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

[HumanHive]

Fire all the existing generals and replace them with loyalists. That is what Lincoln did in the Civil War.

Such as?

 

[MrJokerRager]

Such as?

I'm sure Trump has people who have figured out which colonels or lieutenant generals are loyal enough to get promoted. That is generally easy stuff if previous presidents like Obama did it.

 

[CrystalHead]

Wisconsin Supreme Court Petitioned to Declare All Drop-Box Ballots Illegal, Block Certification​

Ayy that's the kind of thing Barnes was talking about. It'a likely he had some kind of involvement in that.

He seems pretty optimistic about petitioning the Wisconsin SC due to him succesfully doing it on 04 while representing Ralph Nader. Fingers crossed on this one

 

[MrJokerRager]

Looking at right wing commentators, so far black conservative commentators have remained generally very loyal to Trump whereas among white conservative commentators, it's a mixed bag with Styx being more aggressive each day whereas for others, I guess it's fatigue that they are concerned about the 2022 midterms and 2024 elections. At least it helps separate these sheltered retards who think things will be normal in 2024 and democrats will play fair and won't rig.

 

[alreadyhome]

Ayy that's the kind of thing Barnes was talking about. It'a likely he had some kind of involvement in that.

He seems pretty optimistic about petitioning the Wisconsin SC due to him succesfully doing it on 04 while representing Ralph Nader. Fingers crossed on this one

Is Barnes trustworthy? I only recently learned of him.

 

[E Solveig]

Is Barnes trustworthy? I only recently learned of him.

he's funny, but inserts himself into every law aspect of the culture wars

not by commenting on it, like a viva frei, but by being an actual attorney for his team

then never shutting up about it, at all, and making you loathe him instinctively

 

[Gehenna]

he's funny, but inserts himself into every law aspect of the culture wars

not by commenting on it, like a viva frei, but by being an actual attorney for his team

then never shutting up about it, at all, and making you loathe him instinctively

He's also an absolute lolcow who lets his political biases bias the -fuck- out of his predictions.

 

[alreadyhome]

He's also an absolute lolcow who lets his political biases bias the -fuck- out of his predictions.

So have many of his predictions been wrong?

 

[CrippleThreat]

Is Barnes trustworthy? I only recently learned of him.

He's a realist, so while he believes that Trump has a shot at reelection, he doesn't buy the "Kraken" shit and criticizes Trump for picking Rudy, and the legal focus the team is striking at, as they would have a far easier time picking at different avenues, rather than vying to break out a Watergate-tier case.

He just sits down and gives his thoughts on matters, and given how most conservatives want info and commentary that fit their bias, he turns them off, if not outright pisses them off. But, he's just being honest.

However, his open disdain for ACB gets to be pretty cowish at times, tbh.

 

[Gehenna]

So have many of his predictions been wrong?

Everything he said about Barrett has proven wrong, his predictions on the senate sweeping red was flat out wrong.

 

[Eggplant Wizard]

If this happened do you think the courts would wait several months to question why Trump ordered the US military to defacto siege several American states or do you think they might let that case skip to the front of the line?

Do you think if Trump claims he sent the military to interfere in his own election because of widespread fraud the courts are going to give him several months to prove it or do you think that is going to be the very first question they ask him?

If he can't show evidence there was voter fraud on day one in this hypothetical scenario do you think he has any standing to invoke the insurrection act?

I don't think he has any intention of actually doing this by the way. It would be a supremely terrible idea. Consider for a moment the possiblity he actually lost the election then think of what invoking the insurrection act under those circumstances would amount to.

Tearing the data straight from the machines themselves is the only logical step I can see there. That is about the only thing that has been truly obfuscated, as far as I can tell.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Petitioned to Declare All Drop-Box Ballots Illegal, Block Certification​

Gauntlet thrown. Let’s see what happens.

What part of the US military? Name one general unconditionally loyal to Trump.

Name one lower ranking soldier that just got called back home, knowing that his superiors lied to keep him in the field that isn’t. The more important question is how many lower ranking soldiers would LOVE a free promotion fast track.

 

[WeDon'tNeedToWhisper]

AP, who unbiasedly "called" the election, went into damage control by saying that Jill's husband was referring to George Lopez when Biden said "George" instead of Trump. Lopez was allegedly interviewing him, along with some woman. You can see his wife, the highly esteemed Dr. Jill Biden (did you know she's a doctor?? She's a doctor, in case you weren't aware) mouth a word (Trump) to him 3 times.

This is the worst his worst gaffe(?), by far, in my opinion. It was on Election Day, too, in PA! ...it's actually pretty sad.

 

[Tree]

Has anyone involved with the process even attempted to explain the late night spikes in Michigan and Wisconsin? I don't think I've even heard anyone seriously try to explain those yet.

 

[WhimsicalTrolli]

Remember when biden was running for Senate?

 

[JambledUpWords]

Has anyone involved with the process even attempted to explain the late night spikes in Michigan and Wisconsin? I don't think I've even heard anyone seriously try to explain those yet.

This is more in real life, but my husband’s colleague had an explanation that the reason why there was the massive spike was because Trump encouraged his followers to vote in person while Biden encouraged the mail-in system. The big spike was supposedly all mail-in votes. Additionally, USA Today gave the reason for the oddly high turnouts in Wisconsin. Their reasoning was that lots of people registered to vote in August, but the government was too slow to put everyone’s information in, which is why there was 200% turnout in Milwaukee, on top of same-day registration availability. The massive mail-in Biden spike doesn’t make sense since mail-in votes are meant to be taken in before polls close (the spike was long after polls closed, or were supposed to be).

 

[Tree]

This is more in real life, but my husband’s colleague had an explanation that the reason why there was the massive spike was because Trump encouraged his followers to vote in person while Biden encouraged the mail-in system. The big spike was supposedly all mail-in votes. Additionally, USA Today gave the reason for the oddly high turnouts in Wisconsin. Their reasoning was that lots of people registered to vote in August, but the government was too slow to put everyone’s information in, which is why there was 200% turnout in Milwaukee, on top of same-day registration availability. The massive mail-in Biden spike doesn’t make sense since mail-in votes are meant to be taken in before polls close (the spike was long after polls closed, or were supposed to be).

Yeah, I've heard no grounded explanation of those spikes. As you say, the mail ins were supposed to be counted in tandem, not saved for after and all at once, and even if they were it shouldn't result in a spike but rather a steep slope. I've heard nothing except dubious speculation from third parties when it comes to an above board explanation for these spikes, and for some reason it annoys me that I haven't heard a competent excuse for those yet.

 

[6MillionCoofs]

Yeah, I've heard no grounded explanation of those spikes. As you say, the mail ins were supposed to be counted in tandem, not saved for after and all at once, and even if they were it shouldn't result in a spike but rather a steep slope. I've heard nothing except dubious speculation from third parties when it comes to an above board explanation for these spikes, and for some reason it annoys me that I haven't heard a competent excuse for those yet.

Heck, even if there was a reasonable explanation, a sudden spike like that in any field that uses numbers would raise an eyebrow and get everyone to check it.

The fact that people seem really reluctant to check this stuff clearly and transparently tells me all I need to know.

 

[Superman93's Bitch]

AP, who unbiasedly "called" the election, went into damage control by saying that Jill's husband was referring to George Lopez when Biden said "George" instead of Trump. Lopez was allegedly interviewing him, along with some woman. You can see his wife, the highly esteemed Dr. Jill Biden (did you know she's a doctor?? She's a doctor, in case you weren't aware) mouth a word (Trump) to him 3 times.

This is the worst his worst gaffe(?), by far, in my opinion. It was on Election Day, too, in PA! ...it's actually pretty sad.

In the interest of not being an intellectually dishonest Trump sycophant, I'm gonna go ahead and call out shit like this because at this point it's getting really annoying.

The first video is a tossup on being a legit brain fart if the interviewer was indeed a man named George. Whatever. Regarding the second video however: Biden clearly was going to say "This is my son Beau's daughter" or something to that effect but then aborted that train of thought to just say "this is my granddaughter Natalie." This is something you see Trump do in just about every damned interview and speech, so there's no way you aren't familiar with this. The camera then zooms in away from Biden as he says "Oh wait, no we got the wrong one here." When the camera refocuses, you can see the girls have switched places and now Natalie is the one he has his arm around. Finnegan approached him from behind so it's reasonable for him to assume he just didn't see which one it actually was.

With the amount of autism dedicated to trying to analyze things like the Biden laptop, you'd think you guys would be able to figure something as simple like this out. It's obvious what he meant to anyone with two brain cells. Just like it's obvious what he meant when he was saying he had "the largest voter fraud organization" for this election. No, the guy wasn't admitting to anything on air, he was clearly saying that he had built a team for countering it. Obviously recent events call the efficacy of that into question. That's not the point. You know what he was saying. Oh, and spare me your "Freudian slip" shit. You just don't want to be honest about it because the dishonest approach supports your narrative and makes the opposition looks bad. Sound familiar?

The left rightfully earned indignation by doing this for years to Trump (e.g. "they're not sending their best"=racist). There are actual gaffes to laugh at and that should cause concern, but this isn't one of them. I know just by saying that some of you will justify it by saying "Well they are getting a taste of their own medicine hur hur hurr." Well if you feel that way then congrats, because in that case you've earned my disdain as much as the left has, and I'm disgusted by the idea of being associated with you. You're just a snake on a different side of the aisle.

 

[Overly Serious]

Yeah, I've heard no grounded explanation of those spikes. As you say, the mail ins were supposed to be counted in tandem, not saved for after and all at once, and even if they were it shouldn't result in a spike but rather a steep slope. I've heard nothing except dubious speculation from third parties when it comes to an above board explanation for these spikes, and for some reason it annoys me that I haven't heard a competent excuse for those yet.

Does anyone know a good source of raw numbers for all of this data? I would love to do some of my own analysis. For example, we've all heard the "mail in ballots are overwhelmingly Democrat" but I seldom saw numbers on this from other states where we aren't suspecting massive fraud. That would form a very useful basis of comparision. I heard someone say in some PA counties that the mail in ballots were something like 57% Biden. Whilst that's a significant lean towards Democrats considering the general percentages, it's not the 100% we allegedly see from the spike which I think was supposed to be an arrival from Philladelphia (but again, it's vague).

Mail-in ballot requests in PA were 63% Democrat so a lean is expected. But if that spike is 99% Biden something is off.

I really just want some raw data, preferably by hour, but not sure where to look.

 

[Secret Asshole]

Has anyone involved with the process even attempted to explain the late night spikes in Michigan and Wisconsin? I don't think I've even heard anyone seriously try to explain those yet.

I can

BALLOT COUNTING MACHINES GO BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

But seriously, there's no adequate explanation. No amount of mail-ins for Biden like that would have been counted at once. Even if there were a lot of mail in votes, some would be for Trump. Its incredibly suspicious and anomalous and in all my years of watching elections, I've never seen something like this.