• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We would love for you to become a part of our community.
    Take a moment to look around and join the discussion.
    CLICK HERE TO JOIN TALKWEATHER

2020 Political Thread (1 Viewer)


gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,665
Location
Meridianville
What are you talking about? I am basically arguing for your point of view LOL. Seems outlandish for you to make this kind of statement. And some of that statement is made from personal experience my friend not what I read.
I’m just saying it’s so outlandish it doesn’t merit discussion.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,756
Location
McCalla, AL
None of my statements are to discount the vote or discount that Biden may actually win regardless. It is about the integrity of the election. You all wanted Trump Investigated to the hilt based off of speculation and he was. There are hints that voter fraud has taken place. Would you rather a true election where its integrity is not in question, or would you rather win regardless and have the entire vote under suspicion of being altered?

I would want to that the Elections in the United States are fair, are not wrought with fraud and that ever vote that was legally cast by election night was counted. No double votes, no dead people voting, no people introducing ballots that should not have been, no cheating regardless if it was right or left doing it. If the People Choose Biden then that is who they chose. But let it be the correct outcome.

Biden already won. The election has been over for days. Trump has no plausible path to victory. An agency in Trump's own administration published a statement today saying this was the most secure election in American history.

https://apnews.com/article/election...ns-elections-66f9361084ccbc461e3bbf42861057a5

Trump was not investigated based off of speculation. He told Lester Holt in a public TV interview that Russia was on his mind when he fired the Director of the FBI. He later went on to obstruct justice multiple times trying to block the FBI's counter-intelligence investigation into the activities of several former members of his campaign and whether or not they coordinated with Russia as part of Russia's attempts to influence the 2016 election.

More specifically, Trump told the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, just a day after he fired the Director of the FBI, that:

"I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job." "I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." He later told Lavrov "I'm not under investigation." demonstrating that part of his rationale for firing Comey was because he refused to publicly announce that Trump wasn't under investigation.

I know I've asked this before, but have you read the entire Mueller report? I have. Several times. There was ample evidence in the report that Trump almost assuredly committed numerous federal crimes in his first couple of years in office.

I've also previously asked that you please list any specific examples you have that you believe are indicative of election fraud. You've listed two specific examples at various times in this thread, and I believe that I provided a strong rebuttal as to why neither of those two examples are credible, convincing, or truthful. Vague claims of fraud and casting aspersions on the integrity of the election are easy to do.

I mean, I could easily claim that Senate candidates receiving less votes than Biden in multiple states is evidence that Mitch McConnell and his allies tampered with ballots. But, I wouldn't do that because there's a reasonable explanation for why under-votes and split-ticket voting occur in every single Presidential election.

If I wanted, I could allege that Trump's appointee at the USPS deliberately made changes to the USPS' ability to process large amounts of mail, right in time for the peak mail flow of absentee and vote-by-mail ballots, correct? Isn't it VERY possible those changes led to a sizeable number of ballots being potentially being delayed past the cutoff mark in several key swing states? But, is that proof? An allegation is merely that. Hard evidence is required for an allegation to be substantiated. Nonetheless, there's no hard evidence that DeJoy's foolish meddling at the USPS actually delayed an electorally signicant number of ballots. But, what could be said about the potential that votes were suppressed due to months of evidence that the USPS was delivering mail with delays ranging anywhere from 3-4 days past normal to WEEKS past the normal delivery time?

Again, it's easy to claim there's been foul play. But, the actual burden is that someone has to provide hard evidence of fraud or suppression, and do so in a way that specifically quantifies the number of votes impacted and explain the who, what, when, how, and why of how said votes were impacted. Merely saying it's possible something impacted some votes somewhere is neither adequate nor convincing.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,756
Location
McCalla, AL
I fully support recounts where the difference is within a state’s specified margin. If it is outside of that margin, I do not support a recount nor do I believe the Democrats are the devious masterminds that would be necessary to cheat to that level.

You know, if the Democrats are clever enough to conduct a massive operation of ballot fraud that rigged an election, and they did so without leaving any proof, doesn't that show a certain competency that perhaps we'd want in government?

Because, my goodness, everyone knows that the current federal government can barely do anything at scale right now without screwing it up. Just sayin'.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,756
Location
McCalla, AL
Trump's own Department of Homeland Security is on record explicitly contradicting the wild claims and conspiracies he's been making about last week's election.

It's nothing less than a complete indictment and dismissal of Trump's efforts to sow confusion, doubt, and misinformation about the results of the election.

 

JayF

Technical Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
2020 Supporter
Technical Admin
Messages
1,159
Location
Hartselle, al
Biden already won. The election has been over for days. Trump has no plausible path to victory. An agency in Trump's own administration published a statement today saying this was the most secure election in American history.

https://apnews.com/article/election...ns-elections-66f9361084ccbc461e3bbf42861057a5

Trump was not investigated based off of speculation. He told Lester Holt in a public TV interview that Russia was on his mind when he fired the Director of the FBI. He later went on to obstruct justice multiple times trying to block the FBI's counter-intelligence investigation into the activities of several former members of his campaign and whether or not they coordinated with Russia as part of Russia's attempts to influence the 2016 election.

More specifically, Trump told the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, just a day after he fired the Director of the FBI, that:

"I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job." "I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." He later told Lavrov "I'm not under investigation." demonstrating that part of his rationale for firing Comey was because he refused to publicly announce that Trump wasn't under investigation.

I know I've asked this before, but have you read the entire Mueller report? I have. Several times. There was ample evidence in the report that Trump almost assuredly committed numerous federal crimes in his first couple of years in office.

I've also previously asked that you please list any specific examples you have that you believe are indicative of election fraud. You've listed two specific examples at various times in this thread, and I believe that I provided a strong rebuttal as to why neither of those two examples are credible, convincing, or truthful. Vague claims of fraud and casting aspersions on the integrity of the election are easy to do.

I mean, I could easily claim that Senate candidates receiving less votes than Biden in multiple states is evidence that Mitch McConnell and his allies tampered with ballots. But, I wouldn't do that because there's a reasonable explanation for why under-votes and split-ticket voting occur in every single Presidential election.

If I wanted, I could allege that Trump's appointee at the USPS deliberately made changes to the USPS' ability to process large amounts of mail, right in time for the peak mail flow of absentee and vote-by-mail ballots, correct? Isn't it VERY possible those changes led to a sizeable number of ballots being potentially being delayed past the cutoff mark in several key swing states? But, is that proof? An allegation is merely that. Hard evidence is required for an allegation to be substantiated. Nonetheless, there's no hard evidence that DeJoy's foolish meddling at the USPS actually delayed an electorally signicant number of ballots. But, what could be said about the potential that votes were suppressed due to months of evidence that the USPS was delivering mail with delays ranging anywhere from 3-4 days past normal to WEEKS past the normal delivery time?

Again, it's easy to claim there's been foul play. But, the actual burden is that someone has to provide hard evidence of fraud or suppression, and do so in a way that specifically quantifies the number of votes impacted and explain the who, what, when, how, and why of how said votes were impacted. Merely saying it's possible something impacted some votes somewhere is neither adequate nor convincing.


Actually your first statement is technically incorrect. Trump has not conceded the election and the states have not certified their election results to give Biden 270 Electoral Votes.
 

ghost

Member
PerryW Project Supporter
Messages
743
Location
NW AL
Also I understand that Tubby has talked about raising money from his new Senate office which is illegal.
 

JayF

Technical Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
2020 Supporter
Technical Admin
Messages
1,159
Location
Hartselle, al
Also I understand that Tubby has talked about raising money from his new Senate office which is illegal.
I cannot find anything on this. Would you care to enlighten us please.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,756
Location
McCalla, AL
Actually your first statement is technically incorrect. Trump has not conceded the election and the states have not certified their election results to give Biden 270 Electoral Votes.

We don't decide football games on the basis of whether or not the other team conceded or what was put in the ref's game report.

At the end of the game, one team has more points than another, and we see those results displayed on our TV or in an App. The team with the most points at the end of the game is the winner. Likewise, in a Presidential election, once someone crosses 270 projected electoral votes -- they're the President-Elect. We've been doing it this way for a long time.

Trump's pathetic inability to concede has no bearing on the electoral process that determines who won. It doesn't "delay" Biden from winning or prevent him from being recognized as the winner by the American public. The only thing it does is firmly reveal that Trump is a pathological crybaby and that his supporters are taking his landslide loss 50 times worse than Hillary supporters did. It's unquestionably one of the most embarrassing public meltdowns of a leader and his fanbase that I've ever witnessed.
 

JayF

Technical Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
2020 Supporter
Technical Admin
Messages
1,159
Location
Hartselle, al
We don't decide football games on the basis of whether or not the other team conceded or what was put in the ref's game report.

At the end of the game, one team has more points than another, and we see those results displayed on our TV or in an App. The team with the most points at the end of the game is the winner. Likewise, in a Presidential election, once someone crosses 270 projected electoral votes -- they're the President-Elect. We've been doing it this way for a long time.

Trump's pathetic inability to concede has no bearing on the electoral process that determines who won. It doesn't "delay" Biden from winning or prevent him from being recognized as the winner by the American public. The only thing it does is firmly reveal that Trump is a pathological crybaby and that his supporters are taking his landslide loss 50 times worse than Hillary supporters did. It's unquestionably one of the most embarrassing public meltdowns of a leader and his fanbase that I've ever witnessed.


Oh but that is the way we have always done it is a lame story. Sorry to Bust your bubble but Under Federal Law this is the process. Until then President-Elect is just a made up title.

January 6, 2021: Joint Session of Congress to Count Electoral Votes and Declare Election Results Meets On January 6, or another date set by law, the Senate and House of Representatives assemble at 1:00 p.m. in a joint session at the Capitol, in the House chamber, to count the electoral votes and declare the results (3 U.S.C. §15). The Vice President presides as President of the Senate. The Vice President opens the certificates and presents them to four tellers, two from each chamber. The tellers read and make a list of the returns. When the votes have been ascertained and counted, the tellers transmit them to the Vice President. If one of the tickets has received a majority of 270 or more electoral votes, the Vice President announces the results, which “shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President.”
 

JayF

Technical Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
2020 Supporter
Technical Admin
Messages
1,159
Location
Hartselle, al
And then there is this. This is why we need to look at this stuff closely.


Wonder why the major news outlets aren't covering it. Pandering to their base maybe. It is also why not one of the Main Stream Media Outlets can be 100% taken to provide the truth.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,756
Location
McCalla, AL
I gave up on Cruz once he abandoned his integrity to suck from the Trump teat.

Here's the problem...it wasn't just his own personal integrity that he abandoned. He also abandoned that of his father and wife -- along with the remaining integrity that his supporters and constituents possessed.

Ted Cruz is the epitome of a quisling. Merriam-Webster should update their dictionary entry for the word quisling to say "See: Cruz, Ted or Rubio, Marco" as both men are shining examples of exactly how one defines quisling.

Does anyone doubt that Cruz and Rubio would've been Vichy collaborators -- gleefully snitching out all the Jews and Resistance members they could think of? Can you not picture them, in a patriot fervor, joyfully denouncing their own wives and children to Stalin's NKVD -- completely untroubled that their actions just assured the execution or exile of their entire family?

People may think I'm being quite harsh towards Cruz and Rubio, but I genuinely believe that they are wholly irredeemable people and deserving of eternal damnation. To be quite honest, I wanted to say a whole lot more, but I'm actually biting my tongue. I had a Pol Pot reference and a Charles Taylor example that I didn't even use!
 

KoD

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
2020 Supporter
PerryW Project Supporter
Messages
1,160
Location
Huntsville, AL
It looks like everything has (finally) been called.

Screenshot_20201113-153257.png


Certainly no electoral detractors will change that outcome.

Also, president-elect is a made up title in the same way that english is a made up language and that lol is a made up acronym.
 

JayF

Technical Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
2020 Supporter
Technical Admin
Messages
1,159
Location
Hartselle, al
It looks like everything has (finally) been called.

View attachment 4878


Certainly no electoral detractors will change that outcome.

Also, president-elect is a made up title in the same way that english is a made up language and that lol is a made up acronym.


LOL I am just going to shake my head at this. I have said all along, that Biden is very possibly our next president. All I have heard from you folks for the past 4 years is let the investigation play out. Until it is an investigation that goes against you. Then its oh why is he pushing this. You all are so darn hypocritical you make my head hurt.
 

maroonedinhsv

Member
Messages
421
Location
Harvest, AL
And then there is this. This is why we need to look at this stuff closely.


Wonder why the major news outlets aren't covering it. Pandering to their base maybe. It is also why not one of the Main Stream Media Outlets can be 100% taken to provide the truth.
That isn't new information, and all of the "Main Stream Media Outlets" covered it way back when it actually happened. This claim has already been addressed. It could be that justthenews.com is pandering to its base.
 
Top