2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

[Pointless Pedant]

As if the Republicans have never done this.

They certainly have. Bush Jr passed the Patriot Act. But Trump let that expire this year.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Biden's camp is putting on an "Election Protection Briefing", basically accusing the Trump campaign of filing meaningless lawsuits.

Part of it is propaganda, but some of the lawsuits listed do seem weak. I want a full accusation of raw fraud, throwing out thousands of votes, not just "we think you didn't let us see enough".

 

[Tour of Italy]

@Hellbound Hellhound

Why are you doing this? How are you doing this? How can you come into a thread and claim that it’s an echo chamber that despises honest discussion while having several discussions about that very fact spanning multiple pages?

I’m going to be clear from the get go; I want you to concede the fact that just because people disagree with you, even vehemently, that does not mean they are not interested in having the conversation. People have engaged you more often than not and you trying to claim the moral high ground about this has me a little peeved.

We had a conversation after I tried to engage you in one, but to suggest that your side was friendly to the idea of a conversation is clearly not true.

This is false. You were having a conversation with someone else and I went out of my way to respond to you. Why would I do that if I didn’t want a conversation? Why would the first person be having a conversation to start with if they didn’t want a discussion?

It would be one thing if people were dismissive of you outright or just told you to go away. You didn’t see that. People engaged you with reasoned arguments and long explanations of their positions.

I’m guessing your argument is that strong responses and neg rates or whatever are an attempt to come hard down on dissent, and that we only responded the way we did because you presented an opposing viewpoint. I’m not going to argue that the views in this thread skew a certain way, even heavily, but it’s absurd to claim that we don’t tolerate dissent just because you fail to make a convincing argument about something and people call you out on it.

I didn’t tell you to go away, I didn’t try to shut down discussion, I tried to expand it and explain why you were wrong.

Throughout our exchange, you repeatedly questioned my motivations for wanting to engage in the discussion, despite me making my contentions clear, which suggested to me that you thought there was something untoward about the fact that somebody with a different point of view would decide to present it here (in a board dedicated to discussion, no less).

It’s baffling to me how we can have ten thousand words or more of productive conversation and your takeaway is the sentence or two where I said I thought you were possibly a shill.

I only brought that up because some of your points were so willfully obtuse that I questioned whether you were approaching in good faith.

And what the fuck do you even mean by “untoward”? Not only are you claiming to read my mind and motivations, what your saying makes no goddamn sense.

The simple truth is that I thought you were wrong. I thought your responses were wrong. I thought your responses to my responses were wrong and we kept hashing it out until we came to a point where we had a handful of things we could agree on.

I will give you credit for putting in the effort, but it's not like I didn't do the same, and I'm disappointed that you would speak to me in such disparaging terms when I have been nothing but respectful towards you.

I got heated, sure, but only because I invested literally hours writing responses in a discussion with someone who has different perspective than me only to have the come in and claim that we don’t make an effort to engage different perspectives.

You’re describing a fantasy scenario here where people “don’t tolerate dissent” despite the fact that not only was your dissent tolerated but it was entertained for fucking months.

“Not tolerating dissent” is when the majority of replies are telling you to fuck off, or when attacks are overwhelmingly personal, or when you get banned from the thread or harassed elsewhere on the site. If this has happened as the majority of your interactions, then we can talk, but what I have seen is mostly people engaging you on the merits of your arguments.

“People don’t like being wrong” is hardly a fresh take and it definitely doesn’t mean that this place is an insidious hivemind with an Orwellian desire to crush the wrongthink.

What you’re describing as “not tolerating dissent” is, conveniently, identical to bunch of people tolerating your dissent but caring enough to tell your wrong, often with pages of lively conversation.

I just want you to take a step back and see the irony.

 

[God of Nothing]

The one with the 8-24 hour pauses where magical bags of 100% onesided ballots appear out of thin air, yes that one.

I know, fucking ridiculous isn't it? The only thing that will make this worse is if they actually get away with it. Fat fucking chance of that when even the Democrats' own voters are seeing the bullshit. Chances of this happening ever again so stupidly are low, especially if there are large repercussions.

 

[Tomboy Respecter]

Here’s my thing: isn’t the SCOTUS also having to deal with entrenched Obama appointees who can see their position as a chance for activism, along with Justice Roberts whose position and support is a literal coin flip with every single case?

Right now the court is majority conservative by literally one person. If they can present a baller case, then Trump can actually get a lot of the fraud thrown out on the basis of it being counted way after the deadline for the elections being announced for one candidate or the other.

 

[CheezzyMach]

Republicans don't claim to hate the rich. Republicans don't claim to be fighting big corporations. Democrats do, therefore that's what makes them hypocrites.

A better comparison would be like a super anti-gay Republican being caught with a male hooker.

They do now, meanwhile Trump's handpicked head of the FCC approved both the Disney buyout of Fox and ATT gobbling up Time Warner. All while bitching about Twitter and Big Tech.

 

[Oats12345]

100% agree with this. Too many democratic/republican sycophants in this country willing to do whatever it takes to make THEIR candidate win.

I've argued with retarded conservatives who don't want to really investigate these ballots because they're afraid that they'll actually be legit. They've seen the anti-Trump protests and they know that Trump is a highly divisive character and they're afraid that Trump might not ACTUALLY have enough popular support to win the presidency.

However, I've also argued with retarded libs wanting to dismiss any evidence of fraud they see because Biden winning is all that matters.

tl;dr: all you retarded sycophants in this thread need to stop caring about whether your preferred candidate is winning and care more about uncovering the truth about these mail-in ballots.

Well I made it clear I would like a recount and it Biden legit won after the recount than fine

 

[Fanatical Pragmatist]

@Hellbound Hellhound

Why are you doing this? How are you doing this? How can you come into a thread and claim that it’s an echo chamber that despises honest discussion while having several discussions about that very fact spanning multiple pages?

I’m going to be clear from the get go; I want you to concede the fact that just because people disagree with you, even vehemently, that does not mean they are not interested in having the conversation. People have engaged you more often and not and you trying to claim the moral high ground about this has me a little peeved.



This is false. You were having a conversation with someone else and I went out of my way to respond to you. Why would I do that if I didn’t want a conversation? Why would the first person be having a conversation to start with if they didn’t want a discussion?

It would be one thing if people were dismissive of you outright or just told you to go away. You didn’t see that. People engaged you with reasoned arguments and long explanations of their positions.

I’m guessing your argument is that strong responses and neg rates or whatever are an attempt to come hard down on dissent, and that we only responded the way we did because you presented an opposing viewpoint. I’m not going to argue that the views in this thread skew a certain way, even heavily, but it’s absurd to claim that we don’t tolerate dissent just because you fail to make a convincing argument about something and people call you out on it.

I didn’t tell you to go away, I didn’t try to shut down discussion, I tried to expand it and explain why you were wrong.



It’s baffling to me how we can have ten thousand words or more of productive conversation and your takeaway is the sentence or two where I said I thought you were possibly a shill.

I only brought that up because some of your points were so willfully obtuse that I questioned whether you were approaching in good faith.

What the fuck do you mean by “untoward”? Not only are you claiming to read my mind and motivations, what your saying makes no goddamn sense.

The simple truth is that I thought you were wrong. I thought your responses were wrong. I thought your responses to my responses were wrong and we kept hashing it out until we came to a point where we had a handful of things we could agree on.



I got heated, sure, but only because I invested literally hours writing responses in a discussion with someone who has different perspective than me only to have the come in and claim that we don’t make an effort to engage different perspectives.
You’d describing a fantasy scenario here where people “don’t tolerate dissent” despite the fact that not only was your dissent tolerated but it was entertained for fucking months.

“Not tolerating dissent” is when the majority of replies are telling you to fuck off, or when attacks are overwhelmingly personal, or when you get banned from the thread or harassed elsewhere on the site. If this has happened as the majority of your interactions, then we can talk, but what I have seen,is people engaging you on the merits of your arguments.

“People don’t like being wrong” is hardly a fresh take and it definitely doesn’t mean that this place is an insidious hivemind with an Orto crush the wrongthink.

What you’re describing as “not tolerating dissent” is, conveniently, identical to bunch of people tolerating your dissent but caring enough to tell your wrong, often with pages of lively conversation.

I just want you to take a step back and see the irony.

Just FYI I believe it was revealed on a prior thread that Hellbound Hound is not a fellow Yankeeburger

 

[Foltest]

Where is the fucking livestream?!

 

[CrystalHead]

https://youtu.be/dEe463Y5lAw

Baris is streaming. He seems very sold on the voter fraud allegations.

By the way I don't know if i've missed it but has trump's team said anything about Georgia.

 

[BULLY HUNTER_77]

Here's what I think will happen

1) Biden's campaign calls Pennsylvania
2) Pennsylvania's Republican-controlled legislature says it won't certify the election until accusations of fraud are investigated and the investigators can guarantee the result is genuine, which won't happen
3) The Democrats and Republicans then go to court over whether a state legislature can do this.

All the other disputed states with Republican legislatures do the same thing. It all comes down to a court case at the Supreme Court where Republican appointees are a majority. They most definitely can by any originalist reading of Article 2 Clause 2 of the US Constitution.

The interesting thing about this is how quiet Trump is. His supporters are probably apoplectic and will support any shit he proposes to undo the obvious fraud but he seems to be uncharacteristically restrained.

Guys, you gotta make sure you pay attention to Gustav here. We were skeptical on election night when Trump was ~10% ahead in the rustbelt states and we told him "IDK - it seems like they'd need to commit A LOT of voter fraud to overcome this lead"

Here was his response:

They're going to try

 

[Calandrino]

If you can't hold an election you're a joke country.

Sometimes democracies have a difficult time maintaining an election when they get older. It's totally normal, nothing to be ashamed of, and doesn't make them less of a country. And there are treatment options.

 

[DeadFish]

What about Singapore if Biden gets in?

 

[Foltest]

found a stream on a swedish newsite:

https://www.svd.se/rysare-i-usa-folj-presidentvalet-har

 

[Itu aru kamusu tugeza]

I gotta slightly disagree - I think there's always evidence, always at least one whistle blower willing to testify. There's no way to pull off fraud this big without leaving breadcrumbs.

For example, if they have on-the-spot voter registration, compare their voter registration records to the phonebook. Do these people actually exist? Can they confirm that their vote wasn't tampered with? That sort of thing.

>election tourists

I should've realized sooner.

I was floating around the slim possibility that throwaway Obamaphones were being used for this very purpose, to have easy disposable numbers kept for identity theft purposes. Naturally, since the state has this list of numbers as identification info on their roll, and since the Lifeline program is administered through several smaller state agencies, I thought it was a viable avenue to cheat "verification", but hopefully someone like @It's HK-47 can give feedback to see if this little theory of mine holds any real weight.

Just a thought. I personally believe there's lots of other in-roads malevolent parties can use to muddy things up.

 

[Stoneheart]

What about Singapore if Biden gets in?

they bonk Indonesia on the nose if they come close...

 

[Clockwork_PurBle]

Does anyone have the picture of the chart that's behind Joe in the Kiwi Farm's logo? Thanks in advance.

 

[Tour of Italy]

Just FYI I believe it was revealed on a prior thread that Hellbound Hound is not a fellow Yankeeburger

He’s not he’s English.

To be quite frank, I like @heathercho’s commentary as an outsider with a Southeast Asian perspective and I liked his as well with a European persepective because it’s interesting to see just how wrong someone can be about US-Europe defense policy despite the fact that he lives there.

 

[verissimus]

Does anyone have the picture of the chart that's behind Joe in the Kiwi Farm's logo? Thanks in advance.

Just try googling...well if they still allow it...Wisconsin electoral results. That might do it.

...wow I actually so far can't find images of this right now.

...omfg it's getting buried by "Fact-checking" bullcrap ffs.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

What about Singapore if Biden gets in?

You can try, but I don't think they have as much of an open door policy on immigrants as Merkel's Germany. Also, if the impending Malarkiarchy manages to pass new, sweeping internet censorship via hate speech laws (always a possibility with all the spineless bitches and Quisling Republican congressmen), being in Singapore won't save you from the effects.