An easy question for the left

a reply to: VoiceofReality

Got it. And to be clear, I was using a hypothetical, as I am well aware there is no proof of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: VoiceofReality

Got it. And to be clear, I was using a hypothetical, as I am well aware there is no proof of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

The other part to this, is his policies. Let's forget about his refusal to concede the election, let's forget the fact that he likes to make his base foam at the mouth using mostly mistruths. Let's look past the "mean tweets" as I hear used so frequently here.

I read an article on CNN (yeah yeah I know everyone's view on CNN around these parts...lol) showing the 15 campaign promises Trump has made so far. There are literally 2 of them that I can agree with:

- Immigration - Biden has pooched immigration hard. Something needs to change
- Crime - I will agree that we need to be tougher on crime. There is far too much that occurs that goes unpunished, etc. Look at the looting that occurs and no one tries to stop the perps. If I was in the store I wouldn't be recording it, I would be tackling that MF to the ground and waiting for the police.

So there are 2 policies I do agree with Trump on. Probably why I'm a moderate vs. a true lefty. But the reality remains I stand dead against the other 13 policy promises he has made. So even if we agree to put everything else aside, there is the still the pesky matter of pure policy. Even as moderates (my wife and I) we don't support most of the policies he will try and implement. Just again my humble 2 cents.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: VoiceofReality

Got it. And to be clear, I was using a hypothetical, as I am well aware there is no proof of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

hereistheevidence.com...

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: VoiceofReality

Got it. And to be clear, I was using a hypothetical, as I am well aware there is no proof of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

hereistheevidence.com...

Except that's a list of allegations, and not credible evidence. Many of the links take you to something that someone posted on Twitter. I can post on Twitter right now and state that the sky is green. Someone can link to my Twitter post and claims that as credible evidence??? I think not.

That having been said there may be credible links on that page I didn't have time to go through all of the links that quickly. But many lead to twitter posts and youtube videos that anyone, anywhere, trying to prove anything can post. I would hope for something better than that?

a reply to: VoiceofReality

I wish I could post a CNN video where the democrats are openly admitting to election fraud.

Were conservative voices shadow-banned on social media prior to the election?
Yes.

Was there a concerted effort to blame Hunters laptop and allegations of corruption by Joe Biden on Russian disinfo?
Yes.



You can claim that the last election was the best and freeist and most fair election since Moses took some tablets, but that allso doesn't make it so.

a reply to: VoiceofReality

I just read that article. Too much there to just make a quick comment on, so I'll try to make it a thread.

But looking at it (and removing the obvious spin) almost all of it sounds logical and good to me. But again, I'm biased.

Bring back domestic oil drilling, I have even had a staunch lefty make the case that Biden is doing more domestic drilling than Trump did, so that shouldn't upset anyone.

Revamping the DEI system? needs to happen today.

Stopping Biden's attack on firearms companies? Good!

Bringing back penalties on China taking advantage of our business? That seemed to be a good thing last time, not sure why it's bad now other than Biden being owned by China.

Stopping the insane push to make Electric vehicles mandatory by a certain time when the technology nor the infrastructure is ready? (I will need some clarification as to what's wrong with that one, really no bullsh!t)

new cities and flying cars? Puff puff pass dude.

Being tough on NATO? Ask the NATO countries how they like it before you discount it. At least one has commended him for making them spend more on their own defense. And that seems logical.

Using the DOJ like the Biden admin has been doing? I don't like it. It's scummy when he does it, and it would be scummy if Trump did it. I'd understand it, but I wouldn't endorse it.

Gender Care and not letting kids be ruined? Good. If a kid turns 18 and wants to lop of his junk, OK, but don't let them make decisions like that as a child. We don't let kids smoke or drink, and those are temporary things, so permanent things should be off the table as well.

Health care, he claims he can do better than Obamacare, put his feet to the fire and make him keep that promise.

Going after Drug Cartels? Lofty goal, but if you ever want Mexico to be a real nation, then removing the stranglehold they have on things is essential, not sure how it would happen, but it's a good plan in theory.

And crime and immigration are of course the right things to focus on.

So while I claimed this was too much to do in a post, apparently I lied. Can you articulate what you don't like about each of those things?

eta: www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: VoiceofReality
I find it funny that some on here can't accept that there are valid reasons why some on the left don't like Trump.

It's because your "valid reasons" don't reflect reality. And you on the Left refuse to admit that, further exacerbating the situation. You just keep saying things like "it was a free and fair election," when it has been proven otherwise. The Left will come back at that fact with things like, "there wasn't 'widespread' fraud" or "every single court case was dismissed because of lack of evidence." We have told you over and over and over again (ad infinitum) that there didn't have to be widespread fraud, just the specific "surgical cuts" they employed in certain swing states; or that all of those court cases were thrown because of "lack of standing" and they never reached the discovery phase. So who knows what the evidence was? That doesn't mean there was no evidence. And then the Left will come back with this retort - "all right, show me the evidence." Of course we people talking on the internet don't have the evidence and you know that. We should turn that around and ask the Left members talking online to provide the proof, themselves, that Joe Biden won the election. They can't do that anymore than we can provide any evidence to the contrary. Because.... we ordinary citizens are not privy to that information. So, to ask for evidence from us to prove anything is disengenuous. And you know that.

And the Left keeps talking about the "insurrection" on January 6th. There was no insurrection on January 6th and the FBI confirmed that. Remember the FBI? That was the organization the Left believed in when they said Hunter's laptop was "Russian Disinformation." Now, all of a sudden, the Left doesn't believe the FBI anymore.

The reason the Left is scorned so much for their "valid reasons" is because there's no reality in their "valid reasons," just lies repeated over and over. Their "valid reasons" do not reflect the facts of the matter. Now, do you wonder why you keep getting ridiculed?

originally posted by: VoiceofReality
Sure, but again we're talking about widespread voter fraud that caused Trump to lose

There you go again. You Lefties keep saying there wasn't "widespread voter fraud." There didn't have to be any widespread fraud! There wasn't widespread voter fraud - there didn't have to be to have changed the outcome of the election. Just a fraud here and there and that's what put Biden barely over the line to win. You Lefties refuse to acknowledge that possibility. Why is it not possible? Stop being so close-minded - learn to accept reality.

a reply to: Station27

Not a leftie, but there were numerous cases claiming voter fraud. With no evidence.

Perhaps it is you that needs to accept reality? And move on?

originally posted by: VoiceofReality
Except that's a list of allegations, and not credible evidence. Many of the links take you to something that someone posted on Twitter. I can post on Twitter right now and state that the sky is green. Someone can link to my Twitter post and claims that as credible evidence??? I think not.

That having been said there may be credible links on that page I didn't have time to go through all of the links that quickly. But many lead to twitter posts and youtube videos that anyone, anywhere, trying to prove anything can post. I would hope for something better than that?

You're being disengenuous. Because you're saying that people talking about the evidence doesn't prove anything. It doesn't. But, they're talking about the evidence which exists that people and organizations have collected and have in their possessions. Why should I listen to anything you say? It's just something somebody posted on a conspiracy site. Do you see how that works, now? You're trying to hold others to a higher standard than you yourself live by.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Not a leftie, but there were numerous cases claiming voter fraud. With no evidence.

I'm going to have to ask you to prove that statement.

Bottom line:

I don't think any real evidence that would stand up in a court of law can be posted online.

Defendant to Judge: I got the evidence of my innocence off the internet.

Judge to defendant: Guilty as charged. Next!

So, why does the Left keep asking for real evidence on the internet? Why indeed.

a reply to: Station27

Why? You claimed there was evidence. Over to you.

Were any of all those law suits successful?

No.

Why do you think that was?

a reply to: Station27

What a ridiculous strawman!

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Station27

What a ridiculous strawman!

What a predictable deflection!

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Were any of all those law suits successful?

No.

Why do you think that was?

I know why. Do you know why? None of those court cases reached the discovery phase. You know, where the evidence actually gets to be submitted and looked at? That phase.

a reply to: Station27

I do know all about the discovery stage. I also know that these claims need to have some evidence to support them before they even reach that stage.

That never happened.

Counsellor.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Station27

I do know all about the discovery stage. I also know that these claims need to have some evidence to support them before they even reach that stage.

That never happened.

Counsellor.

Have you heard of "lack of standing?" What exactly is looked at when a case is dismissed due to lack of standing.

Your Honor.

a reply to: Station27

I have also heard of cases being dismissed, or "tossed" as being a steaming pile of Wombat's doos.

I'm a lawyer, by the way.

Got any sources?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Got any sources?

As a matter of fact, I do. But what would be the point? People like you never accept it, so why waste my time? It took me seconds to do a search and find my answer, one that backed up my statements. Do lawyers know how to use search engines?