[Libloather]

Socialists decide what democracy means. That can't go well. (Sure looks like they really hate audits.)

[metmom]

Good.

We need BOTH sides to count votes, not just the democrats.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Democrats only believe in democracy when they are allowed to steal elections.

[kaehurowing]

“CNN via MSN”—Can’t think of a more reliable source than that!

[ConservativeInPA]

but it is the latter that is by far a clearer threat to democracy.

We've never had a democracy and hopefully we never will. ANYONE that writes about the US being a democracy needs to be abused and vilified as being completely ignorant.

[a fool in paradise]

When conservatives circulated the “who counts the votes” meme last November, the “fact checkers” all denied that Joseph Stalin ever said it and “dinged” any posts that used it as “FALSE”.

But here we are now, 7 months later and CNN/MSN are using it to attack Republicans.

[beethovenfan]

Yes, only Democrats can count the votes.

[MarvinStinson]

CNN

[dynachrome]

“no one has proven exists”

If no one looks, there will never be any proof.

[DAC21]

If it wasn't for 33 year old millennial's via Dartmouth like Lil’ Harry I wouldn't know what to think.

[eyeamok]

fear of widespread fraud that no one has proven exists

Hmmm, Maybe one of these States should take them at thier word and make it a DEATH PENALTY Offense to engage in any Concerted Effort or Organized effort to commit any kind of Election or Vote Fraud.

[Terry L Smith]

Pravda hath spoken

[GaryCrow]

Arizona Senate Republicans have allowed a company that has no experience in ballot counting to go on a goose chase in its"audit" to find fraud long after the election. Republicans in other states have pushed for audits as well.

The biggest indicator that there was massive fraud is seeing how fervently democrats are trying to stop audits from happening and discredit the firms conducting the audits.

[IAGeezer912]

In honor of Ruby Freeman we need to call voter fraud being “Rubied”. That will make the libs heads explode.

[AndyTheBear]

widespread fraud that no one has proven exists,[Emphasis added]

Oh that fun standard of proving something is "widespread" to a hostile observer.

Show specific evidence in detail, and they will counter that what you have shown is not "widespread".

Show them the widespread evidence and they will counter it is not sufficiently proved in detail.

[NetAddicted]

Peruse later.

[MrRelevant]

Good. Are they saying next election Ruby Freeman and her crew wont be able to pull ballots out from under a table and count them alone in the middle of the night unsupervised?