Railbird vs SlipperyPete Election Contest.....
- Thread starter SlipperyPete
- Start date
Actually in some precincts they've already found more votes than there are registered voters.
Now that alone doesn't mean the fraud was perpetuated by the left or right, who knows, maybe both, but there is certainly obvious signs of frauds being committed.
That kind of stuff goes well beyond an "I heard".
Do I think Trump can overturn the election if he loses? No, probably not. But you'd be naive to think this guy is just going to go quietly into the night.....
Minds much sharper than mine will have a lot of input into this before it's over.
Then it should be easy for someone like yourself to link us to any of this corruption. Take your time. Otherwise, it's all people in Trumps camp, spreading false rumors again, and people like you falling for it and doing exactly as they want you to do because you're too nieve to think otherwise for yourself. Take your time. Need a legit source.
Nieve? WTF does that mean?
I don't watch political networks, watched them until late in the morning on election day, about 10 minutes total ever since.
On the regular daily news people that do this for a living said there is already enough probable cause to litigate. Plenty of it.
I repeated what they said. Do I know any of it as fact, of course not, no more than you know if it's not true.
And the part you don't understand is that if your side somehow loses these counts, they too will find grounds to litigate.
And suddenly there will be plenty of proof for you.
Anyway, no need to respond. I know Trump has destroyed your life and you can't speak like an adult on any of this stuff.....
You are ATE UP.
Life's too short to waste on these kind of idiots.
Tell you what, I need a bushay box or a Twinkie, I'll wave you over. If not just keep trucking along....... thanks.
We move on.
I don't watch political networks, watched them until late in the morning on election day, about 10 minutes total ever since.
On the regular daily news people that do this for a living said there is already enough probable cause to litigate. Plenty of it.
I repeated what they said. Do I know any of it as fact, of course not, no more than you know if it's not true.
And the part you don't understand is that if your side somehow loses these counts, they too will find grounds to litigate.
And suddenly there will be plenty of proof for you.
Anyway, no need to respond. I know Trump has destroyed your life and you can't speak like an adult on any of this stuff.....
You are ATE UP.
Life's too short to waste on these kind of idiots.
Tell you what, I need a bushay box or a Twinkie, I'll wave you over. If not just keep trucking along....... thanks.
We move on.
Actually legitimate news outlets are correctly pointing out that trumps legal teams litigation efforts are baseless with no leg to stand on. Trumps team is simultaneously requesting to stop counting ballots in some states while encouraging continued voting in others.
The outlets like CNN and MSNBC are stating that trumps team has a legitimate and legal right to request a recount in Wisconsin where the result was less than a 1% difference. Doing so will be a waste of time however because it's a difference of 20,000 votes and they'll be lucky to find more than a 100-200 vote discrepancy
The outlets like CNN and MSNBC are stating that trumps team has a legitimate and legal right to request a recount in Wisconsin where the result was less than a 1% difference. Doing so will be a waste of time however because it's a difference of 20,000 votes and they'll be lucky to find more than a 100-200 vote discrepancy
I won't ask for your definition of legitimate news outlets, I believe I know the answer. Anyway I already wrote above what I heard.......no need to type it again.
People that litigate for a living have claimed they've already been exposed to information that tells them this will be in the courts. Perhaps they're lying?
So your final position, even if Biden loses, is there was no fraud or corruption in this election?
If so can you explain how you and Bushay have come to this conclusion?
How could you possibly know that?
Let me guess, another legitimate news outlet told you so?
People that litigate for a living have claimed they've already been exposed to information that tells them this will be in the courts. Perhaps they're lying?
So your final position, even if Biden loses, is there was no fraud or corruption in this election?
If so can you explain how you and Bushay have come to this conclusion?
How could you possibly know that?
Let me guess, another legitimate news outlet told you so?
Just googled it, said there was over 3,200,000 votes cast in Wisconsin. How can you say only 100 or 200 would have a discrepancy?
These kind of things (and every Bushay response) is why "normal" posters quit arguing this stuff long ago.
It's absolutely pointless to try and have a normal give and take discussion.
These kind of things (and every Bushay response) is why "normal" posters quit arguing this stuff long ago.
It's absolutely pointless to try and have a normal give and take discussion.
I like you Heis but these posts sound more like Winky or Bushay than they do you.......
So the news outlets have the evidence Trumps team will use in their possession? They already are aware of the litigation efforts of all those attorneys?
Hours after the election, Trumps evidence is already completed? And after it was done, it's apparently been sent to news outlets to be reviewed?
Wow, that would be a first!! And from there these people have the experience to make a ruling, LOL.
And lastly you are able to verify that these "legitimate news outlets" with all this information reviewed it correctly?? Have you seen the material as well?
Incredible the lengths we go to believe the story we want to believe.
Me? Again, I have no idea, not going to pretend otherwise but I can see bullshit when I read it.
So the news outlets have the evidence Trumps team will use in their possession? They already are aware of the litigation efforts of all those attorneys?
Hours after the election, Trumps evidence is already completed? And after it was done, it's apparently been sent to news outlets to be reviewed?
Wow, that would be a first!! And from there these people have the experience to make a ruling, LOL.
And lastly you are able to verify that these "legitimate news outlets" with all this information reviewed it correctly?? Have you seen the material as well?
Incredible the lengths we go to believe the story we want to believe.
Me? Again, I have no idea, not going to pretend otherwise but I can see bullshit when I read it.
Ok, that's an entirely different statement. Sure, anyone can opine on what has been publicly said.....
In the first 48 a lot of that superficial stuff is going to be thrown around angrily. Lot of emotion involved.
No one is privy to the final arguments the Trump team will end up presenting in court, no one. Not even Donald at this point.
Carry on.
A judge threatens the postmaster general over slow execution of sweeps for undelivered ballots.
On Tuesday, Judge Sullivan had ordered inspectors to sweep facilities in 12 districts after the Postal Service said in court that some 300,000 ballots it had received had not been scanned for delivery. He said he was particularly concerned about ballot delivery in key swing districts with low on-time delivery scores, including Central Pennsylvania, Philadelphia and Detroit.
Roughly 300,000 ballots that the Postal Service says it processed showed no scan confirming their delivery to ballot-counting sites, according to data filed recently in federal court in Washington, D.C., leaving voter-rights advocates concerned.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/04/us/politics/usps-ballots.html
On Tuesday, Judge Sullivan had ordered inspectors to sweep facilities in 12 districts after the Postal Service said in court that some 300,000 ballots it had received had not been scanned for delivery. He said he was particularly concerned about ballot delivery in key swing districts with low on-time delivery scores, including Central Pennsylvania, Philadelphia and Detroit.
Roughly 300,000 ballots that the Postal Service says it processed showed no scan confirming their delivery to ballot-counting sites, according to data filed recently in federal court in Washington, D.C., leaving voter-rights advocates concerned.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/04/us/politics/usps-ballots.html
What you heard is false or incorrect.
The one I can think of (there may be others) is Al Franken's first Senate election in Minnesota in 2008 There was a razor thin margin, I'm sure lawyers were involved, and, after the recount, Al Franken went from extremely narrow loser to extremely narrow winner. This is off the top of my head. I'll research it for the specifics.
From Wikipedia:
Preliminary reports on election night, November 4, (2008) were that (incumbent U. S. Senator Norm) Coleman was leading by over 700 votes, but the official results, certified on November 18, 2008, had Coleman leading by only 215 votes. As the two candidates were separated by less than 0.5 percent of the votes cast, the Minnesota Secretary of State, Mark Ritchie, authorized the automatic recount provided for in Minnesota election law. In the recount, ballots and certifying materials were examined by hand, and candidates could file challenges to the legality of ballots or materials for inclusion or exclusion. On January 5, 2009, the Minnesota State Canvassing Board certified the recounted vote totals, with Franken ahead by 225 votes.[65]
On January 6, 2009, Coleman's campaign filed an election contest, which led to a trial before a three-judge panel.[66] The trial ended on April 7, when the panel ruled that 351 of 387 disputed absentee ballots were incorrectly rejected and ordered them counted. Counting those ballots raised Franken's lead to 312 votes. Coleman appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court on April 20.[67][68][69] On April 24 the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.[70][71] Oral arguments were conducted on June 1.[70][72]
On June 30, 2009, the Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously rejected Coleman's appeal and said that Franken was entitled to be certified as the winner. Shortly after the court's decision, Coleman conceded.[73] Governor Tim Pawlenty signed Franken's election certificate that evening.[74] (bolding and underlining and parenthetical clarification by me)
So the recount changed the results enough to change the winner. The court case's changes in results increased Franken's recount winning margin by 87 votes from 225 to 312, only affirming the recount results change in the winner, but not changing the winner.
The one I can think of (there may be others) is Al Franken's first Senate election in Minnesota in 2008 There was a razor thin margin, I'm sure lawyers were involved, and, after the recount, Al Franken went from extremely narrow loser to extremely narrow winner. This is off the top of my head. I'll research it for the specifics.
From Wikipedia:
Preliminary reports on election night, November 4, (2008) were that (incumbent U. S. Senator Norm) Coleman was leading by over 700 votes, but the official results, certified on November 18, 2008, had Coleman leading by only 215 votes. As the two candidates were separated by less than 0.5 percent of the votes cast, the Minnesota Secretary of State, Mark Ritchie, authorized the automatic recount provided for in Minnesota election law. In the recount, ballots and certifying materials were examined by hand, and candidates could file challenges to the legality of ballots or materials for inclusion or exclusion. On January 5, 2009, the Minnesota State Canvassing Board certified the recounted vote totals, with Franken ahead by 225 votes.[65]
On January 6, 2009, Coleman's campaign filed an election contest, which led to a trial before a three-judge panel.[66] The trial ended on April 7, when the panel ruled that 351 of 387 disputed absentee ballots were incorrectly rejected and ordered them counted. Counting those ballots raised Franken's lead to 312 votes. Coleman appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court on April 20.[67][68][69] On April 24 the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.[70][71] Oral arguments were conducted on June 1.[70][72]
On June 30, 2009, the Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously rejected Coleman's appeal and said that Franken was entitled to be certified as the winner. Shortly after the court's decision, Coleman conceded.[73] Governor Tim Pawlenty signed Franken's election certificate that evening.[74] (bolding and underlining and parenthetical clarification by me)
So the recount changed the results enough to change the winner. The court case's changes in results increased Franken's recount winning margin by 87 votes from 225 to 312, only affirming the recount results change in the winner, but not changing the winner.
Last edited:
So far the only evidence of fraud came from the republicans
BUSTED: Republicans caught conspiring to commit election fraud in Pennsylvania
Published
11 hours ago
on
November 5, 2020
By
Bob Brigham
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/bu...ing-to-commit-election-fraud-in-pennsylvania/
BUSTED: Republicans caught conspiring to commit election fraud in Pennsylvania
Published
11 hours ago
on
November 5, 2020
By
Bob Brigham
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/bu...ing-to-commit-election-fraud-in-pennsylvania/
Idiot try and concentrate. Think hard. Remember when Trump won in 2016. He also claimed voter fraud, to the tune of 6 million votes. He even created a voter fraud commission to investigate. It turned out to be a Trump lie. Zero fraud was found. Ane now that Trump is once again claiming voter fraud without any evidence you think it should be investigated. What a fuken Repuplicon idiot you are.
The ballots that are being counted are the ones that were mailed in early, they counted the votes on Tuesday first, then the mail in votes after, since the majority of mail in votes were by Dems, it's not a surprise that Biden's numbers keep improving, this was expected. There are members from both parties overseeing the counting, as long as the ballot was sent in by the 3rd, it should be counted, every vote should count even if it takes a few days longer.
Sorry kid I'm not a Republican and I voted for HC in 2016.
What I do know is how completely sad it is that you are on a sports gambling forum and you don't even bet sports. I mean you do know how depressing it is to join a group that you have nothing in common with because you lack friends in the real world? I mean most in your position would just off themselves but you came here.
What I do know is how completely sad it is that you are on a sports gambling forum and you don't even bet sports. I mean you do know how depressing it is to join a group that you have nothing in common with because you lack friends in the real world? I mean most in your position would just off themselves but you came here.