Trump Under Fire

[ChrisJones 7,975]

8 minutes ago, Nik_B said:

The system will pass it's test, the constitution looks like it was very well thought out and it's quite amazing to see it still work today.

The voting system especially machines and mail in ballots does need to be sorted out and that isn't a partisan thing to say. The media have been running stories about it for years and even Elizabeth Warren has made comments about the machines. Mail in voting should be restricted to a small percentage of the population who are unable to vote...that is how it used to be and now it's been abused.

I used to have a list of British MPs who had the highest percent of mail votes but I can't find it. I'm sure David Miliband was the top one and the figure was ridiculous.

2020 was definitely a perfect storm for this election. I can't really argue with that. Post Covid I'd predict a much lower mail in ballot and a stronger return for in person voting. It's hard to describe, really, but voting in person is very much viewed as a civic duty and once the perceived risk has lowered it will increase.

The criticism against the voting machines can be valid to a point but processing 150 million plus votes, by hand, would struggle to pass the constitutional muster that it mandates. Had they all been counted by hand it might be difficult, if not impossible, to process them all in the time allowed. I sincerely doubt that had this election been machineless that the Trump team would have some other argument saying how votes not being processed within that time would have somehow won him the election, although that's pure speculation on my part.

It hasn't slipped my attention that the states in which he won, in some cases with a higher margin than 2016, aren't subject to the same scrutiny. If this system is as genuinely flawed as is being suggested here then surely all of those results are suspect? This of course is despite the fact there is broad bipartisan agreement that this election has been the most secure. Even from members of Don's own cabinet.

There's always room for improvement but the attempt to have millions of votes, in some cases, thrown out due to an unproven conspiracy is something that few seem to be addressing. Cancelling votes because the candidate finds them unpalatable is a worrying authoritarian move.

8 minutes ago, Balaur said:

What do you think they'd have made of America today, I'd imagine they'd be arming themselves in order to rid America of its blatant corruption within politics and business, globalisation and monopolies. At least with the romans a nutty emperor came along now and again and culled the senate....

[Nik_B 3,790]

6 minutes ago, ChrisJones said:

This of course is despite the fact there is broad bipartisan agreement that this election has been the most secure. Even from members of Don's own cabinet.

 

After 4 years of Russia hacked the election....really?

You cannot believe that

[Nik_B 3,790]

Just now, Balaur said:

I honestly believe the left would be more willing to cheat than the right, as I believe the remainers would have been over brexiteers, that's just going on my views of human nature , people I've spoken to and the behaviours of each side respectively....

My Dad used to work for the Labour party in the 60s/70s and he always said that. Dead people voting isn't a new meme...it's been going on for decades.

Personally I think there was a large number of postal/duplicate votes for remain, probably a few hundred thousand.

Technology is so advance today that you can safely access your bank from a mobile phone but apparently we have to live with some antiquated backwards and easily manipulated system in 2020.

 

[Nik_B 3,790]

Bloody hell...after last nights marathon 30 hours without sleep due to work I'm on a roll again...apologies in advance

Nice to have some work after 9 months of thinking my job was finished forever

Sorry for any rambling, barely slept or eaten for the last week

[ChrisJones 7,975]

8 minutes ago, Balaur said:

I honestly believe the left would be more willing to cheat than the right, as I believe the remainers would have been over brexiteers, that's just going on my views of human nature , people I've spoken to and the behaviours of each side respectively....

I might have agreed 10-15 years ago but I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could throw them!

9 minutes ago, Nik_B said:

After 4 years of Russia hacked the election....really?

You cannot believe that

Mate. Watching the nonsense spouted by the duopoly, and it's rabid band of followers, I'm going with the actual evidence that's passed constitutional muster. The system isn't perfect but it's head and shoulders above the dross that are slinging as much sh*t as they can to see if any will stick.

By all means pick your side. I have. I don't trust any of them and will critique them all accordingly. Even if my team fluked a win I'd still be watching them like a sh*thawk...

The only constant is the constitutional standard. I'm a fan of that for reasons we've discussed previously. I hold them all to that constant and any anomaly has to go through that due process. If it passes it stays. If it doesn't then it goes. This is why I've skimmed through most of the noise submitted here and in other places over the last few months even if it's for my own sanity. I'm not joining anyone down that rabbit hole. I did too much of that in the late 90's and it's a bad, bad, road.

[Nik_B 3,790]

5 minutes ago, ChrisJones said:

I might have agreed 10-15 years ago but I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could throw them!

Mate. Watching the nonsense spouted by the duopoly, and it's rabid band of followers, I'm going with the actual evidence that's passed constitutional muster. The system isn't perfect but it's head and shoulders above the dross that are slinging as much sh*t as they can to see if any will stick.

By all means pick your side. I have. I don't trust any of them and will critique them all accordingly. Even if my team fluked a win I'd still be watching them like a sh*thawk...

The only constant is the constitutional standard. I'm a fan of that for reasons we've discussed previously. I hold them all to that constant and any anomaly has to go through that due process. If it passes it stays. If it doesn't then it goes. This is why I've skimmed through most of the noise submitted here and in other places over the last few months even if it's for my own sanity. I'm not joining anyone down that rabbit hole. I did too much of that in the late 90's and it's a bad, bad, road.

You refuse to look at the evidence Chris!!

 

[Nik_B 3,790]

https://hereistheevidence.com/

[ChrisJones 7,975]

8 minutes ago, Balaur said:

I'm obviously refering to the electorate as opposed to any politicians or parties lol. But you might be as well lol

Fair. This has raised the question for me, though. If the democrats are so dirty and neck deep in voter fraud. From dead people voting, to bussing in illegals to vote for them. Why aren't the Republicans? Do we honestly believe that only one side would engage in such behaviour? It would be naive for me to suggest that only one side would be capable of such actions while the other would be beyond reproach?

8 minutes ago, Nik_B said:

You refuse to look at the evidence Chris!!

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, that's what the due process is for. Through all of this noise if any of this sh*t is going to stick it has to have sound legal grounds to pass muster. That simply hasn't been the case so far. From the Biden laptop to the releasing of the Kraken... We're now at 90 mins. England are still well up but we don't know how much injury time is left on the clock. Sure, San Marino can still win but they're going to have to pull some magic from the bench at this stage.

Mate, I've got more years in than I have left. I simply don't have the time or the inclination to wade into the conspiracies and I'd much rather sit outside with my coffee and watch the birds. None of it matters if the judge is going to throw it out and anything left is beyond my control for the most of it.

If the evidence exists present it. If it warrants a change in the result it will. This is the way.

[Nik_B 3,790]

If you don't want to look at evidence that has been presented then you really shouldn't comment.

And calling people conspiracy theorists is rude and condescending and isn't a good look.

There is a link to all of the so called evidence, anyone is free to look at it. There are very educated statisticians who have gone on record and signed affidavits...those people are more intelligent that anyone on this forum by a mile.  

[ChrisJones 7,975]

1 minute ago, Balaur said:

That's exactly what I'm saying....but I'm also massively generalising and never mentioned beyond reproach. 

Fair comment, and I didn't infer that from your post.

Giving the fact that we've all got a few miles on the clock and we've seen a wide spectrum of behaviour from our fellow homo sapiens I just cannot accept that it would be as one sided as each side allege. Especially when it comes to politics. One side is the devil. The other is saviour. We all know that's bollocks even if we won't admit it publicly.

[Born Hunter 17,763]

3 minutes ago, Nik_B said:

If you don't want to look at evidence that has been presented then you really shouldn't comment.

And calling people conspiracy theorists is rude and condescending and isn't a good look.

There is a link to all of the so called evidence, anyone is free to look at it. There are very educated statisticians who have gone on record and signed affidavits...those people are more intelligent that anyone on this forum by a mile.  

Pot f***ing kettle! Hahaha

[Nik_B 3,790]

Just now, Born Hunter said:

Pot f***ing kettle! Hahaha

When did I call you a conspiracy theorist?

 

[Born Hunter 17,763]

Just now, Nik_B said:

When did I call you a conspiracy theorist?

 

Oh right, is it just that that's below the belt then?

[Nik_B 3,790]

Just now, Born Hunter said:

Oh right, is it just that that's below the belt then?

When did I call you a conspiracy theorist?

 

[Born Hunter 17,763]

Just now, Nik_B said:

When did I call you a conspiracy theorist?

 

Oh shit ive broken him!