Nearly 80% of Americans say Biden won White House, ignoring Trump's refusal to concede: Reuters/Ipsos poll

[Jingthing]

11 hours ago, GeorgeEboy said:

The last election was decided by approximately 70,000 votes. And they were real votes as real as the 150,000 now giving the advantage to the other side. With again 4 million more votes to the democratic candidate by the popular vote.

Over five million now. 

[wwest5829]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Incorrect. They almost always start much, much earlier. 

Yes, I was trying to raise my question for those who think everyone waited for the official set certification of the votes or the Electoral College.

[Jingthing]

14 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

on CNN and in newspapers is has been said severel times

that 48 out of  50 states enjoy winner take all or first past the pole (roughly same same)

 

which two states do not apply winner take all,

and how do these two states do it?

They are allowed to make that rule for themselves. That's how. 

But the trouble with that is that it's kind of a game of chicken. 

If California and New York did it and others didn't, it would mean there would never be a democratic president again (until a major future realignment).

Really the entire electoral college should go. But that's almost impossible to pull off.

[Phoenix Rising]

Karl Rove explains that Joe Biden beat Trump in Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal

 

"Karl Rove, a Fox News contributor and one of the most prominent Republican strategists, gently told President Trump and his supporters in a Wall Street Journal op-ed Wednesday evening that the presidential race is over and Trump lost. Republicans did much better than expected on Election Day, but "the White House changed hands," he writes. No amount of legal jujitsu will change that, Rove explained."

[jcsmith]

11 hours ago, polpott said:

Not if the Democrats win the 2 senatorial run offs in Georgia. Senate tied, Harris takes the seat.

 

Democrats won the state, can they win the senate?

They've got a shot to tie it up and then have the VP as the tie-breaker. But it's an uphill climb for them in the senate. Middle America is deep red. And while you could gather up most of those states together and they might equate to California population wise (not sure how accurate that is but it seems about correct) they'll result in many times more seats. I get why it was done that way when the government was formed, they were trying to keep smaller states in the union, but as population has grown it just becomes more and more archaic.

[Masterton]

49 minutes ago, stevenl said:

As many have indicated, the ruling as mentioned in this link will most likely be overturned. Not many votes in it, so no effect on me the result.

I have deleted your other links, giuliani's youtube is not a reliable source.

 

No surprises at all that a consistently Anti Trump poster would delete links that contradict the narrative that the Trump legal team has no case. Here is the point that you're missing. The narrative that the Democrat mainstream media is pushing is that the Trump legal team's cases are "baseless" and "without evidence". I stated correctly that they claim to have plenty of evidence. That claim was disputed and links were requested to back that up. I provide links that show a member of Trump's legal team discussing the basis of the cases and the evidence they have amassed and you delete the links as not being a reliable source (??!!). Wow. So tell me then, who is a more reliable source to talk about the cases being filed and the evidence being submitted than a member of the Trump legal team ?? How can Rudy Giuliani not be a credible source to discuss the evidence he is presenting to court ?? Ludicrous logic. This is nothing more than selective censorship.

 

Furthermore you are being disingenuous by describing the links as "Giuiani's Youtube". He is being interviewed by cable news channels in the USA, it is their channels not his. You and others claim that the other ruling will "likely be overturned" with "not many votes in it". But listening to what is being said in the interviews contradicts this. They are saying the amount of disputed ballots are in the hundreds of thousands, 600k I think it was. So who is right ? The legal experts and lawyers involved in the case or the pro Dem posters on TVF ?? It is not relevant as to whether it gets overturned or not, only that there is merit to the case and it should be heard. Why is it that people can't wait and see what pans out ?? If you are all so sure that everything was above board and the result will not change then you should be welcoming the challenges as they may likely result in your favour and add credibility to the results. It is very bizarre the way people are trying to discredit and censor the legal challenges, it just adds suspicion.

 

 

[Throatwobbler]

2 hours ago, Masterton said:

 

My info comes straight from the horses mouth, the Trump legal team filing the cases. Or is that source not "credible" enough ? I have also included a clip of former judge and independent counsel Ken Starr weighing in on the Pennsylvania constitutional issue as some posters on the forum seem to think they know more than he does. The Democrat media is promoting a false narrative that there is "no evidence" but they actively censor anyone who is willing to come on and present it. Strange that.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zWufjEbzjY - Penn. & Mich. still in Play for Trump says Rudy Giuliani Part 1 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1k05pyx75k - Penn. & Mich. still in Play for Trump says Rudy Giuliani Part 2

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xurB9TiCWE - Giuliani presents evidence for Trump's legal battle

 

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6208240789001 - Starr: Pennsylvania mail-in ballot deadline extension a 'constitutional travesty'

OMG you are quoting Giuliani and expect to be taken seriously? You are hilarious.

Edited November 12, 2020 by Throatwobbler

[Throatwobbler]

21 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

No surprises at all that a consistently Anti Trump poster would delete links that contradict the narrative that the Trump legal team has no case. Here is the point that you're missing. The narrative that the Democrat mainstream media is pushing is that the Trump legal team's cases are "baseless" and "without evidence". I stated correctly that they claim to have plenty of evidence. That claim was disputed and links were requested to back that up. I provide links that show a member of Trump's legal team discussing the basis of the cases and the evidence they have amassed and you delete the links as not being a reliable source (??!!). Wow. So tell me then, who is a more reliable source to talk about the cases being filed and the evidence being submitted than a member of the Trump legal team ?? How can Rudy Giuliani not be a credible source to discuss the evidence he is presenting to court ?? Ludicrous logic. This is nothing more than selective censorship.

 

Furthermore you are being disingenuous by describing the links as "Giuiani's Youtube". He is being interviewed by cable news channels in the USA, it is their channels not his. You and others claim that the other ruling will "likely be overturned" with "not many votes in it". But listening to what is being said in the interviews contradicts this. They are saying the amount of disputed ballots are in the hundreds of thousands, 600k I think it was. So who is right ? The legal experts and lawyers involved in the case or the pro Dem posters on TVF ?? It is not relevant as to whether it gets overturned or not, only that there is merit to the case and it should be heard. Why is it that people can't wait and see what pans out ?? If you are all so sure that everything was above board and the result will not change then you should be welcoming the challenges as they may likely result in your favour and add credibility to the results. It is very bizarre the way people are trying to discredit and censor the legal challenges, it just adds suspicion.

 

 

They can claim whatever they like. In court so far they have been able to provide any evidence. That is the simple fact that seems to be beyond your grasp.

  I could claim that I have been to the moon but you would demand evidence. Claiming something does not make it true. Please try and understand that.

[Phoenix Rising]

30 minutes ago, Masterton said:

It is very bizarre the way people are trying to discredit and censor the legal challenges, it just adds suspicion.

Suspicion about what, that the crushing victory of President-Elect Biden over trump is due to a big conspiracy which would have had to involve a number of GOP governors and state administrations?

If you think that is even remotely plausible you really have lost touch with reality. 

[Masterton]

22 minutes ago, Throatwobbler said:

OMG you are quoting Giuliani and expect to be taken seriously? You are hilarious.

 

16 minutes ago, Throatwobbler said:

They can claim whatever they like. In court so far they have been able to provide any evidence. That is the simple fact that seems to be beyond your grasp.

  I could claim that I have been to the moon but you would demand evidence. Claiming something does not make it true. Please try and understand that.

 

Basic comprehension clearly not your strength I see. I was not quoting anyone, I was (as I repeatedly said, do try to keep up please) that according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence. This is disputed by the Democrat sycophants on TVF as they subsribe to the MSM narrative that the legal challenges are baseless and they have no evidence. This is false. Now, as you clearly can't follow simple deductive reasoning, Rudy Giuliani (your personal opinion of the man is irrelevant) is a member of the Trump legal team, therefore that would make him a credible source to discuss the evidence that they are taking to court to file their case. Stop trying to twist my words in order to fit your delusional narrative. It is pathetic. It is pointless trying to debate this with you. Feel free to continue wobbling your throat all you like, but I will no longer be responding.

[Phoenix Rising]

Arizona's GOP Attorney General: Trump Likely Lost State, No Evidence Of Fraud

 

"Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, said Wednesday he believed President Donald Trump would likely lose the state and that there were no “facts” to back up claims of rampant voter fraud, the latest in a small group of GOP officials to undercut the White House line following Trump’s loss to President-elect Joe Biden.

“Right now, there is less than 50,000 votes to count, and the president would have to get about 65% of them to win Arizona, so it does appear that Joe Biden will win Arizona,” Brnovich told Fox Business anchor Neil Cavuto on Wednesday. “If indeed there was some great conspiracy, it apparently didn’t work.”"

 

Hands up any trump supporter who still hasn't heard the fat lady hit the High C!

[Throatwobbler]

2 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

 

Basic comprehension clearly not your strength I see. I was not quoting anyone, I was (as I repeatedly said, do try to keep up please) that according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence. This is disputed by the Democrat sycophants on TVF as they subsribe to the MSM narrative that the legal challenges are baseless and they have no evidence. This is false. Now, as you clearly can't follow simple deductive reasoning, Rudy Giuliani (your personal opinion of the man is irrelevant) is a member of the Trump legal team, therefore that would make him a credible source to discuss the evidence that they are taking to court to file their case. Stop trying to twist my words in order to fit your delusional narrative. It is pathetic. It is pointless trying to debate this with you. Feel free to continue wobbling your throat all you like, but I will no longer be responding.

They claim they have evidence but so far have not been able to produce anything. I am glad that you are not responding because it really is painful having to deal with people like yourself. Giuliani and Trump are proven liars. If you believe them then you really are far to gullible.

 

[Throatwobbler]

1 minute ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Arizona's GOP Attorney General: Trump Likely Lost State, No Evidence Of Fraud

 

"Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, said Wednesday he believed President Donald Trump would likely lose the state and that there were no “facts” to back up claims of rampant voter fraud, the latest in a small group of GOP officials to undercut the White House line following Trump’s loss to President-elect Joe Biden.

“Right now, there is less than 50,000 votes to count, and the president would have to get about 65% of them to win Arizona, so it does appear that Joe Biden will win Arizona,” Brnovich told Fox Business anchor Neil Cavuto on Wednesday. “If indeed there was some great conspiracy, it apparently didn’t work.”"

 

Hands up any trump supporter who still hasn't heard the fat lady hit the High C!

There are still a few in denial who think that Giuliani will save them. 

[Silurian]

Breaking News! Even Donald knows he has lost. He is currently planning on running again in 2024. Woohoo! I guess he wants to lose twice!

 

Trump endorses McDaniel to remain RNC chair, ponders 2024 run

 

Quote

A source familiar with internal discussions said Trump was telling allies he planned to run for president in 2024 and could announce it by the end of the year.

 

[Phoenix Rising]

3 minutes ago, Masterton said:

 

 

Basic comprehension clearly not your strength I see. I was not quoting anyone, I was (as I repeatedly said, do try to keep up please) that according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence. This is disputed by the Democrat sycophants on TVF as they subsribe to the MSM narrative that the legal challenges are baseless and they have no evidence. This is false. Now, as you clearly can't follow simple deductive reasoning, Rudy Giuliani (your personal opinion of the man is irrelevant) is a member of the Trump legal team, therefore that would make him a credible source to discuss the evidence that they are taking to court to file their case. Stop trying to twist my words in order to fit your delusional narrative. It is pathetic. It is pointless trying to debate this with you. Feel free to continue wobbling your throat all you like, but I will no longer be responding.

"Basic comprehension clearly not your strength I see. I was not quoting anyone, I was (as I repeatedly said, do try to keep up please) that according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence. This is disputed by the Democrat sycophants on TVF as they subsribe to the MSM narrative that the legal challenges are baseless and they have no evidence. This is false."

 

Apparently the courts disagree with you and Giuliani as the legal challenges are dismissed as soon as they're filed, but hey, don't let that fact disrupt your false narrative. "Democratic sycophants"? Yes, the Dems, who look at the election result and see this slew of frivolous, baseless and lame lawsuits for what they are are sycophants, while the trump base who laps up every pathetic lie coming out of trump's mouth are independent critical thinkers!

 

" It is pathetic. It is pointless trying to debate this with you. Feel free to continue wobbling your throat all you like, but I will no longer be responding."

OK then, if you've got nothing I agree it's better for you to quit. 

 

 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Masterton said:

 

My info comes straight from the horses mouth, the Trump legal team filing the cases. Or is that source not "credible" enough ? I have also included a clip of former judge and independent counsel Ken Starr weighing in on the Pennsylvania constitutional issue as some posters on the forum seem to think they know more than he does. The Democrat media is promoting a false narrative that there is "no evidence" but they actively censor anyone who is willing to come on and present it. Strange that.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zWufjEbzjY - Penn. & Mich. still in Play for Trump says Rudy Giuliani Part 1 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1k05pyx75k - Penn. & Mich. still in Play for Trump says Rudy Giuliani Part 2

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xurB9TiCWE - Giuliani presents evidence for Trump's legal battle

 

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6208240789001 - Starr: Pennsylvania mail-in ballot deadline extension a 'constitutional travesty'

Wow! Ken Starr and Rudolph Giuliani. That's Ken Starr of Whitewater fame who later got fired for malfeasance at Baylor University.

And in a previous Giuliani worked hand-in-glove with Andrii Derkach in investigating the Bidens. Dirkach was designated a Russian agent by the State Dept.

To start with the last one first. There is a movement that has been circulating among extreme right groups such as the Federalist Society that the State Legislature cannot be overruled by the judiciary even if it is violating the state constitution. In the past it was considered nonsense. Now with an extreme right Supreme Court in place it might pass muster. But even if it does, and those mail-in ballots that arrived during the extension are thrown out, it it will have no practical effect. Only 10000 mail-in ballots will be affected and they haven't even been tallied yet. So that's not going to affect Biden's 50,000 vote margin.

 

As for the interview with Giuliani. It's conducted by a reporter from OAN. 

Here's what mediabiafactcheck.com says about OAN"

Overall, we rate One America News Questionable based on far-right bias, lack of sourcing, promotion of conspiracy theories, and propaganda as well as numerous failed fact checks. OAN is not a credible news source.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/one-america-news-network/

The interviewer starts with questions based on unproven assertions about "voting irregularities" that she accepts as truth.. Giuliani claims that Republicans weren't allowed to observe the count of the mail-in ballots. This is a lie. There exists a very funny interrogation by a judge of one of Trump's lawyers who after being cornered admits that a 'non-zero" number of Republicans were observing the ballot count.  I could go on from there but virtually everything that Giuliani says are lies that have mostly been debunked.

 

 

[Phoenix Rising]

7 minutes ago, Silurian said:

Breaking News! Even Donald knows he has lost. He is currently planning on running again in 2024. Woohoo! I guess he wants to lose twice!

 

Trump endorses McDaniel to remain RNC chair, ponders 2024 run

 

 

Gonna be tough for him to run from a jail cell he'll share with a 6'5" 300 lbs black guy with an attitude.

[Buba Ho Tep]

I don't trust any polls any longer.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, ExpatOK said:

The pandemic started in a country with central government.

And how's it doing now over there?

[Scott]

Conspiracy post and replies reported and removed.

 

[Meat Pie 47]

Just in

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/us-election-results-news-live-biden-trump-map-b1721639.html

So his biggest law firm is pulling out of Arizona already.

[cdemundo]

4 hours ago, Masterton said:

 

 

Basic comprehension clearly not your strength I see. I was not quoting anyone, I was (as I repeatedly said, do try to keep up please) that according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence. This is disputed by the Democrat sycophants on TVF as they subsribe to the MSM narrative that the legal challenges are baseless and they have no evidence. This is false. Now, as you clearly can't follow simple deductive reasoning, Rudy Giuliani (your personal opinion of the man is irrelevant) is a member of the Trump legal team, therefore that would make him a credible source to discuss the evidence that they are taking to court to file their case. Stop trying to twist my words in order to fit your delusional narrative. It is pathetic. It is pointless trying to debate this with you. Feel free to continue wobbling your throat all you like, but I will no longer be responding.

"according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence"

No one is disputing that the Trump team claims to have a lot of evidence.  What people are saying is that several of the Trumpist claims have already been thrown out of court for lack of evidence.   You say the "Trump team claims to have a lot of evidence" which you claim is supported by the fact that...."the Trump team claims to have a lot of evidence".

[pomchop]

and 20% of americans are delusional hard core trumpers cult members that wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on their behind

[jcsmith]

12 minutes ago, pomchop said:

and 20% of americans are delusional hard core trumpers cult members that wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on their behind

I think most of those guys even know the truth. They just think they are at a WWE match and somehow Trump is the good guy wrestler. They just want to boo, and spit, and convince themselves that their Heroes' words are true. Though I could be wrong and maybe they still believe in Santa Claus.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, cdemundo said:

"according to the Trump legal team, they had a lot of evidence"

No one is disputing that the Trump team claims to have a lot of evidence.  What people are saying is that several of the Trumpist claims have already been thrown out of court for lack of evidence.   You say the "Trump team claims to have a lot of evidence" which you claim is supported by the fact that...."the Trump team claims to have a lot of evidence".

Mr. Trump was ranting for many months that the only way he could lose was by fraud. So we knew many months ago that was going to be his strategy if he lost. In other words, he's accused people of crimes first and now is scrambling for evidence that does not exist. Judges see right through this scam and are throwing out his cases very quickly. The thing is, judges require EVIDENCE. Sure every election in history has minor incidents of irregularities. The big question is if there is some kind of mass democratic conspiracy action that illegally turned the election that was BIG ENOUGH (enough votes!) that if detected and reversed would give Mr. Trump the win. There is no such thing. It only exists as a fake talking point narrative of Mr. Trump's propaganda machine. There is no evidence of such a thing.

 

If anything the evidence that there is for a mass conspiracy falls squarely towards Mr. Trump. It is Mr. Trump that installed a yes man post master general that slowed down the U.S. postal service just in time for one of the most important elections in American history that just so happened to have an unusually high number of mail in ballots because the U.S. is in the middle of a severe pandemic, that coincidentally (?) is completely out of control under the failed leadership of the outgoing president's administration.

 

It also can't be mentioned often enough that IF there was such a mass fraud effort by the democrats, why did they lose many seats in the house, and fail to take over the senate? So according to Mr. Trump not only is the democratic party guilty of massive fraud, they are also very bad at it. 

 

In other words, there is no there.

President Elect Biden won fair and square.

The final electoral total for Biden will likely be 306, hilariously the same high number that Mr. Trump (incorrectly) called a landslide margin.

President Elect Biden also has a very large popular vote lead in his total representing the most votes in American history.

Yes, not only did President Elect Biden win it turns out his win isn't even close.

This is not Florida in 2000 that had a margin of 500 votes.

Mr. Trump would need to turn around multiple states with much much larger margins than that.

Short of a coup, Mr. Trump turning over this result is damn near impossible.

It's time for Mr. Trump and his fans to give up this farce that he has a chance to remain president.

Edited November 12, 2020 by Jingthing

[Tie Dye Samurai]

On 11/10/2020 at 10:53 PM, Barnabe said:

Trump was investigated for 4 years for the supposed Russia collusion, but now we can't spend a couple of months investigating fraud reports?

A transition of power was not held up during any of the Russia collusion investigations, Trump was in the White House talking to Obama on November 10 2016...not even close to being the same thing. 

[placeholder]

*Deleted post edited out*

 

Actually, I've been finding that ignorance of American law and belief in fake media is often a reasonably sure indicator of a Trump voter.

Here's A Running List Of False And Misleading Information About The Election

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/janelytvynenko/election-rumors-debunked

[bendejo]

8 hours ago, Silurian said:

Breaking News! Even Donald knows he has lost. He is currently planning on running again in 2024. Woohoo! I guess he wants to lose twice!

Trump endorses McDaniel to remain RNC chair, ponders 2024 run

Three things:

1- would he be able to run for president from inside a prison?

2- would he be able to run from a foreign country?

3- if either above situation does not come to pass,  it's pretty damned certain it will NOT be as a Republican

And there are the questions of health, mortality, and the ravages of age. 

 

Teddy Roosevelt split off and started his own Bullmoose Party.  DT will start the Bull (insert vulgar word for doo-doo here) party.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2020 by bendejo

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Three things:

1- would he be able to run for president from inside a prison?

2- would he be able to run from a foreign country?

3- if either above situation does not come to pass,  it's pretty damned certain it will NOT be as a Republican

And there are the questions of health, mortality, and the ravages of age. 

 

Teddy Roosevelt split off and started his own Bullmoose Party.  DT will start the Bull (insert vulgar word for doo-doo here) party.

 

 

I don't have the answer to those questions, but they remind me of the historic "Know Nothing" party (great name, huh?) in the U.S. that has at least some similarities to Mr. Trump's political movement (which has widely been described as a hostile takeover of the republican party). 

 

So on the question of mortality, perhaps we can look forward for the formation of the No Pulse Party.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing

[PhonThong]

Let's see, Trump got 49.7% of the votes and we are suppose to believe that 80% of Americans think Biden won the election?  Sorry, just doesn't pass the smell test.