Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
8 minutes ago, candide said:

The irony being that election officials in New Hampshire, in order to avoid conspiracy theories, decided not to select the widely used Dominion system. 😁

Instead they chose a new and inexperienced supplier..

 

Terrible. Experience in cheating should be mandatory.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 3
Posted
1 hour ago, impulse said:

the company resolved the issues before the new database came into use ahead of the presidential vote this spring.

 

'Nuff said.

 

States administer elections.

 

In 2022, 70% voted by hand-marked paper ballot, 23% voted by matching which marks a paper ballot, and 7% by Direct Recording Electronic machines.

 

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-ELECTION/VOTING/mypmnewdlvr/

 

 

Harris is plus 7 in this left-leaning state with 4 electoral college votes.

 

Trump is still likely to win. What will yousay  then? "Oh the election was fine."

 

 

Calm down.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
12 hours ago, DougieMax said:

Yes, as it should be, and should have been in 2020 but for massive election interference and fraud.

Sources beside Qanon and Truth Social and Faux entertainment 

  • Agree 1
Posted
15 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Much the same as every MSM, Hillary, and the Dems believed after taking the L in 2016.   There were dozens of MSM articles about the vulnerability of the machines after 2016 and even more after 2018 midterms.   Google them.   Not to mention montages of Dems claiming Trump and the Russkies cheated.   

 

Crickets, though, after 2020.  Why is that?

 

 

Your too impulsive go back to sleep with that imagination 

  • Sad 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Dems outnumber Repubtards

 

so battle of the demorats and repubtards. sounds about right. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, stoner said:

 

so battle of the demorats and repubtards. sounds about right. 

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

  • Love It 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

How about sworn statements from 18 states and 126 congressmen?  Refer to the Texas lawsuit, and the amicus briefs that ensued.

 

Yawn.

 

One state, Texas, suing another state Pennsylvania arguing PA doesn't know how to run an election.

 

Please stop the nonsense.

 

The Supreme Court issued orders on December 11, declining to hear the case on the basis that Texas lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution to challenge the results of the election held by another state.

 

-Wiki

  • Love It 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

 

They all scum. Rich get richer. Our system is totally broken. They are all sell outs to special interest.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

 

More like bedtime blast. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, Irish star said:

Wake and Bake Good Morning, you an Indie huh or just Hating on everything 

 

I mean speak of the devil...the timing on this is glorious.

 

 

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

One state, Texas, suing another state Pennsylvania arguing PA doesn't know how to run an election.

 

Please stop the nonsense.

 

If that's what you believe, you don't have a clue.  It was more than just PA.  And 126 congressmen agreed in a sworn statement, along with 18 states. 

 

And I would add that the SCOTUS specifically stated they didn't judge the merits or the facts of the case.  Just the standing.

Edited by impulse
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

If that's what you believe, you don't have a clue.  It was more than just PA.  And 126 congressmen agreed in a sworn statement, along with 18 states. 

 

And I would add that the SCOTUS specifically stated they didn't judge the merits or the facts of the case.  Just the standing.

 

 

You referred to Texas v. Pennsylvania. No clue what you now mean by "It was more than just PA."?

 

126 "congressmen" signing onto a mad plot to stop the peaceful transfer of power is hardly indicative of anything.

 

"Standing" is important. Even a nine-year-old recognizes how silly it is for one state to try and tell another state how to hold an election.

 

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...