|
|
|
|
|
|
by jtxxwl
1986 days ago
|
|
|
>they'd be 100% convinced the election was fair is if had Trump won. Maybe some would. But I'll tell you, if the democrats wanted it to look like they were running a fair election despite their vitriolic hatred of Trump, they could have done quite a few things differently. For one, the measures they put in place to reduce the spread of the coronavirus were an absolutely unprecedented obstruction of the ability of observers to watch the process. An election observer should be able to see everything every election worker does as closely as the election worker sees it. If they wanted the other party to believe the results, they would have found some other way. >This whole election fraud this is a Trump invention. How does your assertion that Trump said election fraud first mean my statements of fact rely on his word for their validity? Can you answer the actual question I asked? (You can't) >He knew he was going to lose According to the official tallies, he lost by a combined total of 42,976 votes across three states (if AZ, GA, and WI went Trump, it would have resulted in a 269-269 tie). How could anyone have known he was going to lose, unless they were part of a coordinated effort to fix the election against him? |
|
|
The mask isn't supposed to over the eyes, only the mouth and nose. Do you have any concrete examples of "unprecedented obstruction" and their effects? Or evidence that it didn't affect both sides equally? These are just random insinuations.
Also there's a bit of karmic justice here, because if Trump had taken the pandemic more seriously in the first place maybe there wouldn't have been all these restrictions. Or maybe he deliberately sabotaged the response so he could blame the restrictions for affecting the result later. (See? It's so easy to make up accusations).
> An election observer should be able to see everything every election worker does as closely as the election worker sees it.
Do observers generally get closer than 6ft to workers? Even under normal circumstances that's considered personal space.
Also this would require a conspiracy among hundreds if not thousands of election workers to have any effect. Without a single person blowing the whistle.
> How could anyone have known he was going to lose,
The polls had him losing WI by a far larger margin so that was a hint. The WI race being so close, and the history of the Republican party's treachery in that state is more an indicator of a failed Trump steal. I don't believe that is the case either - it's more likely that it was bad polling.
> Can you answer the actual question I asked?
You haven't presented any facts - only vague accusations. What is there to answer? You're a concern troll. I'm done responding to you.