Do Americans Still Trust Our Elections?

[Rigby5]

A legacy of Trump

Spread lies to cause mistrust in our free elections

While I would tend to trust the 2020 election, is it only because I think more evidence of anything widespread would have come out by now.
Cheating is getting much easier, not harder.

For example, there is absolutely no reason at all for the use of electronic voting machines.
They not only could easily be preprogrammed to change votes, but hide ballots.
And they also are easily hacked on the fly, through wifi, USB, or ethernet.

The trouble with mail in ballots is that spouses, landlords, elderly facilities, etc., can coerce or defraud easily.

And it clearly is illegal to prevent the 40 million ex-felons from voting.
That is "taxation without representation", which is clearly illegal.

Elections are not currently all that good or "free".
All we have to do is remember the Florida election of 2000 to be reminded of how bad they can easily be.

 

[AntonToo]

Do Americans Still Trust Our Elections?​

Still? For three years Republicans were deperately looking for evidence of any electoral fraud. Count, after recount, review, after review found NOTHING of note.

By all reason Americans ought to have more confidence than ever in the integrity of our elections.

 

[eagle7-31]

If you don't trust elections because of 2020, you are beyond a dumbshit.
Because of Trump's lies there has never been an election examined more thoroughly than 2020.
The results are our elections sytem worked in 2020.
Trump paid millions to lawyers and data compnies to find errors in the election.
Despite being paid millions, they could not find errors.

Here is the Evidence

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.

hereistheevidence.com

Guess again. Most of the courts refused to hear documented evidence of fraud.

 

[eagle7-31]

Still? For three years Republicans were deperately looking for evidence of any electoral fraud. Count, after recount, review, after review found NOTHING of note.

By all reason Americans ought to have more confidence than ever in integrity of our elections.

For the head in the sand crowd maybe.

 

[rightwinger]

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials," the Post reports. "Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton's chances."

Here is the Evidence

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.

hereistheevidence.com

Guess again. Most of the courts refused to hear documented evidence of fraud.

They rejected evidence provided as inconsequential

If your assembled evidence can’t even get you to trial, it is clear you have no case

 

[eagle7-31]

And now you don't trust them at all.

Cool... Do you think it's a coincidence that you stopped trusting them when you stopped winning?

Hardly. Had no use for Clinton or BO but they both won. Will NEVER say the same for Thief in Chief Biden.

 

[westwall]

Ahhh, look at the Chinese bootlicker lying like a rug!

Even your corrupt fbi said there was no help to Trump

Hillary questioned whether a President who used Russian intervention to win was legitimate

Liar! Or do you prefer "LAIR!"

 

[eagle7-31]

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials," the Post reports. "Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton's chances."


They rejected evidence provided as inconsequential

If your assembled evidence can’t even get you to trial, it is clear you have no case

Save it. There was documented evidence which the courts refused to hear. And since you are still pushing the phony Russian hoax still that just proves what a dim bulb you and the rest of the looney are.

 

[Blaster]

I don't recognize Joe Biden as a duly elected President. He has hurt this country and also is corrupt.

 

[eagle7-31]

All total crap, brainwash functional moron. Our election officials and law enforcement say it was probably the most secure election ever and none of your crap has ever been brought up in court because that would be a crime. Change the channel and try reality, brainwashed functional anti American scumbag...

Gee another left wing lying dirtbag heard from. LOL

 

[AntonToo]

For the head in the sand crowd maybe.

No worries Trumper nutbag, nobody is accusing you of being reasonable.

 

[westwall]

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials," the Post reports. "Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton's chances."

The same agencies that were proven to lie you mean?

DISMISSED!

 

[eagle7-31]

No worries Trumper nutbag, nobody is accusing you of being reasonable.

Coming from your ilk that is a compliment.

 

[AntonToo]

Coming from your ilk that is a compliment.

ok Trumper nutbag.

Enjoy the "compliments" as people laugh at you crazy retards.

 

[eagle7-31]

ok Trumper nutbag.

Enjoy the "compliments" as people laugh at you crazy retards.

From the looney left. LOL

 

[Marener]

Here is the Evidence

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.

hereistheevidence.com

Guess again. Most of the courts refused to hear documented evidence of fraud.

You didn’t have documented evidence of fraud. You had a bunch of nonsense. You don’t need an evidentiary hearing for paranoid ramblings of Trump cultists.

I’m serious. There were so many examples of this. There we “documented evidence of fraud” when someone saw a van at a voting center take boxes in. That’s it.

That’s not fraud. That’s lunch being delivered to the workers.

 

[Lastamender]

You didn’t have documented evidence of fraud. You had a bunch of nonsense. You don’t need an evidentiary hearing for paranoid ramblings of Trump cultists.

I’m serious. There were so many examples of this. There we “documented evidence of fraud” when someone saw a van at a voting center take boxes in. That’s it.

That’s not fraud. That’s lunch being delivered to the workers.

This is for aggregating publicly available items of evidence that would be admissible in court, not general election news stories or updates.

 

[Marener]

This is for aggregating publicly available items of evidence that would be admissible in court, not general election news stories or updates.

You can admit an affidavit saying they saw boxes going into the voting center.

But since that’s not evidence of fraud, the lawsuit will be properly dismissed. Even if we all accept this evidence as true, it doesn’t amount to a case.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials," the Post reports. "Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton's chances."

1. the DNC is a private organization apart from the government. Do you think they weren’t trying to hack the RNC?

2. “Connections to the Russian government”… what kind? Janitor?

3. Which US officials opinions are being sourced? With How often US intelligence was wrong (or providing intentional cover) about the Hunter Biden story, that holds little weight…So you’re just sourcing random officials who easily could have political activist motives?

The 2016 election was lost by Hilary straight up, and she questioned American election integrity by calling Trump illegitimate.

Now, you’re whining that Trump is questioning American election integrity when your candidate did it just last election. Do you suffer from memory loss?

 

[vegas giants]

Here is the Evidence

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.

hereistheevidence.com

Guess again. Most of the courts refused to hear documented evidence of fraud.

Because of an organized conspiracy?