2020 Election Thread

[virtual9mm]

How is it possible that smart folks believe the unproven nonsense that Giuliani and his people made up? Meanwhile, they discount "grab them by the pussy" and multiple rape accusations as nothing.

The only credible thing against Biden are the sexual harassment charge and I am not sure about the truth of it. To deny it would be foolish but I am not going to pre judge.

Regarding Trump -- if you voted for him, you are not necessarily racist but you don't mind it, either. Or you don't recognize it fir what it is, probably the more likely explanation in this case. Too many folks have been sucked into his personality cult.

If you support racists, how are you not racist?

I understand your 2nd argument, that there are probably some people that support Trump that don't know he is racist. But you would have to actively avoid hearing him speak or reading anything about him to be in this boat. If you are saying they see what he says but don't think it is racist/sexist/xenophobic, then I would argue you have to be those things to not realize they are racist/sexist/xenophobic.

Maybe the distinction is between passively being willing to tolerate racism (i.e. supporting Trump for his anti-China stance while ignoring the blatantly racist and sexist shit he is doing) and actively being a Proud Boy supporter. And the truth is that we're all racist in some way or another. But there are those of us who try not to be racist and other folks who turn a blind eye.

Agreed about everyone being racist--I think I started out this conversation saying that. Just a matter of where you are on the spectrum. And, like you said, if you actively try and avoid it, or lean into it.

Absolutely.

[In2ition]

How is it possible that smart folks believe the unproven nonsense that Giuliani and his people made up? Meanwhile, they discount "grab them by the pussy" and multiple rape accusations as nothing.

The only credible thing against Biden are the sexual harassment charge and I am not sure about the truth of it. To deny it would be foolish but I am not going to pre judge.

Regarding Trump -- if you voted for him, you are not necessarily racist but you don't mind it, either. Or you don't recognize it fir what it is, probably the more likely explanation in this case. Too many folks have been sucked into his personality cult.

What did Giuliani and his people make up?
If you *ignore* the video footage, data analysis, statistical impossibilities, whistleblowers, witness affidavits, expert witness affidavits, forensic audits, etc. There is no proof of voter fraud.

I've got news for you, the Hunter laptop is real, the shit in it is real, and the media is finally looking into it after suppressing it before the election.

Why do you think projecting racist liberal bs on others is cool? I suppose if I just fed on a diet of a lies that the MSM shoved down my throat at every minute, I would be in the same boat as everyone else. I'd sit here in the echo chamber jerking off to each other's "wisdom".

Some of my disjointed thoughts below. Some you'll like and others you won't. But that's reality for you.

For one thing, I probably (but not certainly) know China better than you do and some of the unproven rumors that were floating out there as "fact" -- like Hunter Biden having filmed himself raping 1800 Chinese pre-teens -- just sound incredibly crazy. The only part of any of this that was revealed beyond Giuliani and his folks vouching for it themselves was that Hunter Biden mentioned that the "Chairman" had not approved of himself being directly involved in a fundraising transaction. Having tried to raise Chinese money myself for my own venture before that started being frowned upon (it was awfully tempting before we realized that there were so many strings attached) -- Joe Biden did the right thing.

But with stuff like Pornhub and Epstein out there and how the elite covered up for Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew -- and Donald Trump -- it's hard for you to believe anything coming from the elite, isn't it? There's a part of me that says that your thinking is crazy but there's another part of me that agrees by questioning why should you believe anything from the elite. And there's a part of me that knows the truth -- the elite plays by a set of rules that they generally don't break but often forget to think about how these rules are written in their favor. Like my friends and family members in finance -- they think nothing of building 8000 square foot houses and thinking that this is normal because they're helping markets run and entitled to a huge salary. They say they care about their friends and family members back in Midwestern small towns but they won't put their money where their mouths are. But at the same time, they're incredibly ethical folks by their own standards. The rules are written in their favor, though. How would you feel about think tank events with former ambassadors and congressmen who were invited to attract big donors to the institution? It's completely legit and ethical according to prevailing standards. But you probably wouldn't think it was fair.

The MSM has certainly failed in many cases but they at least TRY to portray an unbiased picture -- journalistic neutrality is hard to achieve but there's a lot of journalistic integrity still. Meanwhile, the likes of OANN are deliberately trying to manipulate you. I'll take failed attempts at impartiality any day over Giuliani and his ilk holding press conferences at the "Four Seasons" and having as their first "participant" someone who had been convicted of child sex offenses (it's a true story, look it up).

The elite failed in 2016 because they saw the need for little sugar-coated white lies. For instance, the US Trade Representative at the time and others pushed a line of "TPP needs to get done because it's good for everyone". Quietly and in private, the real story was "...it's political, we need to use this to contain China". I wish the elite hadn't told these little white lies because they put Trump and his Big Lie into power.

Now we're all fucked. And I say this as an American expat living abroad who has lots of options.

I have no idea about 1800 Chinese pre-teens. That sounds unlikely. The number is probably much closer to 1, but even one is absolutely disgusting. As far as Hunter calling Joe the "Big guy" and keeping a share for him, I haven't heard of him referred to as the "Chairman".

I have not heard of any connections that Trump has to Epstein, other than he took a picture with him at parties they both attended in the past. I have not heard of any involvement where he went to Epstein island, but there is an island that happens to be right next to it, called Water Island, that is owned by Joe's brother and has a submarine port too. This seems quite convenient and coincidental. Yeah, making a little over $100 K by office of Senator and now having 5 mansions around the country and outside of it, seems sketchy at best. Joe's brother getting a $1.5 billion deal to build houses in Iraq, when he has no knowledge of house building, seems odd. There are a lot of odd things about deals around the world that the Bidens happen to be a part of. I think we'll hear of more shadiness soon.

CNN in particular has been exposed by Project Veritas recently with their 9 am conference calls that have been released. There is nothing that they "TRY" to portray as unbiased. They are completely in the tank and carrying water for the Dems.

China has been attempting and succeeding in infiltrating our politics, with money ties to MSM, spies connected to politicians that have come out recently like Eric Swalwell and we'll find more. Their connections to Dominion voting systems, and others involved in our elections.

[Nodack]

I don’t know how this election thread turned into a racism thread.

You can choose to believe Trump and believe the Postal Service, Republican Governors, Republican Secretary of State’s, poll workers, media, FBI, FOX News, DOJ, Venezuela, Mafia, Supreme Court, Democrats, Dominion voting machines were all working together to steal the election from Trump.

Or you can believe Trump is making it up like he has many thousands of other times.

It’s a no brainer for me. I keep hearing about mountains of evidence. I have seen none and neither has any court in America.

[In2ition]

How is it possible that smart folks believe the unproven nonsense that Giuliani and his people made up? Meanwhile, they discount "grab them by the pussy" and multiple rape accusations as nothing.

The only credible thing against Biden are the sexual harassment charge and I am not sure about the truth of it. To deny it would be foolish but I am not going to pre judge.

Regarding Trump -- if you voted for him, you are not necessarily racist but you don't mind it, either. Or you don't recognize it fir what it is, probably the more likely explanation in this case. Too many folks have been sucked into his personality cult.

If you support racists, how are you not racist?

I understand your 2nd argument, that there are probably some people that support Trump that don't know he is racist. But you would have to actively avoid hearing him speak or reading anything about him to be in this boat. If you are saying they see what he says but don't think it is racist/sexist/xenophobic, then I would argue you have to be those things to not realize they are racist/sexist/xenophobic.

Once again, what does it make you, when you support Biden? This is your argument.

I think it's simple. Biden's an old man whose positions have shifted over time as the US itself has shifted. Trump and his folks deliberately inflict cruelty towards brown people because they can -- ask the 600+ kids who will never see their parents again and are in the foster care system after having experienced the most traumatic thing that could happen to a kid. The foster care system is one of the biggest sources of kids to be pimped out into the "market" if I understand correctly.

Supporting one is not like supporting the other.

I assume you are talking about the kids that were reported separated at the border? They've found many of their parents back in their home country, and the parents do not want them back, most likely because they were sold off to the child trafficker's. So those who think we are separating them from their parents, are mistaken. The border guards are separating them from their handlers and doing their best to keep them from being trafficked. What is the solution if their parents don't want them back? We can't allow child trafficking, and we have to make sure these kids are safe.

[In2ition]

I don’t know how this election thread turned into a racism thread.

You can choose to believe Trump and believe the Postal Service, Republican Governors, Republican Secretary of State’s, poll workers, media, FBI, FOX News, DOJ, Venezuela, Mafia, Supreme Court, Democrats, Dominion voting machines were all working together to steal the election from Trump.

Or you can believe Trump is making it up like he has many thousands of other times.

It’s a no brainer for me. I keep hearing about mountains of evidence. I have seen none and neither has any court in America.

You can blame Indy for that.

Hell, just in Nevada, they had 20 binders of evidence, but the Judge didn't want to look at it. I could give provide you with a mountain of evidence. Did you watch any of the hearings? They didn't even present even close to all of it in those.

[In2ition]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-BB1bSxSf

[In2ition]

Just because I disagree with you all politically, doesn't mean that I don't care about you. Just an FYI

[Split T]

In2, to start off, I’ll say I haven’t looked into very many claims of voter fraud. I looked at a few things Drawls posted, but they all seemed very bogus or were already proven untrue. I’m basing a majority of my opinion on the fact that all the cases, except 1, brought before courts have failed to show any fraud. Many of the Republican leaders in these battleground states have stopped following Trump orders and are verifying the election results. Doesn’t it seem like they would continue fighting if there was any solid evidence? Why wouldn’t Guliani present the evidence he has? You said the courts haven’t seen the evidence, why isn’t in being shown?

I’m not asking to be antagonistic, really just trying to understand. As I mentioned, I haven’t really looked into the claims, I wanted Trump to lose, so I’m hoping there was no fraud, but it’s obviously a problem if there was. But the combination of Trump/Guliani losing all their cases and having so many Republican leaders/judges saying there was no fraud, just tells me there is no fraud.

Trump also is not the type to ever admit defeat. Whether he lost fairly or not, he was never going to accept it. His claims of fraud are exactly as expected for who he is. Makes it hard to give any credibility to his claims.

[virtual9mm]

The most glaring examples I've seen of voter fraud are that of Trumpists who are registered to vote in multiple states. It's like...they're projecting their own behaviors upon their opponents or something...

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-ne ... ple-states

Regarding actual "evidence" of voter fraud, you've had many REPUBLICAN governors and election officials saying that the vote was fair. You've had Trumpists pushing death threats against GA election workers, threatening to rape the REPUBLICAN Sec of State's wife, and doing all sorts of crazy things. I suppose it comes from a "good" place ("Let's defend the Constitution!") but let's be real here. If you choose not to question your sources of information -- it's on you in the end. There's really not much more I can say or want to say.

Regarding COVID -- such warnings come a bit too late to Trump World...they estimate that Trump's rallies caused an incremental 30 to 40,000 deaths. By the time this is done, you'll end up with more dead Americans than have been combat fatalities in all wars fought by the US since the Revolutionary War. And this was because Trump was willing to sacrifice his own supporters in the name of winning the election. What a great, dear leader he is. Just simply wearing masks could have cut the 600k number to be expected by February to a more manageable 60k. Stay safe and glad you're taking this shit seriously now.

Back to basketball for me -- they've done studies that say that folks who disagree politically should continue to talk about other things -- lest that they stop talking altogether. Talking about basketball, wargaming, skiing, Barbie doll houses, etc. will keep society together while we get over the craziness of the fake news crisis. See you on the main board.

[Superbone]

Back to basketball for me -- they've done studies that say that folks who disagree politically should continue to talk about other things -- lest that they stop talking altogether. Talking about basketball, wargaming, skiing, Barbie doll houses, etc. will keep society together while we get over the craziness of the fake news crisis. See you on the main board.

Yep. I decided not to engage In2 any more in this thread. We’ve always gotten along well otherwise. My roommate from college and I got along great although we never talked politics at the time. A number of years ago he started sending me group emails with a Republican slant. I remember specifically one had a nasty caricature of Obama. I asked him politely not to send me any more political emails. He stopped and we’ve remained friends. Another guy I’ve played basketball with for a number of years sent me a Trump campaign video last year. I told him to please stop and let’s not talk politics so we can remain friends.

[BKinSJC]

Hey, folks. I see this is dying down a bit, and I don't wish to escalate things any further, but I did have a couple of thoughts.

First - Hi! I've been lurking for quite a while. Some of you might remember me from the old board (Mori, Cap, Indy, Superbone, Charlie). I've stuck around because I always enjoyed the community; I haven't posted much since it's been a particular drain on my mental health to try to be too much of a Suns (or even Sans) fan over the last few years. It's seemed to me like there's been enough deserved negativity on the basketball side of things that my unfailingly bleak opinions probably wouldn't be required reading. Anyhow.

Further background - while I'd never present myself as any sort of expert, I do have a law degree. I haven't practiced in a number of years, but I can still read/write/speak legalese with some degree of fluency. I am a registered independent, and I tend to lean centrist on economic issues, but I am left-leaning on most social issues. It should be fairly easy to guess which candidate I chose not to support in the past election.

Hell, just in Nevada, they had 20 binders of evidence, but the Judge didn't want to look at it. I could [] provide you with a mountain of evidence.

In2, I understand that you're using the word "evidence" here as it might be commonly used, but with respect, there has not been a "mountain of evidence," nor were there "20 binders of evidence." What there was, is the same thing that there is all over the internet, twitter, reddit, Facebook ... a mountain of information. It's interesting enough to debate and view the spin put on it by various people in the media, but: it can't rise to the level of being evidence, unless the courts are able to accept it as evidence. It has to be presented in such a way that it's recognizably likely to prove or disprove an element of the case or controversy being brought before the court (relevance); it also has to pass tests (such as hearsay) that show how reliable it is. If it is expert witness or statistical data, it has to be vetted and shown to be based on proven models or reliable methods of data gathering; there are people who know a lot more about all of these things than I do, and I'm not going to pretend to have followed the reasonings in every case. Life's too short. I did attempt to read a portion of the so-called "Kraken" lawsuit that was available to the public, and I have to admit, I gave up about forty pages in. It struck me as some of the sloppiest, most careless attempted lawyering that I've ever seen, and I was not surprised in any way when it gained no traction with the courts.

The point is, mountains of unverified, inadmissible information all by themselves are not convincing to courts. And it was necessary to the Trump team that they convince the courts, in multiple states, in order to actually affect the outcome of the election. I am of the opinion that they may have had a shot early on in the process, when they were still generally presenting cases that could actually be heard by the courts that they were going to, but they needed to be able to present strong arguments and real evidence of significant fraud, especially since the relief they were after tended to be extraordinary, along the lines of invalidating thousands or tens of thousands of votes. Since then, they have had jurisdictional and standing problems in some later cases, and many cases have been appeals that did not add anything substantially new to the originals - to the point where a number of lawyers on all sides of the ideological divide have called for censure for bringing frivolous suits. And, significantly, it's not really possible to attribute the continuous failures of the cases to pure bias, since they have been overseen by judges from all over the political spectrum.

In the end, the courts did what they had to do. I'm sure there were partisans who might have changed the outcome if they had been able to (hi, SCOTUS!) but the courts followed the rule of law and recognized the reality of the situation. I'm almost a tiny bit proud of my former profession, in this case.

[Superbone]

Thanks for chiming in, BK. Of course I remember you and I’ve seen you lurking over the years. In fact, I’m really surprised your post count is 1. It feels like you’ve posted something since Marty last moved the board. Anyway, I appreciate your perspective as a formerly practicing lawyer. The distinction between evidence and information is important. Especially the unverified and inadmissible variety.

[Indy]

Thanks for chiming in, BK. Of course I remember you and I’ve seen you lurking over the years. In fact, I’m really surprised your post count is 1. It feels like you’ve posted something since Marty last moved the board. Anyway, I appreciate your perspective as a formerly practicing lawyer. The distinction between evidence and information is important. Especially the unverified and inadmissible variety.

Yeah, welcome back BK! I can't believe it has been literally forever since you last posted on this site. Seems like I would have read something from you in the last (almost) 7 years!

[AmareIsGod]

Just because I disagree with you all politically, doesn't mean that I don't care about you. Just an FYI

So if I'm following this doom and gloom scenario you've provided absolutely no context to, the solar storm is going to cause 6 days of darkness all over the world this month. During that time, Russia and China will collaborate to fire missiles at several major US cities.

Had to try to comb through a few Twitter replies with more replies to uncover this gem of information that apparently nobody else is onto since I can't find anything about this anywhere else.

Is this what you are referring to here or am I missing something?

[Split T]

It was supposed to happen in 2014 as well

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp

[In2ition]

In2, to start off, I’ll say I haven’t looked into very many claims of voter fraud. I looked at a few things Drawls posted, but they all seemed very bogus or were already proven untrue. I’m basing a majority of my opinion on the fact that all the cases, except 1, brought before courts have failed to show any fraud. Many of the Republican leaders in these battleground states have stopped following Trump orders and are verifying the election results. Doesn’t it seem like they would continue fighting if there was any solid evidence? Why wouldn’t Guliani present the evidence he has? You said the courts haven’t seen the evidence, why isn’t in being shown?

I’m not asking to be antagonistic, really just trying to understand. As I mentioned, I haven’t really looked into the claims, I wanted Trump to lose, so I’m hoping there was no fraud, but it’s obviously a problem if there was. But the combination of Trump/Guliani losing all their cases and having so many Republican leaders/judges saying there was no fraud, just tells me there is no fraud.

Trump also is not the type to ever admit defeat. Whether he lost fairly or not, he was never going to accept it. His claims of fraud are exactly as expected for who he is. Makes it hard to give any credibility to his claims.

The Guliani Trump team have only filed 3 cases, so it's not the 49 or 50 cases that have been reported. Those were filed by others. Marty gave a link to all the cases, and how they were judged, but many of those cases were dismissed before evidence was even presented. The one that Texas filed to the Supreme Court was dismissed because of "standing", which was ridiculous, since it was an Elector clause case and it was in their jurisdiction and really can only be seen by the Supreme Court. It wasn't for fraud, but it was for how those states changed their laws illegally.

As far as the Nevada case, it had a lot of evidence, but it also wasn't allowed to be presented. Like I said before, they had 20 binders full of evidence and affidavits, but the judge didn't look at it. https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/o ... d-2216114/
The judge looked at the evidence and no matter the 8,000 pages of it, he thought it was insufficient. That's his prerogative. Another judge may have thought it was overwhelming and significant, but whatever.
https://thenevadaindependent.com/articl ... d-in-court

[In2ition]

Hey, folks. I see this is dying down a bit, and I don't wish to escalate things any further, but I did have a couple of thoughts.

First - Hi! I've been lurking for quite a while. Some of you might remember me from the old board (Mori, Cap, Indy, Superbone, Charlie). I've stuck around because I always enjoyed the community; I haven't posted much since it's been a particular drain on my mental health to try to be too much of a Suns (or even Sans) fan over the last few years. It's seemed to me like there's been enough deserved negativity on the basketball side of things that my unfailingly bleak opinions probably wouldn't be required reading. Anyhow.

Further background - while I'd never present myself as any sort of expert, I do have a law degree. I haven't practiced in a number of years, but I can still read/write/speak legalese with some degree of fluency. I am a registered independent, and I tend to lean centrist on economic issues, but I am left-leaning on most social issues. It should be fairly easy to guess which candidate I chose not to support in the past election.

Hell, just in Nevada, they had 20 binders of evidence, but the Judge didn't want to look at it. I could [] provide you with a mountain of evidence.

In2, I understand that you're using the word "evidence" here as it might be commonly used, but with respect, there has not been a "mountain of evidence," nor were there "20 binders of evidence." What there was, is the same thing that there is all over the internet, twitter, reddit, Facebook ... a mountain of information. It's interesting enough to debate and view the spin put on it by various people in the media, but: it can't rise to the level of being evidence, unless the courts are able to accept it as evidence. It has to be presented in such a way that it's recognizably likely to prove or disprove an element of the case or controversy being brought before the court (relevance); it also has to pass tests (such as hearsay) that show how reliable it is. If it is expert witness or statistical data, it has to be vetted and shown to be based on proven models or reliable methods of data gathering; there are people who know a lot more about all of these things than I do, and I'm not going to pretend to have followed the reasonings in every case. Life's too short. I did attempt to read a portion of the so-called "Kraken" lawsuit that was available to the public, and I have to admit, I gave up about forty pages in. It struck me as some of the sloppiest, most careless attempted lawyering that I've ever seen, and I was not surprised in any way when it gained no traction with the courts.

The point is, mountains of unverified, inadmissible information all by themselves are not convincing to courts. And it was necessary to the Trump team that they convince the courts, in multiple states, in order to actually affect the outcome of the election. I am of the opinion that they may have had a shot early on in the process, when they were still generally presenting cases that could actually be heard by the courts that they were going to, but they needed to be able to present strong arguments and real evidence of significant fraud, especially since the relief they were after tended to be extraordinary, along the lines of invalidating thousands or tens of thousands of votes. Since then, they have had jurisdictional and standing problems in some later cases, and many cases have been appeals that did not add anything substantially new to the originals - to the point where a number of lawyers on all sides of the ideological divide have called for censure for bringing frivolous suits. And, significantly, it's not really possible to attribute the continuous failures of the cases to pure bias, since they have been overseen by judges from all over the political spectrum.

In the end, the courts did what they had to do. I'm sure there were partisans who might have changed the outcome if they had been able to (hi, SCOTUS!) but the courts followed the rule of law and recognized the reality of the situation. I'm almost a tiny bit proud of my former profession, in this case.

Thanks BK. Yeah, I've heard that a lot, from people I trust. It's disappointing that they would be so sloppy. That makes no sense to me. If you are going to present it, why do it like you are a first yr student, and not with proofreading and vetting significantly?

[Mori Chu]

Watch out, everyone! I heard from a super duper reliable source, "Hotel 3 with an underscore," that big bad scary miscellaneous things are going to happen in about a week! Can't say what they are, but he heard it from MULTIPLE people! Rock solid journalism!!

[In2ition]

Just because I disagree with you all politically, doesn't mean that I don't care about you. Just an FYI

So if I'm following this doom and gloom scenario you've provided absolutely no context to, the solar storm is going to cause 6 days of darkness all over the world this month. During that time, Russia and China will collaborate to fire missiles at several major US cities.

Had to try to comb through a few Twitter replies with more replies to uncover this gem of information that apparently nobody else is onto since I can't find anything about this anywhere else.

Is this what you are referring to here or am I missing something?

For what it's worth, I think many believe that it could be that the Insurrection Act and Marshall law may be instituted after the DNI presents his findings on the Executive Order from 2018 on Election interference. This is just conjecture, but there was a lot of activity in flights that has happened right after the election. A lot of activity to and from Guantanamo Bay, rendition flights, and large maneuvering of troops to different locations around the US.

[In2ition]

Watch out, everyone! I heard from a super duper reliable source, "Hotel 3 with an underscore," that big bad scary miscellaneous things are going to happen in about a week! Can't say what they are, but he heard it from MULTIPLE people! Rock solid journalism!!

Haha, are you trying to be a prick for a reason? I don't think he claims to be a journalist, just like you don't either.