Post by potheadPost by SkeeterPost by SnitPost by potheadPost by P. CoonanPost by John SmythThis shouldn't be a surprise. Even to the morons at msnbc.
'MSNBC Interviews Early Voters In Key Battleground State, Struggles To
Find Anyone Who Voted For Harris'
<https://dailycaller.com/2024/10/16/msnbc-arizona-early-voting-kamala-harris/>
'NBC News correspondent Vaughn Hillyard said Wednesday that not one
early voter interviewed by his team in the battleground state of
Arizona admitted they were voting for Vice President Kamala Harris.
Republicans are voting by mail or returning their ballots early at a
two-to-one margin over Democrats, though Democrats outpaced
Republicans with early voting in 2020, Hillyard said on ?Jose-Diaz
Balart Reports.? Not a single voter lining up at the polling
locations in Mohave County openly said they were voting for Harris,
the NBC correspondent added.
?We went to a couple early voting locations, and we saw lengthy
lines during the lunch hour. Thirty people waiting in line, and we
should note, we did not find a single person who audibly would tell us
that they voted for Kamala Harris,? Hillyard said. ?These were
Trump supporters getting out to vote early in the all-important Mohave
County.?
One supporter of Republican nominee Donald Trump named Jim Coddington
said that voters are making a ?special effort? to vote this year
and that it is important for those to come out early. Shelley Schwarz,
a voter in Mohave County, said she voted early for the first time ever
because Trump encouraged voters to do so. (RELATED: Democrats?
Championing Of Early Voting Could Come Back To Haunt Them)
?He keeps saying it, and I?ve been thinking about it, and so here
I am,? Schwarz said.
Another voter said he did not vote in 2020 but voted early in 2024
because he is ?horrified by the state of the country,? Hillyard
said. Three other voters he spoke to said they moved to Arizona from
blue states to support Trump.
Trump is currently ahead in Arizona, 49% to 47%, according to The New
York Times. President Joe Biden narrowly won the state in 2020 by less
than one point, 49.4% to 49.1%, while the former president won the
state against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 49.5% to 45.4%
in 2016
We're going to see a repeat of the Hillary Clinton chokefest and shocked
expressions on CBS talking heads.
I sure hope so, however the demoncrats have been plotting their
cheating methods for 4 years so who knows what they have up their
sleeves this time.
Where do you get these wild stories?
Stay blind.
And stupid as well.
*Just a few anomalies regarding the 2020 election.*
1. Six states changed their election laws two months before the 2020
election by executive fiat, instead of going through the proper channels
in the legislature. That is a violation of their state constitutions and
that in and of itself is enough to invalidate the results of the 2020
election.
2. Mark Zuckerberg, hard left, spent $450 million dollars of private
money on our elections. After the 2020 election analysis revealed that
most of that money went to benefit Democrats.
3. 6 swing states stopped counting the votes on election night for the
first time in American history. At the time that they stopped counting
the votes, Donald Trump was ahead of Biden in each of them.
4. The unelected tech oligarchs in conjunction with the FBI in this
country censored a very important story about Hunter Biden’s laptop and
Joe Biden’s corruption. People who worked in the intelligence community,
came out and said it was Russian disinformation only to have that laptop
be admitted into evidence as part of an FBI investigation and criminal
prosecution of Hunter Biden. Polling after the election showed that if
people knew about the Hunter Biden laptop story it would’ve changed 17%
of the vote.
5. 2,036,041 ballots were touched by anomalies.
6. 923 American citizens filled out affidavits alleging voter fraud, and
signed them under penalties of perjury.
7. 50 plus courts blocked evidentiary hearings into the alleged fraud
found in 2020.
8. Prior to 2020 there were four other contested elections, one in
Florida, one in the 78th district of Missouri, one in the ninth district
of North Carolina, and one in the 22nd district of New York. In every
single one of those four instances, there was an evidentiary hearing. In
the 2020 election, there was no evidentiary hearing. For the first time
in American history.
9. No election contest in American history has had 923 fact witnesses
sign under penalties of perjury and stake their personal freedom in
testimony to attest to the irregularities and legal issues found in
various states.
10. 37 states in the United States of America altered their absentee or
mail in ballots ballot integrity procedures before the 2020 election.
11. If those 37 states used the same ballot integrity procedures that
they used in 2018, swing states would’ve found an upwards of 30,000 more
ineligible ballots.
12. In Pennsylvania, counties allowed new ballots to be filled out after
the election.
13. Any one of those is enough to say that there was enough fraud in the
2020 election to doubt the outcome. Can I prove Donald Trump would’ve
won the election if the Democrats hadn’t cheated? No I can’t prove a
counter-narrative, but I can tell you that this amount of fraud leads
any reasonable person to the conclusion that Joe Biden didn’t win.
The insurrection therefore was on 11/3/2020.
1/6 was a lawful protest with permits that got out of hand. Unlike
Democrats who spent 10 months burning down this country to the tune of
$2 billion dollars, and injuring 740 police officers nationwide, the
capital riot had a couple million dollars in damages, 140 police
officers that were injured and zero deaths. Except the 3 Trump
supporters who were unarmed and killed without any investigation by the
corrupt government.
Anybody who is clutching their pearls about January 6 without mentioning
the fact that there was a large federal presence and many anomalies that
have yet to be answered is a liar and a partisan hack.
You sound like an uninformed stage 10 TDS patient who needs to detox
from CNN and MSNBC.
You can endorse the cackling communist from California, but..don’t you
dare pretend like the reason why you’re doing it is because Donald Trump
did something wrong.
Let’s break down and address these claims one by one:
Claim 1: States changing election laws by executive fiat
It’s true that some states changed voting procedures before the 2020 election
due to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly to expand access to mail-in voting.
However, these changes were largely made through emergency powers or by state
election boards and officials, often with judicial review. In most cases, the
courts ruled these changes were legal under state constitutions. Even in
states where the legality was questioned, no court invalidated the election
results based solely on these procedural changes.
Claim 2: Mark Zuckerberg spent $450 million to benefit Democrats
Mark Zuckerberg and his wife donated to a non-partisan group, the Center for
Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), which provided funds to help local election
offices run elections during the pandemic. While some of the funds went to
areas that leaned Democrat (which are often more populous), Republican-leaning
areas also received funds. There’s no evidence that this funding was used to
favor one party over another.
Claim 3: 6 swing states stopped counting votes on election night
In 2020, due to the unprecedented number of mail-in ballots, some states did
stop counting votes temporarily on election night. This wasn’t a unique event
in history—vote counting has often extended beyond election night in previous
elections, especially in states with close races. Mail-in ballots take longer
to process, and the delays were expected and announced beforehand. Trump’s
early lead in some states was due to the “red mirage” phenomenon, where
same-day in-person votes (which leaned Republican) were counted first,
followed by mail-in ballots (which leaned Democrat).
Claim 4: Hunter Biden laptop story and censorship
The Hunter Biden laptop story was published just weeks before the 2020
election. Some media outlets and social media platforms took steps to limit
its distribution, citing concerns about the authenticity of the information
and potential foreign interference. While subsequent investigations confirmed
that the laptop was part of a legitimate investigation into Hunter Biden,
there is no evidence that the suppression of this story changed the election
outcome. Polls suggesting otherwise are speculative.
Claim 5: 2 million ballots touched by anomalies
This claim is vague and lacks concrete evidence. Many claims about voting
anomalies have been thoroughly investigated, and none have shown widespread
fraud that would alter the outcome of the election. Anomalies are common in
every election, but they are generally clerical or minor errors that do not
affect the overall result.
Claim 6: 923 affidavits alleging voter fraud
While it’s true that some people signed affidavits, affidavits are not proof
of fraud—they are simply statements by individuals. Many of these affidavits
were dismissed by courts due to lack of evidence or because they described
misunderstandings of normal election processes. Simply filing an affidavit
does not prove fraud.
Claim 7: 50+ courts blocked evidentiary hearings
Many courts rejected election fraud claims because the evidence presented was
insufficient or non-existent. Courts didn’t block hearings out of bias but
rather followed legal standards that require concrete evidence before
proceeding. Most cases were dismissed because they didn’t meet the burden of
proof.
Claim 8: No evidentiary hearing for the 2020 election
There were numerous hearings and legal challenges related to the 2020
election, including in key states like Georgia, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. In
most cases, judges found no credible evidence of widespread fraud. The idea
that there was “no evidentiary hearing” is false.
Claim 9: 923 fact witnesses signed under perjury
While hundreds of people may have signed affidavits, it’s important to note
that many of these affidavits were dismissed by courts due to a lack of
supporting evidence. An affidavit alone does not constitute proof, and many
were based on misunderstandings or hearsay rather than direct knowledge of
fraud.
Claim 10: 37 states altered absentee or mail-in ballot procedures
Yes, many states made adjustments to their mail-in voting procedures in
response to the pandemic, which is entirely legal if done in accordance with
state laws. These changes were made to ensure voter safety and accessibility.
Courts generally upheld these changes as legal, with some minor exceptions.
Claim 11: 30,000 more ineligible ballots in swing states
There is no evidence to support the claim that 30,000 ineligible ballots were
cast in swing states. Audits and recounts in key states, including Georgia and
Arizona, have consistently shown that the number of ineligible ballots was
extremely low and nowhere near enough to affect the outcome of the election.
Claim 12: Pennsylvania allowed new ballots after the election
This claim is false. Pennsylvania followed court-approved deadlines for
accepting mail-in ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and received
within a certain window after the election, which is a standard practice.
There is no evidence that ballots were illegally counted after the election.
Claim 13: Any one of these is enough to invalidate the election
Each of these claims has been investigated and largely debunked. While there
were some procedural changes due to the pandemic, none of the claims provide
credible evidence of widespread fraud that would invalidate the results of the
2020 election.
January 6 vs. Summer 2020 Protests
The January 6 attack was not a lawful protest. It was a violent breach of the
U.S. Capitol aimed at overturning the results of a democratic election. There
were investigations into the conduct of Capitol Police, but there is no
evidence of a government cover-up of the deaths of protesters. In contrast,
while the summer 2020 protests did lead to property damage and injuries, they
were largely protests against police brutality, and widespread condemnation
occurred when violence took place.
In summary, the 2020 election was one of the most scrutinized elections in
U.S. history, with no credible evidence found to support claims of widespread
fraud that would have changed the outcome. The claims made here have been
widely investigated, with no proof supporting the narrative that the election
was stolen.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.