Patriot Parties forming in various states by GOP walkaways

[Speedwell]

Once it actually gets to the courts we'll find out. Stay tuned.

You mean you don't know already? It's been close to four months since the election and all you know is that fraud must have occurred somehow because your guy didn't win.

 

[JSRG]

There was a man in Tacoma that ran for a judgeship (IIRC). He had zero qualifications but had the same name as some popular movie star. He didn't put anything in his candidacy other than pay the fee and get on the ballot. He won.

I tried searching around and couldn't find any case of this. This was the best I could find:
https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/politics-government/article25874233.html

Here a guy running for the House of Representatives (John Connelly) had the same name to someone who ran in a neighboring district 2 years ago (and the person who ran in the neighboring district put a lot of money into their campaign, which presumably spilled over into this district).

But John Connelly didn't win the election. It seems there was an open primary, and he got 4th place, not even making it into the run-off. (see Washington House of Representatives District 28 - Ballotpedia)

If this is what you were referring to then the facts you presented were wrong. If you're referring to something else... well, could you give us a source on it?

 

[Direct Driver]

You mean you don't know already? It's been close to four months since the election and all you know is that fraud must have occurred somehow because your guy didn't win.

Nope. That's not my position.

 

[Direct Driver]

I tried searching around and couldn't find any case of this. This was the best I could find:
https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/politics-government/article25874233.html

Here a guy running for the House of Representatives (John Connelly) had the same name to someone who ran in a neighboring district 2 years ago (and the person who ran in the neighboring district put a lot of money into their campaign, which presumably spilled over into this district).

But John Connelly didn't win the election. It seems there was an open primary, and he got 4th place, not even making it into the run-off. (see Washington House of Representatives District 28 - Ballotpedia)

If this is what you were referring to then the facts you presented were wrong. If you're referring to something else... well, could you give us a source on it?

It happened in the 70's. It was hilarious at the time. IIRC there was even a problem seating him because of his lack of credentials.

 

[Speedwell]

Nope. That's not my position.

But you don't know how the "fraud" was perpetrated or by whom.

 

[Direct Driver]

I tried searching around and couldn't find any case of this. This was the best I could find:
https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/politics-government/article25874233.html

Here a guy running for the House of Representatives (John Connelly) had the same name to someone who ran in a neighboring district 2 years ago (and the person who ran in the neighboring district put a lot of money into their campaign, which presumably spilled over into this district).

But John Connelly didn't win the election. It seems there was an open primary, and he got 4th place, not even making it into the run-off. (see Washington House of Representatives District 28 - Ballotpedia)

If this is what you were referring to then the facts you presented were wrong. If you're referring to something else... well, could you give us a source on it?

I found it. It's here: POLITICS / WHY DID HE WIN? : Washington State Puzzled as Voters Oust Chief Justice : What's in a name? A lot, for Charles Johnson. Or maybe the dangerous-dog lobby's bite is worse than its bark.

And what's funny is the stuff I misremembered. Not to mention the year it happened. Those old decades just start to blend together.

 

[Direct Driver]

But you don't know how the "fraud" was perpetrated or by whom.

I don't know. I only suspect. I wasn't there. I figure it is a cross between mail vote fraud and voting machine results manipulation. But it could be something else or more likely a combination of that and other things. Time will tell.

 

[Direct Driver]

You mean you don't know already? It's been close to four months since the election and all you know is that fraud must have occurred somehow because your guy didn't win.

Nope. As I've said repeatedly, I've been on the losing side of a LOT of elections. Heck, I'm a conservative that spent 41 years (as an adult) in Seattle. Until this year, I thought fraud would only work in "close" elections.

 

[Speedwell]

I don't know. I only suspect. I wasn't there. I figure it is a cross between mail vote fraud and voting machine results manipulation. But it could be something else or more likely a combination of that and other things. Time will tell.

Time has already told.

 

[Direct Driver]

Time has already told.

It told who was certified and who was sworn in. The lawsuits will take a bit longer.

I'm not suggesting any of these suits will unseat Harris. But they will at least come to a decision on whether the election was stolen, or at least certain claims involving particular precincts and states are true or not. Like I said before, the lawsuits are a bit like trying to close the barn door after the horse escaped, but the fact is that we want to get more horses. We would like to better ensure they will stay put.

i.e. we'd like to either fix, or ensure the integrity of elections going forward. These suits, if heard to completion, will help with that. You see, people like me really ARE convinced once a court allows the body of evidence to be heard. I'm white and believe that OJ really didn't do it.

I got this from another site:

The Supreme Court has some upcoming cases that will
be hard to ignore.

Sidney Powell’s Court filings:

Wisconsin:
WI Court Filings - DEFENDING THE REPUBLIC

Arizona:
AZ Court Filings - DEFENDING THE REPUBLIC

All - Look under The Battleground tab...
DTR - Home Page - DEFENDING THE REPUBLIC

This site is also worth browsing:

Here Is The Evidence

 

[JSRG]

I found it. It's here: POLITICS / WHY DID HE WIN? : Washington State Puzzled as Voters Oust Chief Justice : What's in a name? A lot, for Charles Johnson. Or maybe the dangerous-dog lobby's bite is worse than its bark.

And what's funny is the stuff I misremembered. Not to mention the year it happened. Those old decades just start to blend together.

Ah, thanks for the link. That gives the important information. So yeah, it wasn't because he had the same name as a movie star, and apparently neither side bothered to give any real campaign at all.

Interestingly, it seems he proved popular after winning. That election was back in 1990, and 30 years later he's still on the Washington Supreme Court (his most recent re-election was in 2020).

 

[Direct Driver]

Ah, thanks for the link. That gives the important information. So yeah, it wasn't because he had the same name as a movie star, and apparently neither side bothered to give any real campaign at all.

Interestingly, it seems he proved popular after winning. That election was back in 1990, and 30 years later he's still on the Washington Supreme Court (his most recent re-election was in 2020).

Yep. In the end it was not "cut and dried". I should point out that although the name was not a "movie star" name, it was the same name as locally famous people. But it shows the same thing that the guy defeated by AOC probably learned. Never assume you are a shoe-in.

 

[Arcangl86]

It told who was certified and who was sworn in. The lawsuits will take a bit longer.

I'm not suggesting any of these suits will unseat Harris. But they will at least come to a decision on whether the election was stolen, or at least certain claims involving particular precincts and states are true or not. Like I said before, the lawsuits are a bit like trying to close the barn door after the horse escaped, but the fact is that we want to get more horses. We would like to better ensure they will stay put.

These cases will all be dismissed as moot. The function of courts isn't to investigate things or give advisory opinions, but rather to settle disputes. The election is over and Biden has been seated, so the relief that the lawsuits want is impossible to grant. Thus they will be dismissed as being moot.

 

[keith99]

Once it actually gets to the courts we'll find out. Stay tuned.

Huh? It has gotten to the courts several times and it has been laughed out for lack of evidence. Or put differently it has and we have. Just not the way Trumpers like.

 

[Direct Driver]

These cases will all be dismissed as moot. The function of courts isn't to investigate things or give advisory opinions, but rather to settle disputes. The election is over and Biden has been seated, so the relief that the lawsuits want is impossible to grant. Thus they will be dismissed as being moot.

Well, the batteries are dead in my crystal ball, so I can't really argue that one way or another. Time will tell.

 

[Direct Driver]

Huh? It has gotten to the courts several times and it has been laughed out for lack of evidence. Or put differently it has and we have. Just not the way Trumpers like.

Actually, there is more to it than that. Did you see the spreadsheet of cases and results? He won some, he lost some. He retracted some, some are ongoing, a common thread was a case being thrown out because of "without standing". But it's not over yet. This stuff needs to be resolved, and not via the court of public opinion.

 

[Arcangl86]

Well, the batteries are dead in my crystal ball, so I can't really argue that one way or another. Time will tell.

No time will not tell. There is only one Constitutional outcome.

 

[keith99]

Actually, there is more to it than that. Did you see the spreadsheet of cases and results? He won some, he lost some. He retracted some, some are ongoing, a common thread was a case being thrown out because of "without standing". But it's not over yet. This stuff needs to be resolved, and not via the court of public opinion.

At the point where there had been 50 cases he won one and that case only mandated that votes in question were kept seperate from others, something that was already being done.

EDIT:

Here is the WIKI for cases filed after the election. Out of 54 total 2 are ongoing and 6 are being appealed. It looks like all the rest went against Trump. One of the 2 that are ongoing is a case filed against the Trump campaign for attempting to disenfranchise black voters in Detroit!

 

[MIDutch]

Personally, I hope all of these rabid right wing political "patriot" parties do form. The more extremist they become, the more REAL conservatives will see them for what they are.

 

[KCfromNC]

Read up on both. It will resolve your confusion on both. I became a student of WWII starting back in 1967. At this point I'll just leave it at that.

I feel little obligation to try and figure out which mash-up of right wing propaganda you're alluding to.