If you distrust election results shouldn't you question all Democrat and republican victories?

perplexed said:

Plenty of people on this board think the US election system is broken and many people are committing fraud but if you think that shouldn't you question all Republican victories as well as the democrat victories? There was a lot of mail in voting before covid.

Click to expand...

Open borders

If you want to influence an election, flood the streets with millions of illegals, and oppose all attempts to enact voter ID requirements.

The left if filthy dirty

It becomes even more obvious when you include their stated desire to end the Electoral College, abolish the filibuster, and stack the Supreme Court.

The left has went to far, and will lose big in the midterms, and in the 2024 presidential election.

Before you say it, I believe Joe Biden won the election.

Silverback said:

Open borders

If you want to influence an election, flood the streets with millions of illegals, and oppose all attempts to enact voter ID requirements.

The left if filthy dirty

It becomes even more obvious when you include their stated desire to end the Electoral College, abolish the filibuster, and stack the Supreme Court.

The left has went to far, and will lose big in the midterms, and in the 2024 presidential election.

Before you say it, I believe Joe Biden won the election.

Click to expand...

First, we don't oppose all attempts at voter ID requirements. We just want free ID and automatic registration for citizens.

Second, we don't "flood the streets with illegals"

The Electoral college robs residents of larger states of their voting power, a fundamental right. It is an archaic institution which has shown it serves no legitimate purpose.

The filibuster as well is archaic and not useful.

The supreme court, as you may have notice has not been stacked, but that issue is bipartisan.

Vylo said:

First, we don't oppose all attempts at voter ID requirements. We just want free ID and automatic registration for citizens.

Second, we don't "flood the streets with illegals"

The Electoral college robs residents of larger states of their voting power, a fundamental right. It is an archaic institution which has shown it serves no legitimate purpose.

The filibuster as well is archaic and not useful.

The supreme court, as you may have notice has not been stacked, but that issue is bipartisan.

Click to expand...

Those pale beside gerrymandering. It’s pretty clear that Republicans are going to control the House as soon as the new maps take effect. The changes already made guarantee a Republican house in 2022. Some states seem to be setting up their legislatures to overrule (or misrepresent) the vote for president as well. With a Republican Supreme Court, it’s hard to see any way out.

perplexed said:

Plenty of people on this board think the US election system is broken and many people are committing fraud but if you think that shouldn't you question all Republican victories as well as the democrat victories? .

Click to expand...

If there is evidence of vote fraud in the case of a Republican victory, yes! Of course.

But unless there is evidence, then the question is academic. In the case of Biden's election, there is a mountain of evidence, so naturally that is the election that has been at the center of the recent controversy.

Vylo said:

First, we don't oppose all attempts at voter ID requirements. We just want free ID and automatic registration for citizens.

Click to expand...

This ^ isn't really an issue. Both sides are agreeable to what you've referred to here.

The Electoral college robs residents of larger states of their voting power, a fundamental right.

Click to expand...

You'll have to explain that one because it appears that the opposite is the case. And doing away with the Electoral College is generally agreed to have the effect of robbing the smaller states of their voting power.

Silverback said:

Open borders

If you want to influence an election, flood the streets with millions of illegals, and oppose all attempts to enact voter ID requirements.

The left if filthy dirty

It becomes even more obvious when you include their stated desire to end the Electoral College, abolish the filibuster, and stack the Supreme Court.

The left has went to far, and will lose big in the midterms, and in the 2024 presidential election.

Before you say it, I believe Joe Biden won the election.

Click to expand...

Well if that didn't sound like a dog whistle...

Didn't even bother to allude to the op

Silverback said:

Open borders

If you want to influence an election, flood the streets with millions of illegals, and oppose all attempts to enact voter ID requirements.

The left if filthy dirty

It becomes even more obvious when you include their stated desire to end the Electoral College, abolish the filibuster, and stack the Supreme Court.

The left has went to far, and will lose big in the midterms, and in the 2024 presidential election.

Before you say it, I believe Joe Biden won the election.

Click to expand...

Those are not positions of the left so why do you attribute it to them?

Last time I checked, undocumented immigrants weren't allowed to vote in almost all circumstances anyway.

Albion said:

This ^ isn't really an issue. Both sides are agreeable to what you've referred to here.

Click to expand...

Except the GOP fights it every time, and limits access to the ID to suppress voting.

You'll have to explain that one because it appears that the opposite is the case. And doing away with the Electoral College is generally agreed to have the effect of robbing the smaller states of their voting power.

Click to expand...

Without the EC, the smaller states' voters get equal voice with the big state voters.

With the EC, small state voters get a disproportionate amount of voting power. For example, a voter in Wyoming has over 3 times the voting power of a voter in California.

The small states already have their extra representation in the senate, a key lawmaking part of the government, they do not need to have the ability to elect a leader that does not represent the will of the people.

The only other purpose of the EC was to make sure we had a qualified person take office. That has gone out the window and they are now blindly partisan.

Albion said:

If there is evidence of vote fraud in the case of a Republican victory, yes! Of course.

But unless there is evidence, then the question is academic. In the case of Biden's election, there is a mountain of evidence, so naturally that is the election that has been at the center of the recent controversy.

Click to expand...

Such a mountain you can’t produce anything that has substance. 0-80-ish in court. After a year, still losing in court. Biden thumped Trump in a free and fair election.

perplexed said:

Well apparently it is easy to commit fraud and Trump won some states

Click to expand...

While down ticket Republicans actually won elections.

perplexed said:

Well apparently it is easy to commit fraud and Trump won some states

Click to expand...

Remember that I had made reference to evidence.

No one would have paid any mind to Trump's claims of vote fraud if they were completely absent any evidence of fraud, as was the case with Hillary's complaining about her defeat in the 2016 election.

Albion said:

Remember that I had made reference to evidence.

Click to expand...

Yes a veritable “mountain” of evidence resulting in a perfect record of court decisions ….

Vylo said:

Except the GOP fights it every time, and limits access to the ID to suppress voting.

Without the EC, the smaller states' voters get equal voice with the big state voters.

Click to expand...

wrong.

With the EC, small state voters get a disproportionate amount of voting power. For example, a voter in Wyoming has over 3 times the voting power of a voter in California.

Click to expand...

With an election that's decided on total popular vote regardless of where those voters live, no one living in Wyoming or forty other states would ever see a presidential candidate in the flesh. And what those voters need or care about would similarly not matter to the candidates. So, it wouldn't be just Wyoming (the go-to example that's always used) that would be effectively disenfranchised.

All that the candidate would need to do is hit the handful of states with the biggest populations (and be on their TV channels). Practically speaking, most of America would not be involved in the choice of the president

Albion said:

wrong.


With an election that's decided on total popular vote regardless of where those voters live, no one living in Wyoming or forty other states would ever see a presidential candidate in the flesh. And what those voters need or care about would similarly not matter to the candidates. So, it wouldn't be just Wyoming (the go-to example that's always used) that would be effectively disenfranchised.

All that the candidate would need to do is hit the handful of states with the biggest populations (and be on their TV channels). Practically speaking, most of America would not be involved in the choice of the president

Click to expand...

What I'm hearing is: there arent enough people who are like me therefor I deserve a bigger vote.

Thats is really your argument.

Vylo said:

Except the GOP fights it every time, and limits access to the ID to suppress voting.

Click to expand...

The facts are completely opposite to your claim here.

durangodawood said:

What I'm hearing is: there arent enough people who are like me therefor I deserve a bigger vote.

Click to expand...

Well, I cannot control what you think you're hearing.

It's no doubt whatever you had been led to believe was true before having the error in that line of thought explained to you.