Re: Political Debate Thread
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:31 am
This has to be one of the WORST mowing jobs I've ever seen. The kid is PLAYING Trump for a FOOL. SAD!
Psh. You normies and your impossible pant leg standards. smhSMR 510RR wrote:Mowing job is twice as good as his dads pants. He could probably fit both legs in one pant leg!
Seriously though, need a bit more overlap on your mowing kid!
Get Spinelli in here!!! That kid left yardribbons in every row! (yardribbons (yard RIB onz) - n. The unmowed patches ofjlv wrote:
I mean the practical nature of having a tent big enough for a small family with you all the time is appealing.aeffertz wrote:Psh. You normies and your impossible pant leg standards. smhSMR 510RR wrote:Mowing job is twice as good as his dads pants. He could probably fit both legs in one pant leg!
Seriously though, need a bit more overlap on your mowing kid!
I'm sorry, and you probably won't like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.
With respect to forum members not liking the hijacking of MXS Twitter, I wanted to continue this conversation over in the correct thread if that is alright.jlv wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 2:34 am1. Doesn't matter. Find the mismatch, track down the voter and find out if they exist and actually voted. If you have 10% fraud it should be easy.m121c wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:30 am I might be mistaken but I thought PA:
- Passed into law 2 weeks prior to the election effectively not requirement signature match sighting it was a mechanism to apply subjectivism to disenfranchise votes.
- After mail in ballots are processed the seal envelop (with signature) is separated and disposed of.
Unless I am missing something, these processes do not seem like they would safeguard fraud or at the very least invalid ballots. They also would not make it very easy to prove, certainty not in a week and a half with persistent resistance to just "concede" and to stop investigating.
- PA sent guidelines on the eve of the election on curing Ballots, these guidelines seemed to be misapplied across the state with some citing it was not in accordance with the law. If this is true, theoretically, these ballots could have been "cured" had there not been close supervision...
2. Yes, the ballot is separated from the envelope to maintain a secret ballot. I don't know if they keep the physical envelope but they're going to have to keep a copy of the signature for their records. You would only be able to prove fraud, not which way the fraudulent votes went.
3. I tried to look up what you're referring to and the best I could find was something about late arriving votes with no ID. The late votes were around 10,000 so they can't close the 80,000 gap Trump needs to make up in PA.
Basically, what he needs is 1: Find a single fraudulent vote. 2: Repeat 80,000 times.
Don't you find it odd that there are 80,000 fake votes and they can't find a single one? I know it's hard to believe but I think Trump might be lying.
Facts don't care about your feelings. You've basically got a bunch of people saying, "Hey, this looks fishy!" You need more than that. If it's so widespread, why isn't there a single example? Finding one person in the voter roll who isn't real shouldn't be hard if the fraud is that bad. Without that you're no better than the libs who thought Trump cheated in 2016 because the vote didn't match the polls.m121c wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:53 pm With respect to forum members not liking the hijacking of MXS Twitter, I wanted to continue this conversation over in the correct thread if that is alright.
It's not hard to believe Trump would lie. It's also really not hard to believe that big tech/corporate news and "journalists" would lie either.
When we started our conversation it surrounded the idea that Trump was blindly trying to remove a wide number of votes, effectively disenfranchising a ton of votes all over the country, what was likened to a coup. There was no evidence, we needed evidence, and at the point everything was 'baseless' claims. With these legislature hearings these past 2 weeks... I feel admissible evidence is building up. Now I started on the side that this election at best was questionable and at worst was compromised. Admitting my confirmation bias, I am curious if you have been following any of the legislature hearings in the past week or two, and if you think what is being presented is suspicious and/or is a "bullet" in terms of evidence. I feel it was easy in the first two weeks to claim conspiracy and no evidence.. to no surprise it took some time. Is it still that easy to stand by those statements?
With your statement I am curious if you seen any of the hearings or read any of the affidavits? Or are you insinuating the factual evidence that has been brought forth is false?