|
Post by Bevo on Apr 25, 2024 14:03:20 GMT
I would say, they’ve picked a LOSER issue to back this time.
But then, the entire BLM case was based on a blatant lie. So, who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 25, 2024 3:37:48 GMT
Yea. Right. After he says it twice 🙄
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 14, 2024 12:18:48 GMT
I’m counting on your assessment of non-funded counties in Georgia. Maybe, I shouldn’t ?
Money spent in Texas, or California or New Jersey had zero impact on the outcome of the election. That’s just how it is. But, you know that already, don’t you?
It’s just there to muddy up the data.
I wonder how many lives were saved by this critical COVID protection?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 13, 2024 20:58:09 GMT
Well, that certainly was NOT true in Georgia. I've downloaded the other critical states. I won't bother to look at Texas, it was never in play.
But, I won't have more to say for a few weeks. We're heading out on a 2-week vacation tomorrow. And today, it's MASTERS time.
All this 4-year-old analysis can wait.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 13, 2024 14:00:37 GMT
Ah. Fun with %’s. That trick didn’t work in Georgia, so you’ve decided to expand.
Getting a 70% increase in a county with 22,000 people doesn’t help as much as a 3% increase in a county with 1M.
The bulk of the money went where they knew it would do the most good. Where the democrat voters were.
That’s how political operatives work. You don’t need to be an engineer to understand how to get votes.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 13, 2024 1:14:34 GMT
Maybe I didn’t word my statement correctly. But you proved my point. The counties who accepted the money had higher turnout. It was not the same.
The correlation is actually very easy to see. Let me help you: Where they donated the money, turnout was higher. Where did they donate the money ? Mostly, where Democrats are the majority. It’s not illogical to believe that was the intent. Zuckerberg was doing everything he could to help Democrats. That’s not much of a surprise. It wasn’t just in Georgia too. Georgia just got the most money.
As for the certificates, it’s a big leap from saying certificates existed to saying Trump was trying to pass them off as legitimate. It’s not hard for anyone to check with the various legislatures to find out WHO they had officially certified. It’s all public record.
As for Trump’s phone call, we may not be that far from agreement. I don’t think Trump should have made that call. A better politician would have either called one to one, or had underlings make the call. I just don’t think it was illegal and is certainly no cause for legal action. It’s something voters should take into account if/when Trump ran for office again. To me, it’s wasn’t a big enough deal to make me vote for Biden and the batshit crazy liberals over Trump and his business-friendly policies.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 12, 2024 18:02:07 GMT
You'd have to be a hyper-partisan to look at this data: view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fcapitalresearch.org%2Fapp%2Fuploads%2FCTCL-Georgia-Updated-Data-Set-from-990.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINKAnd not believe Democrats benefited more than Republicans in Georgia from the money coming from Zuckerberg. The Top 10 counties in Spending per Capita ALL voted for Biden, most by large margins. It wasn't just because they are larger and more populous although they are. If you look at the counties where Biden gained the most votes over Hillary's total: www.wyff4.com/article/georgia-election-results-2020-county-map/3493446710 of the Top 11 got money from Zuckerberg. The Top 9 all did. I don't know where you got the data about % turnout increase in the counties that didn't take money, but even using your data, a 36% average is significantly higher than 31%. Turnout increased almost everywhere. IN the counties were Zuckerberg money was spent, Democrat turnout was UP 35%, Republican only 18%. Apparently, the Republican counties that took it didn't know how to spend it. The top 9 most populated counties all took Zukerbucks. The top 6 all voted for Biden. That's who you target if you want to impact an election result. On your point about soliciting ballots from election officials: The justification is that others have done it, he is the only one to get caught. No. My justification is, nothing he did or said on that call was illegal. There were eight lawyers on the call. It wouldn't have happened if it was illegal. On your point about the “alternative” electors: I think they were trying to pass them off as being certified. We have a trial to determine if this was illegal and whether Trump was involved and to what extent. Of course you think that, even without evidence. You would never think otherwise. We'll see the outcome, if/when the trial ever happens Your belief that Trump was justified in his rhetoric or actions is based on faith, using talking points you must redact or are verifiably false, and “everybody does it” logic. My belief is based on a lifetime of observing, and sometimes working in political campaigns. Also, a lifetime of watching Democrats change procedures to make cheating easier, and vehemently opposing any change that makes cheating harder. You might call it "faith". I call it "intelligence guided by experience". IF there IS a way to cheat, people will do it. Republicans would do it too, but it's much harder for them because they don't have support coming from companies like Meta and Google. And, more importantly, Republicans don't have the high concentration of voters that Democrats have in the big cities. It's FAR harder to cheat over a zillion rural counties having more cows and chickens than people.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 11, 2024 19:27:54 GMT
will the NCAA follow suit here? NO way. They are far too woke. But, the new self-administrated "Super Conference" will.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 11, 2024 19:26:56 GMT
Bevo, I commend your efforts and appreciate your view but when you are dealing with TDS types then all facts and logic will be thrown out the window. Trust me, I know. But it CAN be helpful to write down what you believe, and why. Sometimes you learn you've got some parts incorrect. I'm always willing to re-evaluate. But, the mountain of evidence on the Trump side would take a LOT to overcome, for me.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 11, 2024 19:14:36 GMT
I will repeat my premise in case you wish to give your opinion on it: There was no justification for Trump to claim, as fact, that he won the election and it was stolen from him through fraud. There was no justification for Trump to solicit exactly the number of votes he needed to win from election officials. There was no justification for Trump to be involved in fake electors and fake certificates to try to cause confusion or doubt during the confirmation process. I understand my mistake now. Delaware PASSED the early voting law in 2019. I "assumed" (always a bad idea) that they implemented it in 2020. They didn't. It was delayed until 2022. It matters little. Delaware was never a state in contention. I mentioned it only an example of States changing election laws in violation of their own constitutions, and the US constitution. LOTS of that was happening in 2020, even BEFORE Election Day. Too many courts were 'making law', rather than 'interpreting law'. Allowing drop boxes? Who needs a dropbox? Who cannot put an envelope in the mail? Allowing people to register to vote AFTER state legislature required deadlines? For what purpose? There IS a reason to have a deadline. State officials need time to verify registrations. When you get 35,000 in 10 days, just days before the election as Arizona did, there's little chance of checking them all. When the MOV is only 10,450? It naturally raises concerns. As for Zuckerbucks: They were highly effective in turning out more votes for Democrats. In Georgia, there was no such increase in the counties that didn't get the money. There sure was in the ones who did get the money. There are now 27 States who have passed laws banning this kind of outside interference. To directly address your premise, I say YES. I do think Trump was more than justified in saying he had won the election and it was stolen by fraud. The results defied all precedent from previous elections. Candidates who basically do not campaign, and if they do make an appearance can't gather 50 people, simply do not generate the kind of record turnout that supposedly happened. "Bell-weather Counties" that had correctly predicted elections for multiple decades nearly all went for Trump. I believed it then; I believe it today. And I'm very glad Trump didn't just meekly concede and fade away. It's important to let the other side know that WE KNOW they cheated. Maybe, we didn't know exactly HOW in the 8 weeks after the election. We did know that proper, normal, election procedures were NOT followed. As to the phone call with Raffensberger, I'm 100% sure that Trump is not the ONLY elected official who ever called other elected officials of his own Party and encouraged them to "find votes". He's just the only one who's call was illegally recorded and then released. He's probably also the only one who's "Fellow Party member" didn't want him to win anyway. Trump NEVER ask for anything illegal to be done. He didn't tell them to "fake some ballots", "change some numbers". He spent most of the call detailing problems with the way the election was run. Democrats were "finding votes" for days after the election. Trump was just frustrated by the minute margin of victory and wanted to make sure that ALL potential votes were found and counted. Especially, Trump votes. There was also nothing wrong, or illegal about asking State Legislators to consider naming "Alternate Electors". There actually is historical precedent for this. There were only 4 weeks between the election and the certification of electors. Only another 4 weeks until the Senate confirmation. There were many efforts underway to find hard evidence of election fraud. HAD this evidence been found, it would have important to have a new slate of elector readily available. ASKING, is not illegal. PREPARING, is not illegal. If anyone tried to pass off the alternates as being State Legislature certified, THAT would be illegal. I'm not aware of Trump ever doing that. Unfortunately for Trump (And our country), the way the fraud was most likely done left no easily discernable evidence. All they could prove immediately after the elections was: election procedures were violated. The ONLY cure for that would have been, re-do state elections. NO COURT anywhere was ever going to order that. I believe ballots were falsely submitted for people were actually registered, but never voted. The big tech companies could easily generate such lists. All that would be needed to do this was: money, time, and an easy way to submit ballots without facing scrutiny. ALL of these were in place in 2020. Given what's at stake, I presume: IF there IS a way to cheat, someone will do it. There are easy procedural changes that would make this virtually impossible. Democrats adamantly OPPOSE them ALL. So, we will continue having elections that no one trusts. Winners will be pleased. Losers will be left to ponder what they can do about it. It's no way to run a country.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 10, 2024 15:41:49 GMT
None of those are evidence that the election was stolen. Some of those points I don’t even think are true, like counting ballots without signatures. Citation please? When states willingly fail to follow established rules for holding the election, there will always be suspicion when the outcome seems implausible. I erred saying "ballots with no signatures"... It should have been "ballots with no dates". www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mail-in-ballots-must-have-dates-on-envelopes-pennsylvania-appeals-court-rules/ar-BB1kKstzIn 2020, Pennsylvania, in violation of State law, counted mail-in ballots coming in THREE days after election day. Who could possibly abuse that kind of system? Practically no state had a system of signature verification planned for anything like the % of mail-in ballots cast in 2020. They all had to virtually waive their established rules for verification. vashiva.com/scientific-study-reveals-maricopa-counted-200000-ballots-with-mismatched-signatures/ That was the original ruling in 2022. It just got expanded; apnews.com/article/delaware-early-voting-absentee-lawsuit-072bfce3468de4db3b2638ed383cf526I guess the ballots they were using are still OK, but the WAY they conducted the election, as to timing, has been ruled unconstitutional. Zuckerberg’s donations were not found to be illegal, or even politically biased, 6-0 by the bipartisan FEC. LOL The FEC is worse than Inspector Clouseau. Only in America is illegal to give a candidate more than $3,300. But, it's FINE to funnel $491M through shell organizations, and dole it out all over the country, particularly in the critical few swing states, and almost ALL to help Democract turnout. capitalresearch.org/article/shining-a-light-on-zuck-bucks-in-key-states/Note.... Georgia. The state with the HIGHEST per capita grants; CTCL gave grants to 17 of the 31 counties Biden won in Georgia. Together, t hese 17 counties received $42.4 million, or over 94 percent of all CTCL funds in the Peach state. Nothing to see here. Right. Anyone who's EVER worked in a campaign, or in an election, understands well the power of money. Zuckerberg found a loophole, and exploited it. Since 2020, three more states (Alabama, Arizona and Wisconsin) have passed laws, or amended their constitution to specifically BAN what Zuck did. They seemed to think it made a difference.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 9, 2024 18:03:51 GMT
What I don’t respect is dismissing or flat out denying that Trump tried to subvert the will of the people for his own gain, without any evidence that his rhetoric or actions were justified. Trump was fulfilling the will of the people who voted for him. He was fighting, legally, until all options were expired. And I think it was in an official capacity for his job, thus... covered by immunity. We'll see. No evidence at all of a rigged election? Really? It was the most FUBAR election of my lifetime. Long-standing State election laws were completely ignored. Ballots being mass mailed, unsolicited, to names on voter registration rolls that were woefully inaccurate. Ballots being accepted in unsupervised drop boxes, thus bypassing normal postmarks. Allowing people to register, en masse, WEEKS after legislative deadlines... up until just days before the election. Counting mail-in ballots that weren't signed, had no dates... in direct violation of State law. Abandoning required procedures for signature checks. Zuckerberg spending $350 MILLION with State election officials to increase DEMOCRAT turnout. Not to mention the over-the-top coordinated censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop that documented evidence of corruption, and.. at the very least, proved that Joe was lying when he said he knew NOTHING about Hunter's deals and was never involved. Many of the things listed above are now explicitly illegal now in many states, thanks to new laws and constitutional amendments. Heck, in Delaware, their courts have ruled the entire process used in 2020 violated their constitution. It will be a LITTLE harder to cheat, in the same way. But I'm sure that won't keep Dems from doing whatever they have to do. They have convinced themselves that Trump is so uniquely horrible, ANYTHING they have to do to stop him is morally justified. That's how far they've gone.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 8, 2024 3:52:46 GMT
thanks so much for the meaningful contribution Hen. It’s so appreciated at a time when a 71 yr-old Great Grandmother is convicted of multiple charges for walking through an open door on Jan 6, praying inside our Capitol, and then leaving…. Without ever hurting anyone or anything. Biden’s DOJ wants to put her in jail for a year. I’m sure you must be glad. What a THREAT she was to our great democracy. But, you keep on posting your Trumpy FB posts, and feel smug.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 7, 2024 21:10:17 GMT
I don’t see how the charges are invented. Of course you don't, you're a hyper-partisan. Challenging election results is NOT a crime. NO President, EVER, has been charged with keeping documents, even though practically EVERY President has done it. Your hero, James Comey, set the standard: "No reasonable prosecutor would bring charges"... Of course, that wasn't even against a former President. Just a negligent Secretary of State. It's even MORE unreasonable now. The timing of charges is not inconsistent with other white collar crimes, which was an average of 452 days in 2022. Thanks for proving my point. These supposed election 'crimes' and documents cases were committed in Jan 2021, or even December 2020. ON AVERAGE, they should have been charging Trump in April of 2022. Waiting until July of 2023 is DOUBLE the average. The other charges, like the NEVER BEFORE prosecuted horrific crime of providing optimistic real estate property evaluations to a lender (who is responsible to do their OWN evaluation) all happened many years ago. Those cases should never have been brought. They had all the evidence more than 2 years ago. They waited, just for the election. You'd have to be a complete idiot to not understand what's going on here. But, maybe you are? I never thought so. Maybe, I was wrong. Donald Trump said yes, he would abuse power as retribution against (someone). Your response is to defend this, again blaming democrats? You are fine with a dictator as long as he’s on “your side”? I don't like the "new norm" of Presidents "dictating" by Exec Order when EITHER side does it. It's been increasing for decades. I don't know how to stop it. The SCOTUS has over-ruled Biden MANY times. THAT doesn't stop him. For sure, I don't expect Republicans to just stop playing the game right when Democrats have everything going their way. Is Donald on your side? Did he actually accomplish anything he said he would LOL Oh yes. Trump got MANY things done, despite being opposed by BOTH parties in his first two years. That's why they hate him so much. Congrats though..... once again, you've suckered me into debating with you like you're a serious person. I know better. I guess, I'm just an eternal optimist. You can support the party that wants to BAN gasoline powered cars by 2030. I'll take the other team. But, I have better things to do that try to convince you of anything.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Apr 6, 2024 20:37:38 GMT
The Democrats today are the single biggest threat to our Democracy. They are destroying ALL norms with this abuse of the justice system to try to keep Trump from running. If I'm going to vote to "Save Democracy", it will be to get rid of THEM. This is my favorite part about the TDS. Trump commits a litany of crimes, but it is somehow the democrats fault? Don’t Blame Trump for falsifying business records, holding onto classified documents, inciting an insurrection, or conspiring to overturn an election. The Democrats are to blame! There is a reason why Trump is trying to claim immunity. Imagine a country where the president is immune from criminal activities, and those who accuse him of crime are just abusing the justice system. You’re literally advocating for a dictatorship, which Trump has advocated for too. You really have no clue if you think ANY of these charges would have been brought against ANY other person at ANY other time. Please tell me, you're not that clue-less, or hyper-partisan? ALL of these charges are invented and timed purely for political purpose. Anyone with a non-washed brain knows that. Any of these charges could have been brought in the past 3 years if the Dems were truly interested in Justice. The only one that has the tiniest chance of validity is the classified documents case. And that one is obviously politically driven when compared to what Hillary and Joe did, which was WORSE, and done when they were not President, thus having ZERO claim of justification. No court has ever ruled on whether a President has to comply with the edicts of Congress when it comes to documents. Trump had every right to hold on to them and seek relief in the court system. The FBI, with coordination from the Biden WH, didn't want to wait for a court review. "Immunity" has been a long-standing practice for Presidents, when it comes to the duties of their office, not for crimes. There is considerable, partisan debate about whether or not Trump committed any crime as he contested election results. Results that 80+% of Republicans disbelieved. He challenged them LEGALLY, with lawyers and Congress members, NOT with armed combatants. In the end, there WAS a peaceful transition of power. Perhaps you've forgotten it? There was far more violence on inauguration day when Trump took office than there was when Biden was sworn in. The ingrained, embedded DEEP STATE bureaucrats in DC hate Trump, because he is a threat to their never-ending gravy train. Which is a bit irrational since... he did very little to upset them in his first term. They were successful at keeping him pre-occupied with fake "Russia-collusion" charges and bogus impeachments. They definitely fear what he might do... TO THEM... in a second term. This time, their fear is probably justified. He knows now, who they are and what they've done to him. Trump was not dictator in his first 4 years, and he won't be in the next 4. Except, yes... on Day 1, when he'll have to issue a slew of Executive Orders, undoing the edicts of the previous "dictator". That's how our broken government functions these days. Even when Trump tells the truth, YOU guys twist it as some sort of nefarious undertaking. It's really sad to see. This election is no longer about Trump, as a person... or his policies. It's about whether "We, the people.." are going to allow a runaway government monster to dictate who out choices are for leadership.
|
|