Trump approval rating 2 points higher than Obama for same time in office

[disciple Clint]

The law keeps certain voter information confidential. Some states complied anyway. Why is it that Trump's guys couldn't find any sign of voting fraud there?

The investigation was closed because almost all the fraud they did find was by Trump voters. Would you like to see that?

At some point, you have to make peace with reality.

so are you going to do that now? Good.

 

[disciple Clint]

C'mon. Show us some actual proof that there was a significant number of illegal votes.



No one else can find anything, either. It's time for you to accept that fact.

OH I found plenty did you read any of it? Lots of it is from indisputable sources, so that excuse is out.

 

[Arcangl86]

As I previously posted nothing was done because the states would not cooperate and supply the information so that an investigation could be done, at that point Trump would have had to go to the courts to force the states to comply. I have no doubt that the evidence is there but some people do not want it to be seen.

He's willing to go to court for everything else, why not this?

 

[The Barbarian]

OH I found plenty did you read any of it? Lots of it is from indisputable sources, so that excuse is out.

disciple Clint said: ↑
Voter Fraud Is Real. Here’s The Proof
Well, let's take a look at what your guy has to say...

"This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn’t exist."

If he starts with a lie, that's not a very good sign. People who have actually studied the issue claim that it's very rare, not that it doesn't exist. For example, in 2016, there where three fraudulent votes in the presidential race. They all voted for Trump. This is why Trump quickly abandoned his "investigation" into voting fraud; he didn't like the results.

A recent Salon article

argues that “voter fraud just isn’t a problem in Pennsylvania,” despite evidence to the contrary.

Here's what he calls "proof."

"More than 700 Pennsylvania voters might have cast two ballots in recent elections, the secretary of State said Thursday. "

If you think that's proof, we've located your problem.

The figures show “there’s potential voter fraud in Pennsylvania,” said Carol Aichele,

No wonder you think it's been proven; you'll take guesses and unsupported claims as proof. Let's see what else you think is "proof":

A republican official, without presenting any evidence, thinks 700 people may have voted twice in "recent" elections.

In 2016, 6,115,402 Pennsylvanians voted in one election. Which if the unsupported guess is true, then
0.000114 of the votes were illegal. Which, just like the documented illegal votes for Trump, would not have changed anything. But there's more problems with this. The guess is based on registrations, not actual votes. So if a person registered to vote in one community, moves to another and registers there, that's not an illegal vote, even if the county from which they moved, did not remove them from the rolls. This is a very common dishonesty we see from republicans, who argue that incorrect registration must always mean someone illegally voted.

From the article:

"One definitive study

turned up just 31 instances of credible voter fraud out of one billion ballots cast over a 15-year period."

Even if all those were in the same election, they wouldn't have changed anything.

Your guy's story is more than sloppy research; it's intentional deception on his part. Let's see what else there is...

"Yet as the election approaches, more and more cases of voter fraud are beginning to surface. In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote.

From the link:
'Administrators with the Secretary of State’s Office said the veteran’s vote may have been the result of an election judge’s error, but the station said that still didn’t explain why “dozens of others were still listed as active voters months and sometimes years after their deaths.”'

No mystery. Someone dies. No one thinks to call the county and have his named removed. This, your guy claims to be fraud. You decide how honest that is. The article goes on:

'“Does this show the system is rife for fraud?” Mr. Maass asked the secretary of state.

“It shows that there is the potential for fraud,” Mr. Williams responded.'

So once again, he lied about his "proof."

In Texas, authorities are investigating criminals who are using the technique of “vote harvesting” to illegally procure votes for their candidates. “Harvesting” is the practice of illegally obtaining the signatures of valid voters in order to vote in their name without their consent for the candidate(s) the criminal supports.

And for your guy, the fact that republicans are "investigating" is "proof" that it happens. When you check these claims of "proof", it always ends up like this. And we all know why.


These are just some instances of the way republicans dishonestly claim to have "proof" of voter fraud.

Can you present even one proven case of widespread voter fraud?

 

[disciple Clint]

disciple Clint said: ↑
Voter Fraud Is Real. Here’s The Proof
Well, let's take a look at what your guy has to say...

"This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn’t exist."

If he starts with a lie, that's not a very good sign. People who have actually studied the issue claim that it's very rare, not that it doesn't exist. For example, in 2016, there where three fraudulent votes in the presidential race. They all voted for Trump. This is why Trump quickly abandoned his "investigation" into voting fraud; he didn't like the results.



Here's what he calls "proof."

"More than 700 Pennsylvania voters might have cast two ballots in recent elections, the secretary of State said Thursday. "

If you think that's proof, we've located your problem.



No wonder you think it's been proven; you'll take guesses and unsupported claims as proof. Let's see what else you think is "proof":

A republican official, without presenting any evidence, thinks 700 people may have voted twice in "recent" elections.

In 2016, 6,115,402 Pennsylvanians voted in one election. Which if the unsupported guess is true, then
0.000114 of the votes were illegal. Which, just like the documented illegal votes for Trump, would not have changed anything. But there's more problems with this. The guess is based on registrations, not actual votes. So if a person registered to vote in one community, moves to another and registers there, that's not an illegal vote, even if the county from which they moved, did not remove them from the rolls. This is a very common dishonesty we see from republicans, who argue that incorrect registration must always mean someone illegally voted.

From the article:

Even if all those were in the same election, they wouldn't have changed anything.

Your guy's story is more than sloppy research; it's intentional deception on his part. Let's see what else there is...



From the link:
'Administrators with the Secretary of State’s Office said the veteran’s vote may have been the result of an election judge’s error, but the station said that still didn’t explain why “dozens of others were still listed as active voters months and sometimes years after their deaths.”'

No mystery. Someone dies. No one thinks to call the county and have his named removed. This, your guy claims to be fraud. You decide how honest that is. The article goes on:



So once again, he lied about his "proof."



And for your guy, the fact that republicans are "investigating" is "proof" that it happens. When you check these claims of "proof", it always ends up like this. And we all know why.


These are just some instances of the way republicans dishonestly claim to have "proof" of voter fraud.

Can you present even one proven case of widespread voter fraud?

I am absolutely I or anyone else for that matter cannot provide any evidence that you will accept. The evidence is there for anyone who wants to see it. I have proved my point I am moving on.

 

[tulc]

I am absolutely I or anyone else for that matter cannot provide any evidence that you will accept.

Wait...there was evidence given? The links I saw seemed to be more "They could have done it, but there's no evidence they did." sorts of articles.

The evidence is there for anyone who wants to see it.

Not really, or there would have been people who got in trouble and there doesn't seem to be any of that going on.

I have proved my point I am moving on.

Well...you may be moving on but the part about "proved my point" isn't completely accurate.
tulc(is just sayn')

 

[disciple Clint]

Wait...there was evidence given? The links I saw seemed to be more "They could have done it, but there's no evidence they did." sorts of articles.


Not really, or there would have been people who got in trouble and there doesn't seem to be any of that going on.


Well...you may be moving on but the part about "proved my point" isn't completely accurate.
tulc(is just sayn')

anyone who can read all of the pages that I provided and not find evidence just is simply not trying.

 

[The Barbarian]

I am absolutely I or anyone else for that matter cannot provide any evidence that you will accept.

How about one actual case in which someone proved widespread voter fraud? Why can't you do that?

Not "someone thinks it might have happened." Not "potential for voter fraud." Not "people wrongly registered."

Just show us that that voter fraud actually happens often. Why is that so hard? I think you're starting to figure out why it's so hard to do that.

 

[The Barbarian]

Nothing? No one has anything but "we think it's happening, but we don't have any evidence?

 

[disciple Clint]

Nothing? No one has anything but "we think it's happening, but we don't have any evidence?

are you ever going to give up beating this dead horse? it has gone past ridiculous and is now stuck in ad nauseum.

 

[The Barbarian]

are you ever going to give up beating this dead horse? it has gone past ridiculous and is now stuck in ad nauseum.

As soon as republicans stop claiming that there is widespread voter fraud, we will stop correcting their stories.

 

[tulc]

day 1247 president Obama: 48% approval President Trump: 41.4%.
How Popular Is Donald Trump?
tulc(in case anyone was interested)

 

[disciple Clint]

day 1247 president Obama: 48% approval President Trump: 41.4%.
How Popular Is Donald Trump?
tulc(in case anyone was interested)

TULSA, Okla. —

Preparations continue in Tulsa ahead of President Donald Trump’s rally Saturday at the BOK Center.
The President’s campaign says more than 1 million people have requested tickets to the event. Some of his supporters are getting a start on the weekend by already lining up for Trump’s visit.
TRUMP IN OKLAHOMA: Supporters already lining up for President Donald Trump's rally in Tulsa

 

[The Barbarian]

The President’s campaign says more than 1 million people have requested tickets to the event.

Hey, if Trump said it, it's got to be true, right?

Meantime, Fox News released a new poll...

In the head-to-head matchup, the poll finds Biden leads Trump by a 50-38 percent margin. That 12-point advantage is statistically significant, and up from Biden’s 8-point lead last month (48-40 percent).
Fox News Poll: Biden widens lead over Trump; Republicans enthusiastic, but fear motivates Dems

 

[disciple Clint]

Hey, if Trump said it, it's got to be true, right?

Meantime, Fox News released a new poll...

In the head-to-head matchup, the poll finds Biden leads Trump by a 50-38 percent margin. That 12-point advantage is statistically significant, and up from Biden’s 8-point lead last month (48-40 percent).
Fox News Poll: Biden widens lead over Trump; Republicans enthusiastic, but fear motivates Dems

The only score that means anything at all is the score at the end of the game. Where are all those people who said Trump could not get elected, you dont see them talking about how wrong they were do you.

 

[tulc]

(snip)
The President’s campaign says more than 1 million people have requested tickets to the event. Some of his supporters are getting a start on the weekend by already lining up for Trump’s visit.(snip)

I've said it before: "Who doesn't like watching a free dumpster fire?"
tulc(wonders if they used a couple of hamburdlers to lure him out of his bunker?)

 

[disciple Clint]

I've said it before: "Who doesn't like watching a free dumpster fire?"
tulc(wonders if they used a couple of hamburdlers to lure him out of his bunker?)

How many people are camping out to see Biden if and when he comes out of the basement to see if he has a shadow.

 

[The Barbarian]

The only score that means anything at all is the score at the end of the game. Where are all those people who said Trump could not get elected,

Could you name some of them, and what they said?

I can only point out that Trump's own people are panicking, so maybe that's an important clue.

 

[disciple Clint]

Could you name some of them, and what they said?

I can only point out that Trump's own people are panicking, so maybe that's an important clue.

Can you name the ones that are panicking and what they said?

 

[tulc]

How many people are camping out to see Biden if and when he comes out of the basement to see if he has a shadow.

Apparently 11% more then want to see president Trump:

In the Democracy Fund + UCLA Nationscape survey, 50 percent of respondents said that they would vote for Biden, while 39 percent said that they would vote for Trump.

found here: Biden leads Trump by 11 points nationally: poll
tulc(since disciple Clint asked)