Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: justiceseeker93; Liz; Clintonfatigued; fieldmarshaldj; GOPsterinMA; NFHale; stephenjohnbanker; ...
California with it's lax standards had a crapload of people vote with absentee ballots and they are counting them slower than molasses. That's the official story.

I don't recall this ever happening before in a POTUS election. But I did notice that after 2014 when I looked at the Cali election results for Congress like in December that dem margins had grown.

I don't trust that state, at all. Presuming these votes are real, how many are illegal aliens? And why is the counting so glacial? Do they have teamsters doing it.

They've pushed Clinton up to +2 million and they aren't done yet, for all I know they might still be counting come inauguration day.

But they can shove it, Trump get's 100% of the Presidency.

55 posted on 11/23/2016 7:06:17 PM PST by Impy (Toni Preckwinkle for Ambassador to the Sun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: Impy; Clintonfatigued; fieldmarshaldj; BillyBoy; NFHale; stephenjohnbanker

Why does 99.9999% of every recount, etc. ALWAYS favor the RAT? It’s not realistic, yet, outside of FL POTUS 2000, they get away with it.


56 posted on 11/24/2016 4:13:34 AM PST by GOPsterinMA (I'm with Steve McQueen: I live my life for myself and answer to nobody.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: Impy; InterceptPoint; ExTexasRedhead; Political Junkie Too; randita; monkeyshine; David; ...
California with it's lax standards had a crapload of people vote with absentee ballots and they are counting them slower than molasses. That's the official story. I don't recall this ever happening before in a POTUS election. But I did notice that after 2014 when I looked at the Cali election results for Congress like in December that dem margins had grown.

On the day after the election, the national Clinton popular vote margin was about 200,000. Now you say it is 10 times that at 2 million. Doesn't make sense.

Some obvious questions:

(1) What was the Clinton % of the California vote on the day after the election, and what was the Clinton % of the California vote AFTER then? (I was under the impression that as a rule of thumb, absentee ballots in any contest in any jurisdiction should follow about the same percentages to each candidate as non-absentee ballots. If this is not the case in California, it requires a logical explanation. Otherwise, there is a strong suspicion of cheating.)

(2) What percentage of the vast increase in the Clinton national popular vote margin since the day after the election is attributable to California alone?

(3) How does the grand total of California votes as reported now compare to California's total of registered voters? If the the number of total votes divided by the number of registered voters in California is way above the national percentage, that's would be another tipoff that cheating is going on.

Yes, even if Trump is still President-elect, all this fraud and cheating must still be exposed when it exists, and the perps should be held accountable.

Strange that the 'Rats are now claiming that Trump might have won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio due to hacking of electronic voting machines. I would assume that if any hacking was going on, it was done on behalf of the 'Rats. Unfortunately for them, their cheating this year wasn't quite enough to get the Witch over the top. Yet they are still projecting their crimes onto their opponents.

59 posted on 11/24/2016 7:27:09 AM PST by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson