Replies

“I think in all honestly, it is a very difficult case to make.”

You just have not looked. Sorry. Each battleground state picked up 500,000 extra democrat voters. More unbelievable vote totals. Now these 500,000 vote gains in each battleground are democrats only. Trump picked up so many votes the Democrats had to add the 500,000 mail-in votes to barely beat him. The idea that a 1,000,000 voter gain in each battleground state from one presidential election to the next is laughable.

Does anybody really think that Biden beat Obama with the Black population in select Swing State cities, but nowhere else? That he would lose 18 out of 19 bellwether counties, and 27 out of 27 “toss-up” House races, but somehow miraculously receive the most votes in American history with absolutely no coattails? That he would lose Florida, Ohio, and Iowa and win, even though it has never been done before? That he would beat Obama in his prime by millions more black votes yet lose 10% less counties. In these swing state cities that there would dozens of precincts with over 98% Biden vote totals with 100% voter turnout.

Statistically, there are so many outliers with impossible vote totals, one only has to look. But, statistics alone is not largest proof. You must not have read about video evidence of ballot boxes being destroyed within two months of the election, or seen the videos of ballot stuffing, or seen the video of county officials destroying data, or heard about shredding of mail-in envelopes, illegal mail-in ballots with no matching envelopes, there has been so much evidence of fraud that has been dribbled out since the election.

If a news organization gathered the proof and presented all the statistics and illegal activity surrounding election they could prove the fraud to anyone willing to see. The only reason that 90% of the country doesn’t believe the election was stolen is because the evidence of fraud and illegal activity by election supervisors is being delivered piecemeal. No one is seeing the big picture.

You can't make a conclusive argument based on historical vote totals when the rules were changed to make it easier to vote. Many states made it much easier to vote than it had been previously, and while there are tons of people who probably wouldn't make the effort to go to the polls, they would drop a ballot in the mail (or have it picked up) if one is deliberated to their house. Especially if there was door to door canvassing.

Fact is, Trump got 12 million more votes than he got in 2016, and Biden got 15 million more than did Hillary. So unless we're saying there was massive fraud on Trump's end too, we have to accept the reality that changes in voting rules -- particularly the pushing of absentee ballots -- changed the turnout models.

Didn't help that some Republicans kept making the ridiculous "more votes than registered voters" argument, either. Crap like that drowned out whatever legitimate arguments there were to be made.

I forgot to address the second part of your post.

Do I think there was some illegal stuff going on? Of course! The problem is quantifying provable illegality to the degree necessary to prove that it swung an election. You have to be able to count the number of actual votes impacted -- not just guess -- and then the evidence for that must be conclusive, not speculative. That is very difficult to do, especially when a lot of that evidence was destroyed, or based solely on testimony.