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.
So Jim Jordan, Donald Trump, Mike Johnson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Dan Bongino make up the team to ensure honest elections. You're entirely comfortable with that because it is a group. Yay for you.
I don't believe for a minute you mean a word of it. All I'm seeing is the same justification for dishonest elections that we get from leftwingers/Democrats all the time.
Again have a lovely day.
Much Ado About Doodoo
Neither Hillary nor Gore got more than 50% of the Popular Vote, so the elections of 2000 and 2016 would have been thrown into the House of Representatives under that system anyway. There the Republican candidates would have won 30 to 20.
It is really significant in determining how drastically we're being manipulated that the media ignore this fact and gets us all upset about something that never happened.
President will represent the will of the people regardless of where they live.Am I correct that in 1992 Bill Clinton didn't get 50% of the popular vote either?
Suppose that the presidency was decided by Popular Vote. What is the likelihood that future presidents would favor the most populous areas in his executive decisions? Congress authorizes the money but the Executive Branch spends it in ways that benefit them politically. Certain cities and states would benefit more than they do now while Podunk USA gets virtually ignored.
Not with all of the gerrymandering going on. No way.#1 No.
#2 No.
People vote not real estate.
A third option: States allocate EC vote based on the following:
WW
- 1 EC vote per Congressional District
- 2 EC votes per State based on overall state results.
306>232.100% of 100 people involves 100 people.
1% of one million people involves 10,000 people.
But then math hasn't generally been the strong suit of radical leftists has it?
I swear to god, talking to her is like talking to a 4th grader.Machines are calibrated, go through an independent verification and validation and are locked to ensure they haven’t been tampered with.
Machines give repeatable results.
Something hand counts struggle to match
Are you under the impression that every single vote was counted on election night, say, in 1980, 1984, 1972, etc????It totally amazes me that in today's computer/tech age, we sometimes have to wait days, weeks, or even more than a month to figure out who won an election. We're going backwards, not forwards.
I'm sure the folks in the military will love to know they can't vote since they live in a barracks and don't own land.I rent, but I’ve been working since I was 14 and been paying taxes the whole time. I don’t deserve a vote in your stupid scenario?
If idiocy ever goes to $50 a barrel, can I have drilling rights on your head?Well hey cheating takes planning, time and work. Coming up with 'believable' phony ballots takes time when and where they are needed. And when they have to rig a court to nullify a challenge to the count, that also takes some time to arrange. Plus they have to be sure those machines are scrubbed and unreadable before the checkers get to them. They have to make sure there is no 'evidence' or 'insufficient evidence' of any voter hanky panky no matter how much there actually was. Sort of like planning the perfect murder that even Columbo can't solve. Appreciate how difficult all that is. It takes a lot of time.
Or if some clerk somewhere erased her selections and filled out the ballot themselves.Hate to break it to you, but when you fill out a ballot and hand it to a person it goes into a box and you have no way of knowing if it was counted in the way you filled out the ballot or whether it was counted at all if done with a hand count.
WW
How much you want to bet that if the blob wins, the system will stop being "corrupt"...like a miracle.That's a problem you have.
That does not mean the system is corrupt.
WW
The best idea I have heard is to keep the electoral college the way it is. 270 to win. But you also add in the stipulation that the president-elect must get a plurality of the popular vote (more PVs than anyone else). Meaning that the democratic idea of the leading vote getter is the winner. We've had something like 59 presidential elections. The Electoral college winner not winning the popular vote is pretty rare, I think it has happened like 6 times out of 59. So it wouldn't be invoked that often if it were to come to fruition.
Currently, If nobody gets 270, you have the House pick the President. If no candidate gets both the majority of the electoral vote as well as the plurality of the popular vote, have the House pick the President just like we would anyway.
Are you under the impression that every single vote was counted on election night, say, in 1980, 1984, 1972, etc????
They weren't The call of who won the election was made by statistical analysis of votes cast vs. votes outstanding and in what areas of each state have not reported. As states have become more and more divided along party lines, it makes sense that the outcomes would be delayed since you can no longer make the reliable analysis due to such division.
Mail in ballots should be outlawed with very few exceptionsWe can make it easier on ourselves by counting mail-in ballots as they are received and releasing the results when the polls close.
But Republicans won’t let it happen, then complain that it takes so long.
Mail in ballots were extremely popular in 2020 with a record number of people voting.Mail in ballots should be outlawed with very few exceptions
Get off your fat ass and go vote.Mail in ballots were extremely popular in 2020 with a record number of people voting.
It was safe and convenient.
if you disagree, you are welcome to point out any significant corruption
Get off your fat ass and go vote.
Put the Cheetoes down and go vote in person.
Everyone knows you harvest mail in votes
Should only be done limited reasons.Trump votes by mail in ballot
