might assume that the moderates are there but just not showing up. However, we elected far more moderates in the 1980s and 1990s than we do today, and voter turnout was actually lower back then. That was back when the GOP had a ton of moderates (like your old senator, Slade Gorton and Chris Shays) and even liberals (Lowell Weicker, Jim Jeffords). The Democrats had moderates (Bob Kerrey and Paul Tsongas) and pretty staunch conservatives (Billy Tauzin and Jim Exon).
How did guys like that win when turnout was lower and should have been driven by more extreme elements of their parties? It's because the electorate was more moderate and less polarized. We all think we know everything now, so nuance and moderation aren't valued anywhere near as much.
Agree. I would even kick around the idea of not identifying party on the ballot at all. Parties nominate, but you vote for a person, not a party.
You can find much worse. John Sarbanes's district in Maryland is probably the worst in the country, and of course Texas and Pennsylvania have several bad ones (though probably none quite as bad as Sarbanes's). I detest gerrymandering and always have (long before it became a big political story), but I've never seen a way to really get rid of it that people would actually go along with. Nobody believes a nonpartisan commission would really be nonpartisan. Honestly, you'd probably get the fairest districts if a panel of federal judges drew them. They have the least interest.
Hey Bubba, I quit listening to polls and approval ratings a while back. I think i have shown my hand already that I have serious questions about the vote totals in this election being inaccurate in favor of Biden. But even so, Trump is officially credited with over 74 Million votes. That is not an unpopular incumbent.
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
74,000,000 people would vote for a kumquat.
Kumquat? Oh boy, now that I am getting involved here on Hornfans, I can tell that I am going to enjoy football season with our north of the red river compadre.
No offense of course.
I’ll understand if Di moves this to On the field
Mr. Deez, I'm inclined to disagree on this point. And I've had this discussion with one of my best friends, who happens to be pretty liberal.
I find it impossible to vote for a Democrat. The reason is simple - if he is identifying with the Democratic party, then he is linking himself to the Democratic platform, and in Congress, would likely vote the Democratic party line on the significant issues. I read the Democratic platform online (in great detail) and I just can't agree to vote for a candidate who stands on that platform.
I hope the GOP nominates candidates of high character and ability. But I'd rather vote for a so-so GOP candidate than any Democrat.
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
