This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: 2020 Election Commentary  (Read 185194 times)

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1500 on: December 01, 2020, 11:43:27 PM »
But if Rawma posts something in any tone about how Donald Trump is our savior, I know I'm reading verbal sarcasm.

I tried very hard to find a counter-example; closest I came: someday, it may be that the incompetent authoritarian Trump who failed so thoroughly prodded the US to shore up its norms and institutions, saving us from a future competent authoritarian who found fewer vulnerabilities than Trump. But I'd really lay that to the reformers, not Trump.

Hmm, maybe Trump's propensity to lie and self-aggrandize could save Earth from credulous aliens, like Somerset Frisby in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hocus-Pocus_and_Frisby but I don't think Trump plays the harmonica and nobody believed Mr. Frisby anyway so only Rod Serling could identify Trump as our unlikely savior.

Fact Check: EOTB's statement is rated COMPLETELY TRUE, probably even in the Twilight Zone.

Mistwell

  • Smarter than Arduin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5289
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1501 on: December 02, 2020, 12:14:46 AM »
The most simple and easy way to investigate fraud would be a signature check on mail in votes.

How would that work when ballots don't have signatures and they don't keep the envelopes?

Actually, with just the briefest of research, I found a whole lot of states do signature verification.

Here is the California one:

https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/signature-mismatch-ballot-california/


Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8331
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1502 on: December 02, 2020, 12:23:37 AM »
I am not being disingenuous. The terms "President elect" and "Vice President elect" are defined in federal law, and we know that the conditions for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to claim those titles have been met. QED.

Has the Electoral College voted already?

No, then how can QED?

Here's an example of an easy correction.

Presidential Transition Act: https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/Presidential_Act_of_1963.pdf
(definition of President-elect and Vice-President-elect in section 3, paragraph c.)


This tracks with Bush v Gore, where the transition was delayed until December because the election was contested.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-administration-denies-biden-access-to-transition-funds-echoing-2000-bush-gore-standoff-11604950154
(And now I linked to an article behind a paywall. Fuckin internet.)

This is nothing like 2000, which was driven by actual uncertainty of the outcome; this is entirely driven by Trump's ego and narcissism.

Hyperbole. Many people aside from Trump are suspicious and have questions about the election results. I am suspicious and have questions about the election results. I have the luxury of being patient and seeing how this all shakes out, because I'm not the one who ran for President.

Quote
In 2000, Bush leading in Florida by 537 votes (out of nearly 6 million) had 271 electoral votes. (Gore did not contest New Hampshire, which Bush led by only 7,211 votes, closer than any Biden win in this election - flipping that would also have given Gore the win.) Recounts in the current election have certainly been able to shift totals by more than 537 votes (but not 7000+), and Trump would be well justified in lengthily contesting states that were as close as Florida was in 2000. Subsequent recounts by media groups showed that Gore might have won Florida under some consistent standards of counting; the Supreme Court blocked the recount in process and ran out the clock, remanding just before the safe harbor deadline provided for in federal law. That was a reasonable delay in transition activities, if not ideal; the outcome was truly uncertain before the Supreme Court ruling.

However, Bush and key staff did receive full intelligence briefings during the delayed transition; but access to most agencies (for example, to get background checks by the FBI on proposed appointees) was generally impeded. (The 9/11 commission put some blame on the delay, but it was almost 8 months after Bush was inaugurated and I would hope you could catch up by then. Bush reportedly blew off a warning in the Presidential Daily Briefing well before 9/11.) I won't provide a link to the Andy Card and John Podesta (White House chiefs of staff for Bush and Clinton, respectively) op-ed that discusses this because it's at the Washington Post website so same paywall; published on November 10th, they called for an immediate recognition of the then obvious outcome, to avoid harmful delay. By contrast with 2000, we are now deep in the third surge of a pandemic that's killed 250,000 and trashed the economy; until Biden was recognized as President-elect, he and his transition team pandemic response experts were blocked from talking to administration experts (like Dr. Fauci) and there may be many preventable deaths just from that delay.

What's a Biden administration going to do that a Trump administration hasn't? Democrats have been calling for lockdowns which is where our trashed economy is coming from. Tell us to socially distance and wear masks? That's nothing new. I suppose he could claim the vaccine if it's effective. Or blame it on Trump if the distribution has problems. Listen to Fauci when he says it's safe to open the schools? The teacher's unions are blocking that.

I predict that Corona will be handled under Biden exactly the same as under Trump, except with a positive spin of his excuses from the media.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

consolcwby

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
  • Feel the despair!
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1503 on: December 02, 2020, 12:40:51 AM »
I have procured come more information in the hopes of stimulating the debates currently slowing down in this thread. I even placed a few CONSPIRACY THEORIES for those interested. For those not interested, don't worry, be happy!  ;D   And, AWAY WE GO:

Things that make you go:
Hmm… https://twitter.com/va_shiva/status/1333530175770857475
https://twitter.com/TeamTrump/status/1333533891869757443
https://twitter.com/JustTheTweets17/status/1333586736933429252
https://twitter.com/NatyLiy/status/1333500580287950849
https://twitter.com/lourdesmz/status/1332694685379416065
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/dominion-trained-contractor-blows-michigan-hearing-re-scanning-counting-ballots-8-10-times-video/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/china-connection-parent-company-dominion-voting-systems-received-400-million-ubs-bank-switzerland-75-owned-chinese-government/
https://thenationalpulse.com/news/dominion-techie-worked-for-ccp-military-proxy-flagged-by-u-s-govt-for-malicious-cyber-activity/
The TRAITOR’S LIST: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2020/02/09/busted-mike-pompeo-says-he-has-list-of-american-governors-compromised-by-communist-china-n381385
A REMINDER: https://v1.nitrocdn.com/PtUefQrfncdsWOjilqcqdvGyQbUvpoWC/assets/desktop/optimized/rev-fd11ab2/media/bbd2930e3d1aac383aebf52f50803d88.D2C6H_NXgAECHZq

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/11/30/parnell-kelly-act-72-appeal-scotus/#.X8ZH6mCws4U.twitter
https://www.theepochtimes.com/powell-dominion-server-removed-from-fulton-county-while-lawyers-sought-restraining-order_3599859.html
https://twitter.com/AOECOIN/status/1333812820429848578
https://twitter.com/SgtMal/status/1333655654414880769

OMG! https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ/status/1333641704839147520
GitMO! https://v1.nitrocdn.com/PtUefQrfncdsWOjilqcqdvGyQbUvpoWC/assets/desktop/optimized/rev-fd11ab2/media/bbd2930e3d1aac383aebf52f50803d88.EoIgRlnVEAA8BW2

https://twitter.com/congbillposey/status/1327308778170146821

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-campaign-wisconsin-lawsuit-absentee-voting
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1333774107624685569
https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-lets-arizona-gop-review-sampling-of-ballots-as-part-of-election-lawsuit_3600068.html

Who do we vote for again? Oh, that’s right, the Electors:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizona-lawmakers-call-for-resolution-to-hold-back-electoral-college-votes_3599250.html
https://twitter.com/SenMastriano/status/1333578227890221056

Conspiracy_Theory_101 ~ Q_Link: https://twitter.com/DrivelCivil/status/1333831114201317376
            https://twitter.com/DrivelCivil/status/1333832609579769856
            https://twitter.com/DrivelCivil/status/1333833611879956481
            https://twitter.com/DrivelCivil/status/1333834344004153344
The Pardon: https://t.co/kNxQ6SU0zf?amp=1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------                    snip                    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  https://youtu.be/ShaxpuohBWs?si

Trond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2743

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1505 on: December 02, 2020, 07:24:01 AM »
Quote
(c) The terms “President-elect” and “Vice-President-elect” as used in this Act shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful candidates for the office of the President and Vice President, respectively, as ascertained by the Administrator following the general elections held to determine the electors of the President and Vice-President in accordance with title 3, United States code, sections 1 and 2.

So again, how can QED?
"... apparent successful candidates "
"... as used in this Act"

One of the standards for defining the President-elect is the GSA admin's assessment. It's a legal standard, and it authorizes other agencies to take various steps to facilitate the transition, because that's it's purpose: It defines a formal point where additional access is granted. But it doesn't claim to be the authoritative definition. The act defines and uses the term, but only in the context of the document. And it's clearly based on a projection, not on the final reality. The GSA administrator's ruling, after all, has no effect on whether someone becomes president.

There's an older and more authoritative definition, though. It's not formally defined in the Constitution, but it's strongly implied. And unlike the GSA admin's assessment, it's based on reality not a projection. It's when the Electoral Collage votes, and picks a president. (Or the same happens via one of the contingent methods, as described in the Constitution.) That's the final, conclusive determination of the President-elect.

A third definition is when states with 270 electoral votes certify their results. Which isn't final, because states choose their electors, and electors can do what they want. The fourth definition is when one of the major candidates concedes. The fifth and weakest definition is based on various third party projections (like the AP's) shortly after the election results come in.

In most elections, these distinctions don't matter. The AP makes a call, the other candidate concedes, the GSA admin authorizes the various agencies to start the transition process, the states certify their results for the projected candidate, and the Electoral College vote is just a formality. But none of the preliminary steps are final. The steps are traditionally pro forma, but they don't have to be. If it's contested, the correct answer to recognize the ambiguity.

There's been no concession, states with 270 electoral votes have not been certified in favor of one candidate, and the Electoral College has not even been appointed. But the projections are for Biden, the cases disputing the results are winding down, states have begun to certify their results, and the GSA admin's letter has started the transition process in his favor. He's almost certainly going to become the President-elect, so terms like "presumed President-elect" or "presumptive President-elect" are appropriate. But stating that he is the President-elect, full stop, with no qualifications, is simply incorrect.

It's an easy mistake, given the weight of tradition, so it's no surprise people were initially confused, and it took a while to work out the details. But at this point, the news media have had plenty of time to look it over, correct themselves, and put a qualifier in front President-elect. Since they've chosen not to, that means they're deliberately lying.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11749
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1506 on: December 02, 2020, 02:35:04 PM »
I have procured come more information in the hopes of stimulating the debates currently slowing down in this thread. I even placed a few CONSPIRACY THEORIES for those interested. For those not interested, don't worry, be happy!  ;D   And, AWAY WE GO:

I'm interested but more in a meta way. It seems to me like you're tossing out huge numbers of links, but don't engage at all in trying to analyze or think critically about them. It reminds me of a recent Scientific American article about information overload on social media. It's a pretty simple principle - as people's newsfeeds fill up, they think less about each item, and instead share them based only on emotion and cognitive biases.


Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/information-overload-helps-fake-news-spread-and-social-media-knows-it/

I feel that we should be thinking critically about each claim, and would prefer to focus on just a few points.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1507 on: December 02, 2020, 02:51:39 PM »
Here's an example of an easy correction.

Presidential Transition Act: https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/Presidential_Act_of_1963.pdf
(definition of President-elect and Vice-President-elect in section 3, paragraph c.)

Letter of ascertainment from the head of the GSA: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/gop-senator-business-leaders-urge-prompt-biden-transition/2020/11/23/1ab6cbae-2dc7-11eb-9dd6-2d0179981719_story.html

When did I become the fucking US Electoral fact checker:

Quote
(c) The terms “President-elect” and “Vice-President-elect” as used in this Act shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful candidates for the office of the President and Vice President, respectively, as ascertained by the Administrator following the general elections held to determine the electors of the President and Vice-President in accordance with title 3, United States code, sections 1 and 2.

So again, how can QED?

Wow, I thought you were trolling but you're actually confused, something trolls don't generally feign. It's simple logic.

Only the President-elect, as ascertained by the head of the GSA, can receive funding, access, etc as provided for in the Presidential Transition Act.
Joe Biden is receiving those things because the head of the GSA rather belatedly said he could.
Therefore, he must be the President-elect.

In propositional logic, the premises are: if A then P; if not A then not F; F.
The second is equivalent to if F then A, the contrapositive.
Apply modus ponens ("the rule of logic stating that if a conditional statement (“if p then q ”) is accepted, and the antecedent ( p ) holds, then the consequent ( q ) may be inferred") twice:
From F and if F then A one can deduce A.
From A and if A then P one can deduce P.
A is "The head of the GSA has ascertained that Biden is the apparently successful candidate for president".
P is "Biden is the President-elect".
F is "Biden is receiving funding, access, etc under the Presidential Transition Act".

QED.

(Another possibility would be that GSA Administrator Emily Murphy is violating the law; Trump appointees do that fairly often. But she wrote the letter, and that's ascertainment, no matter how peevish the letter, And it's not really in Donald Trump's interest that she violate the law in this way (because it bruises his ego, not because he cares about the law), so you'd think he would do something about it between golf outings.)

Do you even read your own sources?

Honest question.
Who da Drow?  U da drow! - hedgehobbit

There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1508 on: December 02, 2020, 03:16:25 PM »
The most simple and easy way to investigate fraud would be a signature check on mail in votes.

How would that work when ballots don't have signatures and they don't keep the envelopes?

Yes, how can you check the evidence when you throw it away?

That is a real head scratcher.
This is how it is easy to reach the conclusion not enough evidence to counter the election results....but I am sure that stuff was tossed for good reasons, despite this being a MONUMENTAL increase in the number of mail in ballots.

Aglondir

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • A
  • Posts: 1592
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1509 on: December 02, 2020, 03:51:38 PM »
Remaining court cases for Trump campaign (2 Dec):

Quote from: Brietbart.com
Arizona

Kelli Ward, who leads the Republican Party of Arizona, is challenging the election results, arguing that the state’s vote-by-mail procedures are too lax, and that observers were not able to verify the ballots being counted. She wants the state’s certification of the election results to be set aside until the signatures that accompany absentee ballots can be reviewed.

Georgia

Sidney Powell is suing to block the certification of results and toss out mail-in ballots because of alleged faults in the Dominion voting machines and the Smartmatic software. A lawsuit by the Thomas More Society also argues that the Mark Zuckerberg-funded Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) funded public “safe elections” operations in predominantly Democratic countries, violating state law and also violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.

Michigan

Sidney Powell has a lawsuit similar to the Michigan suit. The Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society is suing over Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s decision to send absentee ballot request forms to every registered voter, allegedly with no authority and lax standards. It argues observers were not allowed proper oversight, and cites affidavits stating some ballots were counted multiple times, among other irregularities. It also cites Zuckerberg and CTCL’s efforts.

Nevada

In Law v. Whitmer, the Trump campaign has sued six electors for Joe Biden on behalf of six Republican electors, alleging that Nevada authorities “developed an implemented an election system that was highly susceptible to fraud and abuse.” The lawsuit specifically claims that with a flood of mail-in ballots, officials in Clark County (home to Las Vegas) used electronic verification methods that are allegedly unreliable. It also lists other problems, such as computer malfunctions.

Pennsylvania

There are several active cases. Two are particularly important. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected a Republican challenge last week to the state’s vote-by-mail law, Act 77 of 2019, citing the doctrine of laches — i.e. because it supposedly came too late, and after Republicans had a chance to sue in the primary election. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out the Trump campaign’s effort to block certification. Both cases have been appealed to the Supreme Court.

Wisconsin

A lawsuit by the Amos Center for Justice and Liberty seeks to have the state’s mail-in ballots that were placed in drop-off boxes invalidated, on the grounds that the boxes were illegal. Another lawsuit by the Wisconsin Voters Alliance also targets Zuckerberg’s donations to CTCL. It also says the state illegally relaxed voter ID by letting hundreds of thousands of voters claim they were “indefinitely confined,” tainting the results, which separate Biden and Trump by about 20,000 votes.

Source: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/02/remaining-court-battles-for-trump-campaign-republicans-over-election-results/:

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1510 on: December 02, 2020, 04:02:18 PM »
This is nothing like 2000, which was driven by actual uncertainty of the outcome; this is entirely driven by Trump's ego and narcissism.

Hyperbole. Many people aside from Trump are suspicious and have questions about the election results. I am suspicious and have questions about the election results. I have the luxury of being patient and seeing how this all shakes out, because I'm not the one who ran for President.

The people who are suspicious and have questions about the election results are either coddling Trump (to avoid getting fired, attacked, or losing votes in their next election) or are part of the grift, either as perpetrators, unwitting collaborators or marks. Bill Barr says no evidence of sufficient fraud to change anything; Chris Krebs got fired for saying as much. Numerous Republicans stand by the integrity of the election they ran in their state. Many Congressional Republicans privately want Trump to give it up, but won't say so in public.

In 2000, Republicans knew that the Florida result could be overturned easily in a recount; that's why paid Republican operatives including congressional staffers stopped one county recount in the "Brooks Brothers riot" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot ). The only people trying to stop vote counting this time were Trumpies, and nobody who prefers Biden's victory has done anything to stop the recounts because they have absolutely no fear they can overturn enough states to change the outcome. The threats that result are damaging, though, as Gabriel Sterling, a Republican election official in Georgia, states "I can't begin to explain the level of anger I have right now over this". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzBujmlI3zI

There's an older and more authoritative definition, though. It's not formally defined in the Constitution, but it's strongly implied. And unlike the GSA admin's assessment, it's based on reality not a projection. It's when the Electoral Collage votes, and picks a president. (Or the same happens via one of the contingent methods, as described in the Constitution.) That's the final, conclusive determination of the President-elect.

The explicit definition in federal law is clearly stronger than your made-up implied definition. And it's the only one with any actual consequence other than the PR you're desperately trying to spin. But I applaud your endorsement of penumbral rights found in the Constitution. Note that Congress can still contest the Electoral College votes in early January, so the Electoral College vote is not really final anyway.

Quote
A third definition is when states with 270 electoral votes certify their results. Which isn't final, because states choose their electors, and electors can do what they want.

They've been certified in all the states Trump contests, and President-elect for more than a century has been used before certification or electoral college vote. Note that electors are not free to do what they want in every state; the Supreme Court upheld state laws forcing an elector to vote as committed by the vote and their election laws. The move to get Trump electors to vote against him in 2016 was obviously doomed - electors are longtime party operatives, chosen for their loyalty - but it did set a marker when two voted against him (and another resigned and was replaced because he wouldn't vote for Trump or be faithless). Biden is mainstream enough that it's not going to happen this time at all.

Quote
The fourth definition is when one of the major candidates concedes.

Trump tweeted that Biden won back on November 15th. He loaded it with a lot of self-serving excuses about fraud, voting machines and the media. But a concession would make someone President-conceded-to; concession has never determined who was elected.

Quote
The fifth and weakest definition is based on various third party projections (like the AP's) shortly after the election results come in.

They took until November 7th this time. Republicans had deliberately arranged for delayed counting of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Everyone was leery of making predictions that turned out badly, given that exit polling was useless and there was no experience with so many mail-in ballots. Fox News' early call of Arizona looked like it might have been a mistake, and most other outlets declined to call that one until well after Pennsylvania settled it. The "red mirage" that led Trump to claim multiple states was obviously wrong by the day after the election, though.

Quote
But the projections are for Biden, the cases disputing the results are winding down, states have begun to certify their results, and the GSA admin's letter has started the transition process in his favor. He's almost certainly going to become the President-elect, so terms like "presumed President-elect" or "presumptive President-elect" are appropriate. But stating that he is the President-elect, full stop, with no qualifications, is simply incorrect.

I understand that you're disappointed with the result, but Biden is President-elect; "Pat doesn't think so" is not going to get onto any list of President-elect definitions. Not sure who would have standing to sue to stop them using the title on Biden's presidential transition web site, https://buildbackbetter.gov/ , but maybe you should give it a try if Trump won't.

Quote
It's an easy mistake, given the weight of tradition, so it's no surprise people were initially confused, and it took a while to work out the details. But at this point, the news media have had plenty of time to look it over, correct themselves, and put a qualifier in front President-elect. Since they've chosen not to, that means they're deliberately lying.

Kool-aid overdose (sour grape flavor). They've looked it over and stuck with it because it's true. Media mostly prefer the fifth definition you list, because it flatters them with the most importance. But I encourage you or Trump to sue Fox News over this. Be aware that they've defended lawsuits by claiming they're entertainment rather than news, and Sean Hannity recently admitted that he doesn't vet the information on his show.

Note that many media are also referring to Biden as the 46th President; that's one thing Trump could prevent, by resigning and making Biden 47th (or beyond). Add that demand to your lawsuit, please, for the entertainment value.

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1511 on: December 02, 2020, 04:14:19 PM »
I think all we can really ask of the people on the right, is to accept Biden with the exact same spirit the left welcomed Trump.  Since there are really not very many right leaning tech giants or media firms, I would not park, walk, or go near any parked U-Haul trucks for a while.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1512 on: December 02, 2020, 04:20:41 PM »
Kool-aid overdose (sour grape flavor). They've looked it over and stuck with it because it's true. Media mostly prefer the fifth definition you list, because it flatters them with the most importance. But I encourage you or Trump to sue Fox News over this. Be aware that they've defended lawsuits by claiming they're entertainment rather than news, and Sean Hannity recently admitted that he doesn't vet the information on his show.

Note that many media are also referring to Biden as the 46th President; that's one thing Trump could prevent, by resigning and making Biden 47th (or beyond). Add that demand to your lawsuit, please, for the entertainment value.
You're making up fantasies about me.

You're irrational and insane.

Addressing your less bugfuck crazy shit: The President-elect is not defined by the press, the GSA has no authority over who becomes president, Trump's tweet was ambiguous and he clarified it was not a concession, and just because something is almost certain to happen doesn't mean that it's already happened. Using President-elect to refer to Biden without a caveat like "presumptive" is simply incorrect. It may be acceptable in casual situations, as a shortcut, as long as everyone knows the presumptive is implied. But in professional works where precision is important, like the news, it's just wrong.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2020, 04:26:07 PM by Pat »

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1513 on: December 02, 2020, 04:25:04 PM »
Do you even read your own sources?

That is true, not even one of them. And have I talked about how Trump is our savior?

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11749
Re: 2020 Election Commentary
« Reply #1514 on: December 02, 2020, 04:31:13 PM »
This is how it is easy to reach the conclusion not enough evidence to counter the election results....but I am sure that stuff was tossed for good reasons, despite this being a MONUMENTAL increase in the number of mail in ballots.

As far as I know, in cases where the envelopes were tossed -- they were tossed because that has *always* been the procedure. Yes, there was a big increase in mail-in ballots this election, but we've seen increasing mail-in ballots for the past two decades, and that's been happening in both conservative and liberal states. The 2016 election had over 20% of its votes as mail-in, plus 17% early voting.

To be clear, I'm in favor of increased security election procedures. I dislike especially electronic-only (DRE) voting machines, and I would consider it reasonable to change the process to require filing and keeping all ballot envelopes.

But in general, these are the same procedures that we've had in place for years. These election procedures were set up and kept in place by *Republican* state administrations in many cases. It's not a mark of suspicion that elections have followed the same procedures as 2016.