What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

notobtuse wrote: »

Running the country into the ground, perhaps. But they sure are working hard to ensure audits don't happen, and ways to make future elections not very secure.

In what way are they running it into the ground? And how many election lawsuits have to be thrown out by the courts before you stop believing the election was not secure?

notobtuse wrote: »

Could you be so kind as to highlight and summarize the point you are trying to make?

Which part of the article that you read at a world record pace made you laugh?

Deleted User wrote: »

In what way are they running it into the ground? And how many election lawsuits have to be thrown out by the courts before you stop believing your the election was not secure?

Crisis on the border they have no intention on fixing. Illegal aliens invading the country at the highest levels in decades. Huge increases in gasoline, fuel oil, and other goods that hurt the middle class and the poor most. No more energy independence. Increasing interest rates. Terrible international decisions. That's just a few.

You need forensic audits to get the the true bottom of the problems. Maybe they will prove Biden really was elected. But why fight the audits?. Don't you want to prove us on the right wrong and put the fears of half the nation at ease that democrats might have stolen the election?

Deleted User wrote: »

Which part of the article that you read at a world record pace made you laugh?

I've read that Bloomberg article before. Of course Bloomberg would say that. He ran for president as a democrat and hates Trump. It is proven his publication can't be unbiased in any reporting regarding Trump. There was even calls from liberal news media for Bloomberg media to not report on Trump because of Mike's hatred of him.

notobtuse wrote: »

Crisis on the border they have no intention on fixing. Illegal aliens invading the countries at the highest levels in decades. Huge increases in gasoline, fuel oil, and other goods that hurt the middle class and the poor most. No more energy independence. Increasing interest rates. Terrible international decisions. That's just a few.

Are you aware of what the word "source" is? Knock yourself out.

notobtuse wrote: »

You need forensic audits to get the the true bottom of the problems.

You need there to be a problem first.

The following people said it was the most secure election ever:

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky
U.S. Election Assistance Commission Chair Benjamin Hovland
National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) President Maggie Toulouse Oliver
National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) President Lori Augino
Escambia County (Florida) Supervisor of Elections David Stafford
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky
Members of the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC) – Chair Brian Hancock (Unisyn Voting Solutions), Vice Chair Sam Derheimer (Hart InterCivic), Chris Wlaschin (Election Systems & Software), Ericka Haas (Electronic Registration Information Center), and Maria Bianchi (Democracy Works)

https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12/joint-statement-elections-infrastructure-government-coordinating-council-election

Why are you disagreeing with the experts? Why do you want to waste taxpayer money on a conspiracy?

The only evidence of voting irregularities is of voter suppression by the republicans, and it's quite common. Should we start there?

notobtuse wrote: »

I've read that Bloomberg article before. Of course Bloomberg would say that. He ran for president as a democrat and hates Trump. It is proven his publication can't be unbiased in any reporting regarding Trump. There was even calls from liberal news media for Bloomberg media to not report on Trump because of Mike's hatred of him.

Wow. So you read that article and therefore read the source within the article. Are you saying that Bloomberg bribed all of those people to say that, or what are you saying?

I highly recommend sticking to the conspiracy theory forum, you'll find similar brethren there to talk to.

Billy Mays

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you aware of what the word "source" is? Knock yourself out.

You need there to be a problem first.

The following people said it was the most secure election ever:
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky

U.S. Election Assistance Commission Chair Benjamin Hovland

National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) President Maggie Toulouse Oliver

National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) President Lori Augino

Escambia County (Florida) Supervisor of Elections David Stafford

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky

Members of the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC) – Chair Brian Hancock (Unisyn Voting Solutions), Vice Chair Sam Derheimer (Hart InterCivic), Chris Wlaschin (Election Systems & Software), Ericka Haas (Electronic Registration Information Center), and Maria Bianchi (Democracy Works)

https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12/joint-statement-elections-infrastructure-government-coordinating-council-election

Why are you disagreeing with the experts? Why do you want to waste taxpayer money on a conspiracy?

DeEp St8 ExPeRtS :rolleyes:

briany

Deleted User wrote: »

You need there to be a problem first.

The following people said it was the most secure election ever:
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky

U.S. Election Assistance Commission Chair Benjamin Hovland

National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) President Maggie Toulouse Oliver

National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) President Lori Augino

Escambia County (Florida) Supervisor of Elections David Stafford

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky

Members of the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC) – Chair Brian Hancock (Unisyn Voting Solutions), Vice Chair Sam Derheimer (Hart InterCivic), Chris Wlaschin (Election Systems & Software), Ericka Haas (Electronic Registration Information Center), and Maria Bianchi (Democracy Works)

https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12/joint-statement-elections-infrastructure-government-coordinating-council-election

Why are you disagreeing with the experts? Why do you want to waste taxpayer money on a conspiracy?

The only evidence of voting irregularities is of voter suppression by the republicans, and it's quite common. Should we start there?

We're dealing with a generation of people who've decided they don't want to listen to experts. They have unilaterally decided that people with qualifications and experience in the subject at hand don't actually know anything. They've decided that randomers on Youtube and Facebook have the real scoop.

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you aware of what the word "source" is? Knock yourself out.

You need there to be a problem first.

The following people said it was the most secure election ever:
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky

U.S. Election Assistance Commission Chair Benjamin Hovland

National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) President Maggie Toulouse Oliver

National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) President Lori Augino

Escambia County (Florida) Supervisor of Elections David Stafford

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky

Members of the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC) – Chair Brian Hancock (Unisyn Voting Solutions), Vice Chair Sam Derheimer (Hart InterCivic), Chris Wlaschin (Election Systems & Software), Ericka Haas (Electronic Registration Information Center), and Maria Bianchi (Democracy Works)

https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12/joint-statement-elections-infrastructure-government-coordinating-council-election

Why are you disagreeing with the experts? Why do you want to waste taxpayer money on a conspiracy?

The only evidence of voting irregularities is of voter suppression by the republicans, and it's quite common. Should we start there?

Yet the Arizona audit has already found massive problems in the election process and that a forensic count was absolutely needed. And what are you worried about? Our nation has been torn apart over this election. Why not do forensic audits to insure it really was on the up and up. I'd think you would want this to start the healing process between half the country.

Deleted User wrote: »

Wow. So you read that article and therefore read the source within the article. Are you saying that Bloomberg bribed all of those people to say that, or what are you saying?

I highly recommend sticking to the conspiracy theory forum, you'll find similar brethren there to talk to.

Nope, I'm saying I wouldn't put it past Bloomberg to pick selective sources that supports his way of thinking and ignore the rest. A forensic audit would put the matter to bed I'd think.

Deleted User wrote: »

Wow. So you read that article and therefore read the source within the article. Are you saying that Bloomberg bribed all of those people to say that, or what are you saying?

I highly recommend sticking to the conspiracy theory forum, you'll find similar brethren there to talk to.

You're talking to me. Somehow I picture you as one that bought into that Russia Russia Russia collusion conspiracy nonsense theory.

briany wrote: »

We're dealing with a generation of people who've decided they don't want to listen to experts. They have unilaterally decided that people with qualifications and experience in the subject at hand don't actually know anything. They've decided that randomers on Youtube and Facebook have the real scoop.

It's reaching boiling point on many current affairs topics
Whether it be experts on Covid, experts on election integrity, experts on the economic impact of Brexit, experts saying Hungary has brought in homophobic legislation and so on and so on.

Public figures railing against these people who are qualified and experienced in their respective fields often are coming from the 'telling it as it is' school of education and are throwing fuel on the fire of people who for various reasons either think no one is listening to them or everyone should listen to them and its all getting very intense.

Noticed (once again) on here with a thread on the laws in Hungary and many of the contributors in the early pages of the thread seemed to think the laws weren't really a problem.
If you want to grow a following, start telling people that 'the experts and MSM won't tell you this but, ....'

If this was going on in a houseful of kids you'd say they'd need to have a row and get it out of their system but unfortunately when you translate that to what is going on in the world, the outlook looks very bleak.

notobtuse wrote: »

Yet the Arizona audit has already found massive problems in the election process and that a forensic count was absolutely needed.

No it hasn't. A judged allowed an audit to happen, as has happened many times already, because republicans won't stop whining. There has been no evidence of anything from that audit except for the fact that the audit itself is a form of fraud.

notobtuse wrote: »

Our nation has been torn apart over this election.

Yes, by sore losers like you.

notobtuse wrote: »

Why not do forensic audits to insure it really was on the up and up.

Link me to any other post you have made for any other election where you made the same argument.

Tell me how wrote: »

It's reaching boiling point on many current affairs topics
Whether it be experts on Covid, experts on election integrity, experts on the economic impact of Brexit, experts saying Hungary has brought in homophobic legislation and so on and so on.

Public figures railing against these people who are qualified and experienced in their respective fields often are coming from the 'telling it as it is' school of education and are throwing fuel on the fire of people who for various reasons either think no one is listening to them or everyone should listen to them and its all getting very intense.

Noticed (once again) on here with a thread on the laws in Hungary and many of the contributors in the early pages of the thread seemed to think the laws weren't really a problem.
If you want to grow a following, start telling people that 'the experts and MSM won't tell you this but, ....'

If this was going on in a houseful of kids you'd say they'd need to have a row and get it out of their system but unfortunately when you translate that to what is going on in the world, the outlook looks very bleak.

What do you think about the fact that scientists refused to even look at the origins of COVID coming the Wulan lab simply because Trump (the person at the time with the most information) pushed it, and was totally ignored by the MSN because of their hatred of Trump?

notobtuse wrote: »

Nope, I'm saying I wouldn't put it past Bloomberg to pick selective sources that supports his way of thinking and ignore the rest.

Are you aware of the irony of this comment?

notobtuse wrote: »

Nope, I'm saying I wouldn't put it past Bloomberg to pick selective sources that supports his way of thinking and ignore the rest. A forensic audit would put the matter to bed I'd think.

Eh, no it wouldn't. The election result did not put it to bed. The experts saying it was a secure election did not put it to bed. 80+ lawsuits did not put it to bed. This audit wouldn't put it to bed. Conspiracy theorists will continue to believe what they want to believe.

notobtuse wrote: »

Trump cannot be restored as president. That is not how our system works. It's about making sure future elections are fair and accurate, and election laws not ignored.

You haven't established any proof that the election wasn't fair.... The very article you've pointed to states the following.

The plaintiffs claim there was suspicious activity at a ballot-counting site in Atlanta—a claim which was also made by former President Donald Trump—but an investigation by the Georgia secretary of state's office found no evidence of fraud.

In fact, there's no real indication that this will even have an impact on the final result even if it could. How many states flipped after hand recounts etc?

Deleted User wrote: »

Link me to any other post you have made for an other election where you made the same argument.

We've never has an election so rife with irregularities, potential for abuse, and election laws ignored. This is a first.

Deleted User wrote: »

You haven't established any proof that the election wasn't fair.... The very article you've pointed to states the following.

In fact, there's no real indication that this will even have an impact on the final result even if it could. How many states flipped after hand recounts etc?

A forensic audit would clear it up. Why are you all so scared of them?

notobtuse wrote: »

Yet the Arizona audit has already found massive problems in the election process and that a forensic count was absolutely needed. And what are you worried about? Our nation has been torn apart over this election. Why not do forensic audits to insure it really was on the up and up. I'd think you would want this to start the healing process between half the country.

Because the only outcome you will accept is that Trump had the result stolen from him and every. single. responsible. body. or individual has said that that most definitely did not happen.

First step in healing process is to charge and convict everyone who was involved in the insurrection which happened on January 6th up to and including the main including the main instigator.

There is much more evidence there of wrongdoing and illegal activity yet Republican's refuse to have an enquiry in to what happened while bleating on about the election and talking about what the Democrats need to do to start the healing process.

notobtuse wrote: »

Trump cannot be restored as president. That is not how our system works. It's about making sure future elections are fair and accurate, and election laws not ignored.

So as per the article only conspiracy theorists and batsh1t crazy q believers believe it wasn't and the election laws ignored. Not sure what your upset about given it was proven to be so secure an election trump had a hissy fit and sacked those responsible, the same way as those who did his review of the 2016 results.

notobtuse wrote: »

We've never has an election so rife with irregularities, potential for abuse, and election laws ignored. This is a first.

Nope, we've had the most secure election ever. What are you sources for this drivel?

And I assume the questions you're ignoring are going in one ear and out the other?

uncleoswald

notobtuse wrote: »

What do you think about the fact that scientists refused to even look at the origins of COVID coming the Wulan lab simply because Trump (the person at the time with the most information) pushed it, and was totally ignored by the MSN because of their hatred of Trump?

My thinking is that nothing you have said is a fact.

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you aware of the irony of this comment?

Eh, no it wouldn't. The election result did not put it to bed. The experts saying it was a secure election did not put it to bed. 80+ lawsuits did not put it to bed. this audit would put it to bed. Conspiracy theorists will continue to believe what they want to believe.

All those lawsuit decisions were made saying not enough proof was presented... not that they were invalid. Forensic audits would put the matter to bed, wouldn't you agree?

notobtuse wrote: »

We've never has an election so rife with irregularities, potential for abuse, and election laws ignored. This is a first.

You could not be further from the truth.

George W Bush beat Al Gore after a state in which his brother Jeb Bush was Governor refused to have a recount which would have likely given victory to Gore.

notobtuse wrote: »

All those lawsuit decisions were made saying not enough proof was presented... not that they were invalid. Forensic audits would put the matter to bed, wouldn't you agree?

No. Not at all. Because you wouldn't agree that the matter was put to bed. Because you are a conspiracy theorist.

notobtuse wrote: »

We've never has an election so rife with irregularities, potential for abuse, and election laws ignored. This is a first.

Yet the Trump team failed to prove it at all. You want to know what? Never has there been an election so heavily surrounded with QAnon style conspiracy theorists more than anything else. It's got nothing to do with irregularities, it's just completely dishonest discourse being adopted by the Republican party and its supporters. No civil war will occur, maybe it will create some new terrorists or spree killers that are inspired by the claims. But it will never be true. It's a fringe conspiracy theory at this point, admittedly humiliating for the nation that a former president is pushing it.

notobtuse wrote: »

What do you think about the fact that scientists refused to even look at the origins of COVID coming the Wulan lab simply because Trump (the person at the time with the most information) pushed it, and was totally ignored by the MSN because of their hatred of Trump?

Link to scientists refusing to look at origin of disease please.

That'll be a first.