Bush92
GHBush1992
- May 23, 2014
- 34,808
- 10,714
- 1,400
Inner city Democrats always steal elections.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Inner city Democrats always steal elections.
How would they know there will be a dozen fraudulent votes out of every million?They know there will be a dozen fraudulent votes out of every million.
It's a cost benefit analysis. Do it's just like the IRS O.K.ing thousands and thousands of fraudulent tax returns, rather than auditing each and every one.
How would they determine that?The election commission found that voter ID and other disenfranchisement laws denied 100,000 voters in florida their right to vote in 2000.
And those are documented numbers.
You mean the made up numbers were written down?The election commission found that voter ID and other disenfranchisement laws denied 100,000 voters in florida their right to vote in 2000.
And those are documented numbers.
Actually I just posted proof that both sides do it. The candidates in the OP, and the man in Georiga who voted his dead mothers ballot for Trump. Both of which got caught.You have, dozens of time.
Nazi talking point #2.
Next you'll claim "Well both sides do it."
You are entirely predictable - you operate from a script provided by hate sites like KOS and CNN.
Extrapolation.How would they know there will be a dozen fraudulent votes out of every million?
When you extrapolate from bullshit, all you get is more bullshit.Extrapolation.
The election commission found that voter ID and other disenfranchisement laws denied 100,000 voters in florida their right to vote in 2000.
And those are documented numbers.
They subpoenaed the voting records, they subpoenaed witnesses, took affidavits, and they held months of hearings.How would they determine that?
You just described Mike Lindell.When you extrapolate from bullshit, all you get is more bullshit.
This fails as a hasty generalization fallacy.
That's how they found fraudulent votes in this particular election. That says nothing about elections as a whole.They subpoenaed the voting records, they subpoenaed witnesses, took affidavits, and they held months of hearings.
Prove it, asshole.You just described Mike Lindell.
how does this show its hard to get away with? all this shows is is a case where it was caughtNo one said it doesn't happen. The argument is that it rarely happens and it's very hard to get away with it. As we see here.
You just described Mike Lindell.
Just google Mike Lindell.Prove it, asshole.
OH MY GOD!!!!!
Telling me to look it up is not proof.Just google Mike Lindell.
His top data analyst, after the August 13th deadline for proving massive voter fraud went by without releasing any of the 37 terabytes of "proof", confessed that it was all bullshit.
No one said it doesn't happen. The argument is that it rarely happens and it's very hard to get away with it. As we see here.
And just like WMD's in Iraq, there are people searching long and hard.how does this show its hard to get away with? all this shows is is a case where it was caught
this is why the audits being done are so important
It's always been the same.... There was not substantial voter fraud, that could over come or change the results of the election. PERIOD. Secretary of States said it, cyber security chief said it, AG Barr said it, Board of elections said it, Court judges said it....Democrats have forced snowflakes to change their claims - It used to be 'NO Election Fraud. Now they have to feebly argue, 'Not ENOUGH election fraud.
3 bogus votes were all that were needed to tip the scales by cheating...and they got JUST enough.
Some times a LITTLE bit of cheating is all you / they need.
Telling you to take your head out of your ass and google the news.Telling me to look it up is not proof.
No it doesn't. Invading Iraq is what proved that.And just like WMD's in Iraq, there are people searching long and hard.
In the end, their failure to find any significant quantities of either, proves the existence of both were limited to just the few examples foud.