You’re so quick to jump to conclusions that there is no rigging even when there are red flags all over that there are anomalies in the 2020 election.  Where are you even basing your conclusion that there is no rigging?

Regarding your statement that voters are turning out because they want to vote.... How do you even explain that in some places, there are more votes (200%) than registered voters?

Pls ask yourself if you are really looking at this objectively or not. Confirmation bias is when you ignore evidence when they do not support your views.

You mention “civil war” - if the democrats rigged the election to steal the presidency, then it’s actually already started. It’s called a coup d’etat.

Anyway, back to topic.

All these accusations don't have any evidence in court,  I am basing everything off of that.   If they had proof, they would have made a court case.  None of the current cases that I have researched have any proof.   You can say anything you want to the public,  but in court you are under oath and so far no republicans, pundits or anyone has taken that step.  In my eyes that's because there is no proof.

I know there is some bias, but then again I said the same thing when I was on the winning side vs losing.  Russia had some influence but didn't steal the election, same thing this time around all the investigations in the world will most likely not come out with any evidence just like the democrat witch hunts.

Civil war may happen if the house votes (steals the election for trump) and they still find no evidence of voter fraud.  I will be on the side of evidence.  This is why the 2nd amendment exists.  Its not for the republicans its for democracy.  And if democracy votes for Biden I will be on the side of democracy.

If he wins in the SCOTUS, this will be huge because it will dictate how all future elections are won.  DNC can cheat with zero repercussions and GOP has no hope of winning, unless they too cheat.  Then we will have all 340,000,000 citizens in the nation voting and maybe even more for every election.

Connecting the dots, Feinsteins husband owns part of the voting tally company and so does Pelosi's.

Searching for articles or the like on the internet is not research

All these accusations don't have any evidence in court,  I am basing everything off of that.   If they had proof, they would have made a court case.  None of the current cases that I have researched have any proof.   You can say anything you want to the public,  but in court you are under oath and so far no republicans, pundits or anyone has taken that step.  In my eyes that's because there is no proof.

**** What are you talking about? Are you that stupid? (Rhetorical question). The Republicans were already, last Friday, granted a court order admitting them to closer observation of a ballot counting operation in Philadephia, so they must have presented "evidence" that proved to the judge that they were being denied their legal right to appropriate observation. Most of the rest of the lawsuits are being filed this week... it's hard to have courts rule on evidence before a lawsuit is filed and heard by the court. I'd think anyone would know that. There are numerous people who have signed sworn affidavits that they observed fraud or irregularities in ballot tabulation or handling. They will be part of the evidence presented in these soon upcoming lawsuits. The fact that you don't know about them, or offhandedly discount them without any evidence of your own that they are false says all we need to know about your grossly deficient concept of evidence.

I know there is some bias, but then again I said the same thing when I was on the winning side vs losing.  Russia had some influence but didn't steal the election, same thing this time around all the investigations in the world will most likely not come out with any evidence just like the democrat witch hunts.

Civil war may happen if the house votes (steals the election for trump) and they still find no evidence of voter fraud.  I will be on the side of evidence.  This is why the 2nd amendment exists.  Its not for the republicans its for democracy.  And if democracy votes for Biden I will be on the side of democracy.

**** How would the House voting be equivalent to "steals the election for trump"? The House would only be voting as a result of successful lawsuits wherein a court had deemed the evidence submitted to be valid, or the legal arguments made to be valid, and to have thus warranted the necessity for the House to determine who will take office January 20, 2021. How is that "stealing"?

This is not democracy.  The courts do not decide the victor.  The public does.  The people do.  This is a very dangerous statement.

Goddamn you're a dumbass. The law determines the processes and procedures for determining the outcome of an election. The law is created by legislators who are elected by registered voters (not "the public" or "the people"). The law is interpreted by judges who are either elected by registered voters, or appointed and/or confirmed by legislators or executives who were elected by registered voters.

"This is not democracy." Duh dumbfuck. That's because the United States of America isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional republic ("if you can keep it" as Benjamin Franklin warned).

Almost every sentence you write shows another layer of your ignorance.

smh.

I would say the same about you, the level of your bias is very apparent. 

Public is a synonym of registered voters.   Voters (registered) decide elections.  Period.    Is your argument really that America doesn't do democracy?

You're so full of shit. Do you even read the moronic shit you write?

"Public is a synonym of registered voters."

So when Fauci says "the public will be administered the vaccine" he is talking about only registered voters?! I.e. No one under 18, no convicted felons, no one who is not an American citizen, etc. etc. etc. will be allowed to receive a vaccination?

Show me a single dictionary entry, from any dictionary, anywhere that shows that one definition of "public" is "registered voters".

smh. again. and again. and again.

This is not democracy.  The courts do not decide the victor.  The registered voters do.  The people do (American voters).  This is a very dangerous statement.

You're so full of shit. Do you even read the moronic shit you write?

"Public is a synonym of registered voters."

So when Fauci says "the public will be administered the vaccine" he is talking about only registered voters?! I.e. No one under 18, no convicted felons, no one who is not an American citizen, etc. etc. etc. will be allowed to receive a vaccination?

Show me a single dictionary entry, from any dictionary, anywhere that shows that one definition of "public" is "registered voters".

smh. again. and again. and again.

Someone is seeing the big picture. . . 

It’s too bad the person who really needs to see the big picture and would benefit the most from seeing the big picture is too stupid to see it.

This is not democracy.  The courts do not decide the victor.  The registered voters do.  The people do.  This is a very dangerous statement.

Easy big fella.
Clearly that part is not from you. That part is not in quotes from you. (Reading comprehension? Or did you only study spelling and grammar?)
Members can deduce whatever they want from the quotes. (Or check out the thread)
I argued statistics and that was your response.
Try to focus.
You’re deflecting again.
Pretty soon I’m gonna get an insult from you. (SOP)

( to the rest of the gang, don’t worry I’m done. Don’t want to derail this thread as I want to keep reading it.)

Alright what is a better method?   Why is there no court cases with all this evidence you say exist?  It would be the easiest way to prove your side.  Then I can view those documents and agree with you there is fraud. Why bring dozens of court cases with no evidence of wrong doing?  If you had proof of murder you would take it to court,  if you don't well than actions speak louder than words.

I would say the same about you, the level of your bias is very apparent. 

Public is a synonym of registered voters.   Voters (registered) decide elections.  Period.    Is your argument really that America doesn't do democracy?

And they won the case to observe.  This is not voter fraud.  I will wait for those cases of voter fraud with those sworn affidavits.  Until then this America, innocent until proven guilty.  Its in our constitution.  I never said to stop making court cases if you have proof,  I am only against stealing elections from either side.  If it descends to a house vote and trump wins that way, it will be fraud.   

If no candidate for president receives an absolute majority of the electoral votes, pursuant to the 12th Amendment, the House of Representatives is required to go into session immediately to choose a president from among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes.

No where does this say they must win lawsuits.  This is uncharted territory so I am not sure what will happen.

Until then this America, innocent until proven guilty.  Its in our constitution.