Election 2020

According to Trump, Nearly Everyone Is Conspiring To Deny Him His Rightful Victory

The nefarious scheme evidently includes Republican officials and Trump-friendly news outlets.


The vast conspiracy that Donald Trump says delivered the presidential election to Joe Biden gets broader with each passing day. It now includes not just a cabal of pollsters, mainstream media outlets, and corrupt Democrats but also Republican officials and Trump-friendly new organizations.

The president's assertion that the election was "stolen" posits massive, orchestrated fraud. But one study after another has found that voting fraud is very rare, and there is no evidence this year is an exception.

In Nevada, for example, Biden won by about 31,000 votes, according to unofficial results. The CBS station in Las Vegas says Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, a Republican, "reports there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud."

In Georgia, where Biden is currently leading by about 10,000 votes, the election system is run by Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a former Republican state legislator who was endorsed by Trump when he ran for his current position. Last week the president nevertheless claimed "the election apparatus in Georgia is run by Democrats."

On Friday, Raffensperger rejected insinuations that the state's vote counting system is corrupt. "The stakes are high and emotions are high on all sides," he told reporters. "We will not let that debate distract us from our work. We will get it right….We're committed to doing everything we can to maintain trust in our electoral process. If somebody has a credible complaint and some evidence, they can give our office a call." Gabriel Sterling, voting systems manager at Raffensperger's office, said election officials had not seen any "widespread irregularities."

Biden beat Trump by about 41,000 votes in Pennsylvania, which clinched his victory by delivering 20 Electoral College votes. Pennsylvania's secretary of state, Kathy Boockvar, is a Democrat. But Fox News correspondent Brian Llenas reports "there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in Pennsylvania." He adds: "The American people deserve to see fact based evidence to support these claims of voter fraud. Especially at the levels being alleged. There is no evidence of it in PA at the levels being claimed. Thankfully there are courts that will [distinguish] fact from opinions on this matter."

"Since when does the Lamestream Media call who our next president will be?" Trump wondered on Twitter today. Yet Fox, once Trump's favorite news source, joined other major outlets this weekend in declaring Biden the winner of the presidential election.

Sen. Patrick Toomey (R–Pa.) likewise is not buying Trump's claims about fraud in Pennsylvania. "The president's allegations of large-scale fraud and theft of the election are just not substantiated," he told NBC News on Friday. "I'm not aware of any significant wrongdoing here."

The New York Post, which no one would mistake for a pro-Biden newspaper, last week called Trump's allegations "baseless" in the headline of a news report. Today the Post noted that Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, Trump himself, and "others within the president's orbit" have "repeatedly made allegations of widespread and organized fraud since Election Day, but have not provided hard evidence to back up the claim."

"I WON THIS ELECTION, BY A LOT!" Trump insisted yesterday. Nearly everyone, it seems, is conspiring to deny that reality.

NEXT: Peter Navarro's No-Good Economic Nationalism 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Gosh, why do you suppose he feels this way?

    1. It's a mystery!

      1. It's a total coincidence that all the commenters called out as leftists for months just happen to be on the "nothing to see here" side.

        1. OMG, you guys are really gonna keep crying for the next 4 years.

          1. I hope the irony isn't lost on ya...RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA

            1. Wasn't that a Brady Bunch meme?

              1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20841 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on the given website.....

                For more detail visit the given link............ Visit Here

            2. Loser Loser Loser...LOL Nothing happened as a result of Russia & that's why #DONtheCON is scared about losing.

              1. You have looong set of years approaching, you whiny fucker you.

              2. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

                what I do.........work92/7 online

          2. Start making cash online work easily from home.i have received a paycheck of $24K in this month by working online from Abq home.i am a student and i just doing this job in my spare ?Visit Here


      2. I don't know...Schiff has had the proof that Trump conspired with Russians and is a traitor, so will get the death penalty. What's Trump so upset about anyway? So what if people are actually trying to use the government to kill him?
        He should get some perspective.

        1. It’ll be the next libertarian moment.

        2. Google pays for every Person every hour online working from home job. I have received $23K in this month easily and I earns every weeks $5K to 8$K on the internet. Ajk Every Person join this working easily by just just open this website and follow instructions.............. Visit Here

      3. Start making cash online work easily from home.i have received a paycheck of $24K in this month by working online from Abq home.i am a student and i just doing this job in my spare ?Visit Here

    2. I quit working at shop rite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier So i try use.
      Here’s what I do....... WORK24

      1. Do you have a job for poor Jacob Sullum?
        He's not too big on journalisming but loves to shill, and $65-85 per/h. is a huge step up from Reason wages.

    3. With after-math counting of mail-in Ballots running 80% to 90% in Biden's favor day's after the actual election day certainly wouldn't be comforting to watch.

      Be just like watching all the balls pop-out of the holes you put them in; certainly wouldn't be a comfortable feeling.

      1. Why the obvious sockpuppet SQRLSY/Roberta?

        1. There's no way that Roberta is a Sqrlsy sock. Not enough ALLCAPS.

          1. And Roberta is also not a crazy weirdo. This
            "everyone I don't like is a sock" shit is retarded.

    4. unreason's propaganda is definitely one reason.

      MSM are liars.

      Mail-in ballots are the largest election fraud in US history.

      1. "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

        Mail-in ballots are merely ballots that are sent in by mail. Trump himself voted that way.

        1. There is a difference from requesting a ballot and shotgun distribution of ballots.

          1. So, if that specific practice is what you have a problem with why don’t you speak accurately? The states that did mass distribution of ballot applications is a subset of those that accept mail-in ballots, and the subset that sent out ballots rather than mere applications is even smaller.

            More importantly, why couldn’t Trump articulate this fine point? Why can Trump not articulate ANY fine point?

            1. Because you are a pedantic ass?

              1. Is there any truth to the rumors that the DHS and FBI orchestrated a sting against election fraud by having the various state printers use specially watermarked paper for the ballots?

                I didn't think much about it until Snopes and Reuters fell all over themselves to say it's false, and their only reason for saying so is that the DHS doesn't run elections.
                Never believe strange political rumors until they've been officially denied by Snopes.

                It would be hilarious to see the bricks White Knight would shit with rage if it were true.

                1. We'll find out, but my faith in such things is rather low.
                  Otherwise I'd still be holding out hope for all those indictments...

                2. I guess.

                3. It doesn't make much sense. Contractors print the ballots, and they are hired by so many jurisdictions, the federal government and the DHS wouldn't be involved. The government's own dotgov site also debunks this silly theory of watermarked ballots.

                  1. Guess I am spared from having to “shit with rage”.

                    1. No, you will still "shit with rage" when Trumps retains his title. Be sure to do a selfie video documenting your meltdown and post it. Priceless.

                4. Makes no sense whatsoever--way too many people both on the local government side and the private sector (whoever gets hired to print the ballots) would need to be involved. The latest version I've heard involved quantum computers determining that Trump actually won 80% to 20%.

                  Maybe a better question is, who keeps tossing out nonsense like this to add to the confusion around this election?

              2. "Because you are a pedantic ass?"

            2. It is speaking accurately. Because when anyone on here isn't talking about main-in ballots, they specifically say absentee ballots (you know, the one's you have to actually request).

              1. This has been explained to me a dozen times, and I’ve ignored it every time. Why do you think this time would be different?

                Ps, I agree with SQRLSY that all black men should have felony warrants.

              2. If a state sent out ballot applications, that would fit your definition of an absentee ballot. Which gets back to your complaint only really being about states that sent out ballots, not applications.

                So, why could not Trump articulate that argument.

                1. If a state sent out ballot applications, that would fit your definition of an absentee ballot.

                  Are you really that stupid, or just really that much of a dishonest sack of shit...or both?

            3. Do you. not understand the difference between a requested absentee ballot, and ballots automatically mailed out?

          2. "There is a difference from requesting a ballot and shotgun distribution of ballots."

            Some states have been conducting elections in that matter. Nobody seemed to care until a shambling bunch of slack-jawed bigots got lathered up about everything in general.

            1. California is the only place I had heard about such things. And there have been numerous allegations that california is rife with ballot stuffing. Just not at the national level... There is nothing to stuff at the national level.

            2. Brush your fucking green teeth you stinking meth tweaker. Christ, don’t those missions give you toothbrushes along with the soup?

          3. I received one of these so-called "shotgun blast" ballots, which I declined to use. And when I showed in person to vote last Tuesday, after they verified my ID, they took a little card with my name on it an after my ballot was cast, put said card into a file box marked "completed votes" and crossed me off the list of people who could still vote.

            Keep flailing though.

            1. Meaning that voting in person is reasonably controlled and verified. But a mail in ballot could be filled out by anyone. No ID required. No signature even in PA.

              Weird... That we would require less security and verification for the version that is easier to fake. Seems a bit counterintuitive.

              1. and ALSO meaning that they made sure I couldn't vote twice.

          4. Sorry Pennsylvania didn't do any distribution of ballots to registered voters. All the absentee ballots in Pennsylvania were requested. Too bad that doesn't fit your narrative.

        2. Now that Republicans learned how to cheat properly, I hope you remain as accepting of that method. YOU set the precedent! 🙂

      2. "Mail-in ballots are the largest election fraud in US history."

        Then there should be no difficulty in producing evidence of all that fraud, yet ... .

      3. GO CRY MOAR, ilovedicks1789.

        1. Dude! Your spelling is typical of Democrat voters.

          1. Democratic voters, you illiterate bigot.

            Maybe pray on your illiteracy well, and pretend Jesus said 'tryeth to be literate, or as close as you manage, my gullible followers.'

            1. If there's one thing the LieCheatSteal party - formerly known as the democrats - is not known for, it is being democratic.

            2. Why do you live with so many goddamned cats? Your mom confused cat urine with cologne, and now that’s your Axe? You are fetid!

            3. They are both correct, LOL!

        2. Yes, you do choke down the chodes. But almost 1800? The syph must explain the brain problems.

      4. Our election integrity standards are among the lowest of any nation in the developed world. The new ranking is a recent development. Seriously, just compare the rules for absentee voting in MANY European nations and compare that to the clown show run by certain states.

    5. Russian interference!

      Has anyone checked to see if the Russian interfered in the election?

      Has Joe Biden or anyone in his campaign been in touch with the Russians?

      Did the FBI use opposition research to get a FISA court to let them do surveillance on the Biden campaign?

      Enquiring minds want to know!

      1. Technically, and I know it's hard to keep up with the web of lies, it was the Ukrainians who framed the Russians who hacked the DNC server but which was also not hacked but leaked by Seth Rich who was then murdered by the Democrats.

        1. Thanks for straightening all that out.

    6. “ Gosh, why do you suppose he feels this way?”

      Because he’s a paranoid narcissist?

      1. How do you call someone paranoid when the CIA and the FBI were literally out to get him?

        1. So you’re saying he has a reason to be paranoid. Wutabout the narcissism?
          Ooooh, Let me try: Because grown men have massive crushes on him and readily justify his every action on social media and multi-paragraph love letters on libertarian comment boards??? (I’d let that go to my head too I guess.)

          1. "...Wutabout the narcissism?
            Ooooh, Let me try: Because grown men have massive crushes on him and readily justify his every action on social media and multi-paragraph love letters on libertarian comment boards??? (I’d let that go to my head too I guess.)"

            Does your TDS cause pain, or just massive brain failure, you pathetic piece of shit?

            1. Awww. Sevo called me a name. How completely unoriginal of it.

            2. Trump lost. Cry more, cunt.

            3. Brain malfunctions. But it doesn’t matter, because a Barrista only needs to remember as many letters as can fit on a Vente Latte cup; reason and a functional memory are not required.

          2. “When everyone’s out to get you, paranoia just makes good sense.”

            - Dr. Johnny Fever

            1. Trump lost. Go cry, cunt.

              1. Really? The election isn’t decided yet. How did you determine the?

                1. Going down with the Titanic, I see.

                  1. Gore v. Bush in FL didn’t end until December 2000, and that was only one state. What’s today’s date? How many state have recounts and challenges? This is going to take a while...

                    1. Gore had much more of a case than Trump, and he still didn't prevail.

        2. Ken, you're full of shit.

      2. Is Snowden paranoid, too?!

      3. He's definitely a narcissist but hardly paranoid.

        1. Trump lost. Go cry more, bitch.

          1. This is really eating at you, isn’t it?

            1. That Trump lost? Lol.

              1. All up in your head like an earwig.

                1. China tariffs are gone. Lol.

    7. I have to admit he sounds a little delusional.

      Almost as bad as Hillary has been since 2016.

    8. "voting fraud is very rare, and there is no evidence this year is an exception." - Jacob Sullum

      Sullum, you're are both a fraud & a hack. Please go someplace else.

      1. Reason is usually pretty good.

        But like the national LP, every so often they drop some blatantly biased Leftist trash.

      2. Gonna cry? Lol.

    9. Only because he is the most attacked President in the history of our nation.

      Daily non-stop insults, accusations, implications, insinuations, allegations, blatant lies.

      In what would seem to be a relatively obvious attempt to try and remove the man from office.

      Crazy to think that these same people, who were literally seething with hate and anger from every pore, would rig an election.


      1. He brought on all those attacks, moron.

        1. Up your ass and wiggling in your guts too, heh.

          1. What is? I'm curious.

    10. Because Donald Trump is an overgrown combination of a spoiled brat and a schoolyard bully who's so used to getting his own way about things that he acts like a bull in a china shop, and doesn't seem to realize that it's time for him to concede to the Biden/Harris ticket, which was elected into office fairly, squarely and legally. Here's hoping that Donald Trump gets escorted out of the White House by force, through a cadre of Secret Service people, the Military, or Security in the event that he refuses to transfer his power to Biden and leave on his own. It would serve him right, imho.

    11. He feels this way because he has mental issues that he needs to address. Or maybe he's just senile.

  2. Gee what a surprise.
    The world's biggest narcissist is having the world's biggest temper tantrum when he loses.

    1. Unlike Hillary’s stoic response.

      1. Trump's performance so far is making Hillary's look good.

        1. You are literally lying at this point. Clinton's recitations reach histrionic proportions. She blamed everyone and everything for her lose, except herself.

          1. Hillary Clinton did complain, but she accepted the loss. Trump can wail away all he wants but first he need to concede, just as Hillary Clinton did.

            1. Her speech.

              “Vote to make sure we — not a foreign adversary — choose our president,”

              1. Trump lost, and the tariffs are going away. Cry more, bitch.

                1. lol you still won’t clear 100K this year. That’s the funniest thing about libertarians they make less than plumbers and vote like hedge fund guys.

            2. “accepted the loss”

              She whines on an hourly basis to this day that Russians magically stole it from her, you lying piece of shit.

              1. The extent to which voters like you believed Russian propaganda when making your decision is the extent to which they helped determine the outcome.

                But the problem is now you’re gonna say that Hillary really did bleach her emails or whatever because that’s what Facebook told you.

                1. Sure Bloomberg's $1,000,000,000 dollar ad campaign didn't move the needle, but the Russian's $150k in Facebook ads targeted at both sides stole the election because the Russkis are magic.

                  Keep channeling McCarthy, Tony.

                2. The part where Jesus and Satan arm wrestle? That kind of propaganda?

            3. Did you forget about Russia? (besides, Hillary knew that Reptilian immigrants were ineligible for the presidency, I agree it's racist, but it's the law)

            4. “Complain” ... fantasizing about foreign collusion and getting admin plants to act on it.

              I loved her concession speech too. Oh wait...

          2. It Trump going to walk out of the White House like a baby, or be carried out like a baby?

            Either way, I will be content.

            But he will comply.

            1. ahahaha your heroes are a senile old man and a dirty cop ahhahaajahha

              1. When Tulpa spams the board with the same comment over and over like he is doing here, I encourage everyone to flag the comments as spam. It's time to clean this place up a little.

                1. Good idea. I just flagged your comment, Chipper, for speech suppression and trolling, you piece of shit.

                  1. GO CRY MOAR.

                    1. Learn to spell you illiterate Democrat.

                    2. speling iz rasist!

                    3. LOLCat spelling, not surprising at all.

          3. Let me know when Trump blames himself for his loss.

            1. He never will. Trump is a pathological narcissist, and narcissists don't think they ever make mistakes. That's why they can't ever learn from their mistakes.

              1. Lol

                Narcissist has become the same as racist, fascist, nazi, etc.

                You can't apply critical thought, so you vomit your feelz in the words you've been programmed to use, with no real comprehension.
                You don't like Trump because he's brash and egotistical (and masculine, which is what you find most offensive, but we'll leave that aside for now). He's a dick.
                You, being the virtuous selfless good boy ("nice guy") that you are, feel insecure when confronted by someone who is direct, confrontational, assertive, and doesn't feel the need to apologize for offending someone's delicate fucking sensibilities.
                But really, you're the narcissist. You believe, because you're passive aggressive and weak, other people are responsible for how you feel. Thus seeing someone who rejects your pathology in a position of prominence prompts fear that the social construct will no longer emphasize others' responsibility for your feelings, and you'll have to generate value for yourself.
                The left breeds this collectivist personality disorder, because the left feeds off the weak and uses them as instruments in the acquisition of power.
                Ironically, considering how much you hate Christianity (both because you think that's what the "cool kids" think and because faith is a source of inner, self generated strength for others) this pathology stems from an aspect of Christianity wherein the victim was elevated to God. That is the unhealthy aspect of Christianity which has allowed leftism to take such a hold in the decadent west, but it is fundamentally opposed to nature.
                This is a conflict you are extremely unlikely to ever solve, as you deny your inherent weakness to assuage your ego in the fantasy that you are special and Good.
                You are not. You are codependent and resentful. And this drives your entire moral structure.

                Now that was fun. Gonna be a bitch for you though.

                  1. Turns out he can write well when he's not wishing death upon people.

                    Decent breakdown, Nardz.

                    1. The first part was pure projection on Nardz part. For example:

                      “You can’t apply critical thought, so you vomit your feelz in the words you’ve been programmed to use, with no real comprehension.”

                      Totally Nardz pointing the finger back at his own self-loathing reflection.
                      The rest is just a haphazardly constructed and burnt strawman by an insecure, and sad person who’s only outlet is a 24/7 presence on website where he’s found his only self-acceptable identity. Freud would deconstruct poor Nardz better. But I’m sure it’s something to do with a father who hates him and mother who ignored him, and women/girls who are repulsed by him. Sad really.

                    2. Eric, you really shouldn't try this game.
                      You just aren't insightful.
                      Everyone reading here can compare comments. They'll find i am a very critical thinker, though I don't strive to make every post an example.
                      You, on the other hand, react to the world with your feelz, and very little thought.
                      You don't like Trump, for many of the same reasons as eunuch, so you bitch about whatever mass media, including this publication, "suggest" you bitch about.
                      For example, when Suleimani was taken out, you were outraged!
                      I don't remember if you tried figuring out other reasons for your outrage, but you did settle on one... and it was a doozy.
                      Not only would the bombing cause World War III (again), but YOU WERE MAD BECAUSE "YOUR" WAS GOING TO GET DRAFTED!
                      I, and many others I'm sure, laughed my ass off at that one.
                      But I've been meaning to ask: does your friend who knocked up your wife and tricked you into raising the little bastard at least help with the rent? Buy you a low fat white claw every now and then at least?

                  1. Lol he bent you over and fucked you so hard that I guess he kind of is. But he’s prison gay and you are the bitch.

                    1. Trump is going to be someone's bitch in prison soon. Hahahahahahaha!

                    2. Such a bitch, that you’re fantasizing about it. Just be gay, dude and don’t blame Trump for being such a queer.

                1. That was a delicious word salad of tears. Thx. Buuurrrrpppp....

                2. I don't know. Narcissist seems pretty fair applied to Trump.
                  I would have preferred he get reelected, but let's not pretend that he isn't a singularly bizarre personality.

                  1. You haven’t talked to any CEOs in an relaxed environment, obviously. His personality is not that of a fucking politician, which is why you’re missing the point.

                    1. Trump is a failed businessman, retard.

                  2. Not the way they use it to attack Trump. In that regard, it's become an empty buzzword like the others.
                    We are almost all narcissistic these days, but not exactly narcissists. Social media certainly breeds that kind of thing.
                    Trump is boastful. Trump is literally a brand too. Certainly narcissistic, but more accurately described as egotistical.
                    Let's compare Trump vs Obama regarding the press. Trump confronts them directly. He talks shit to them, and he meets their slander head on. Obama had them barred from interaction, or uninvited them to events, or had them jailed.
                    A narcissist is above all passive aggressive. Because a narcissist is ultimately insecure.
                    Don't think you'll try to argue that there is anything passive about Trump's aggression.

                3. Exactly! Well said.

                4. You couldn't be more wrong. No one is "afraid" of Trump for being "tough." There is the Schwarzenegger version of being tough, then there is the Trump version. Compare and contrast, you might learn something.

                  "faith is a source of inner, self generated strength for others"
                  No, faith is off-loading your moral compass and strength to an unseen deity instead of being accountable.

                  1. Did you have an argument somewhere in that sputtering?

                5. That was interesting.
                  I disagree with you about the part of Christianity that paved the way for "leftism." It's the part where a) eventually there is heaven on earth and everything is perfect (utopia), b) "the first will be last" morality - eventually the people with the least stuff will have the most stuff, according to that reading, so we just have to hurry it up and c) people with less money are morally better. If people aren't careful they can absolutely get a reading that says, the poor people deserve to be in charge and soon will be. If you think that's the rules of the game, it absolutely makes sense to be as poor and weak as possible for as long as possible, because it puts you in the winning bracket.
                  "Victim becomes God" part is one interpretation, definitely. There is a funny crossover in "be like Jesus." There was a misunderstanding there - I could see it when I read that Jesus was in the style of the "wandering spiritual teacher" character in Asian spiritual traditions. There was a familiar dichotomy there between what regular people needed to do, and what it meant to become a monk, basically devoting every personal and material aspect of your life to religion. Reading about Buddhism, there was a sense that not everyone was being asked to donate everything and be monks, there was an understanding that real life involved regular people with possessions and work lives and family responsibilities. One of the interesting things about Jesus is blurring those lines totally. I think some people do fall off the wrong side of the raft there though, but I'm not sure that's the part that caused "leftism." I think leftism developed in response to real material deprivation, but the style is 'Christianity lite;' political perfection is coming, just tithe and pray and believe us. This is part of why people are running around mumbling about immanentizing the eschaton. Being able to access health care *should not* require an apocalypse.

                  The breakdown of Christian social control has allowed many many quasi-Christian concepts to puddle up in weird configurations in Western society. I am a Christian and I wrestle with this. TNWJM... That's Not What Jesus Meant... (which, of course, I use wryly, being unable to know.)

                  1. Well said.
                    Thank you for that. I think your a, b, and c explains what I'm getting at with the elevation of victim to God status very well, and expands upon it a bit.
                    IMO, as an ethnic catholic and firm agnostic, Christianity diverges from the teachings of Jesus pretty significantly. I favor Nietzsche's breakdown: Jesus was basically a Buddhist who sought to teach an alternative to the unfortunately literal interpretation of Judaism. His disciples didn't quite get that, and his ministry was interrupt by his execution, creating a crises for those he reached.
                    Too long a discussion for now.
                    There are healthy and unhealthy aspects to Christianity, as with anything, and it is inescapable in the west. The left seems to have learned all the wrong lessons in Christianity - except how to use its moral/pathological structure to gain power.

            2. Trump didn't commit the massive electoral fraud against himself so why would he take the blame?

              1. What fraud?


                1. Caps-lock self defeat.

                  1. I see you couldn't give evidence of fraud. Trump lost. Go cry more, cunt.

          4. She wrote a whole book blaming everyone but her for her loss.

            1. He's working on it. 280 characters at a time.

            2. Well Trump isn't capable of writing a book.

              1. Haha. You know, I thought that at first too, but I’m thoroughly convinced he’s a lot smarter than I ever thought. I certainly believe now he’s very capable of writing a good book.
                But of course, If he did, there would be about two years of debate over whether he was the actual one who wrote it, etc etc...no matter what the facts are. So what’s the point?

        2. Wait, you mean trump is going to have the IC go after Biden now with false claims?

          1. Protectionism is dead. Lol.

          2. Blue state Jesse. Lol.

        3. "Trump’s performance so far is making Hillary’s look good."

          ahahahaha which is cope since she is STILL WHINING AHAHAHAAH

          1. But not claiming that she won.

            1. Popular vote, anyone?

              1. Hillary won the popular vote, unlike Trump in 2020.

                1. Who cares about popular vote? I don’t.
                  Anyone with any understanding of true democracy, group think, human group behavior, etc would understand that large groups in select parts of the country, like NY, SF, LA do NOT represent the whole of the UNITED States.

                  Unfortunately our half-educated “popular” press avoids any remote attempt to communicate that to the people.

                  Seems like a more impressive vote count would be # of votes evenly spread out across all regions/groups regardless of number. Which Trump seems to have done this time. No?

          2. Hillary didn't file a bunch of frivolous lawsuits contesting the election.

        4. "Trump’s performance so far is making Hillary’s look good"

          allow me to translate

          chemjeff "you laughed at me when my choice Hillary lost so I will pretend you are doing what I did"

          1. He's desperate to both sides his own shame.

        5. Jeff, you still whine that Bush didn’t concede to Gore. Shut the fuck up.

    2. Cmon jeff. Give yourself some credit. You're an obese failure at life who still thinks he has something to offer. Of that isn't narcissism I dont know what is.

      1. by that metric I guess you would probably vote him for prez and then whine when he loses re-election.

        seems to be the criteria you choose your presidents by, kiddo

      2. You voted twice for an obese failure at life. Lol.

    3. "The world’s biggest narcissist is having the world’s biggest temper tantrum "

      You always have to make it about you.

    4. "Gee what a surprise.
      The world’s biggest narcissist is having the world’s biggest temper tantrum when he loses."

      Gee, what a surprise! Lefty TDS victims cheer!

      1. Trump lost. Eat shit, loser. Lol.

    5. Yup! Trump's tantrum over losing the Election, however, is no surprise, however.

  3. No widespread fraud.
    Always qualified.

    1. Well, yeah. Literally no one claims that there is ZERO fraud. There is probably some guy in Nevada somewhere who filled out his and his recently departed roommate's ballot and mailed them both in. The only real question is whether the amount of fraud that does exist is vast enough to change the results in all of these different states.

      1. This article claims that many people said there is no evidence.

        Not that they looked, but they were not aware of any.

        Also: STFU you voted for a corrupt democrat.

        1. Save some of your whimpering for Trump's trial, loser.

          1. ahahaha your heroes are a senile old man and a dirty cop ahhahaajahha

        2. It's an odd argument to make. Election officials all over the country, as their job, try to set up systems that are resistant to fraud. So, the competent ones, at least, are always looking for fraud. And they are being watched by political parties, which provides a second level of people looking for fraud.

          Trump's crack legal team led by Rudy Giuliani, says they have evidence of fraud widespread enough to change the results of the election. So far, they haven't delivered.

          1. And yet you and the other biden sycophants are ignoring how wisconsin clearly violated Brenfords law which is one of the primary analysis methods used to detect fraud. It was used against Iran on 2009 and in Venezuela. Yet you deny it despite it being an almost universal method for detection.

            1. Learn statistics.

              1. No U

            2. Do you mean Benford's Law? You're lecturing me on statistical analysis methods, and you can't even get the name of the law I'm supposed to know correct?

              1. Way to hone in on a typo in order to totally sidestep the point, dude.

                1. It’s not just a typo in this case. It’s a clear indication JesseAz tried the bluff of repeating some talking point he got from some right-wing source, didn’t really know what he was talking about, and f’d up the name.

                  1. And I know all this because I can read minds, and I’m smarter than all of you. Which is important to keep in mind when I tell you that saying all black men have warrants isn’t a racist thing to say.

                  2. "It’s not just a typo in this case."

                    Except that it is, liar, who concludes with "and f’d up the name."

                    Scumbag's Law is anyone employing any of the rules of disinformation to distract from their utterbullshit.

                    Check you bio to make sure "scumbag" is spelled correctly.

              2. JesseAZ is actually dumber than Tulpa.....or is also Tulpa.

            3. https://www.eipartnership.net/rapid-response/what-the-election-results-dont-tell-us

              “Having the distribution of leading digits stray from the expected percentages predicted by Benford’s Law can happen by chance, though it is more common when the law’s assumptions are violated, as they often are with vote tallies. Benford’s Law, and other math-based inquiries, can be used to detect voter fraud, but the vast majority of these violations are not conclusive evidence of fraud.”

              1. Then why are Biden's distributions the only one of the candidates' who strays?

                Trump's doesn't, JoJo's doesn't, the others don't.
                Just Biden's.


                Feel free to bitch about the source, but at least address the graphs.

          2. "Election officials all over the country, as their job, try to set up systems that are resistant to fraud"




            1. Flag the fag.

          3. "And they are being watched by political parties, which provides a second level of people looking for fraud."

            This would be less ridiculous if the Republican party observers hadn't been literally ejected from counting sites.

            I don't know if there was fraud or not. But you can't claim that doesn't at least *look* bad.

            Well, I suppose you could *claim* anything. You can't claim it and expect to be taken seriously, though.

            I mean, for fuck's sake, in an election that the Dems claim is *this* important, you'd think they'd make at least some effort to ensure that everything *looks* above board.

            1. There were Republican and Democrat poll watchers at all the polling places. One republican guy got turned away at one place because the people misunderstood the rules for who can go where. Then he was let in later.
              The republican poll-watchers complained they were too far away in Phillie. So they were allowed to go closer after they sued. They were 6 feet away. Until then they were 10 or 20 feet away. Poll watchers aren't supposed to be allowed to actually read peoples votes anyway. They are supposed to insure the process is fair e.g. the privacy envelopes are there, the bar code scanners are used etc. You guys are just grasping at straws.

              1. Oh ok. I guess if the poll watchers "misunderstood the rules" then it makes it ok, nothing to see here.

                And there were far more than ONE poll watcher. They even went so far as to board up windows engage in "secret counting."

                If you're defending the fraud here, get ready, because now the precedent is set and Republicans are going to cheat just as much as you did, for all future elections.

          4. Step 1: Demand Evidence

            Step 2: Place Blindfold

            Step 3: “I don’t see any evidence.”

          5. Well they've only had a couple of days. But let's set a deadline for them, like the 34 days Al Gore used in the 2000 election. Even Jill Stein and some of the Dems used about a month in 2016, and nobody complained too much about that.

            But no doubt about it they've got to put up or shut up.

        3. Biden’s a crook.

          1. Cry more, bitch.

      2. The only real question is whether the amount of fraud that does exist is vast enough to change the results in all of these different states.
        That question needs to be answered with facts.

        1. That's fine. I know if I had a serious legal challenge I couldn't think of anyone more competent to lead it than Rudy Giuliani.

          1. Yep, he may not be a winner, but Rudy is cheap.

            1. Yeah, taking down the NY mob isn’t a big deal, unlike, say, hiding in a basement all campaign and then pretending you received the highest vote count in history.

              1. Giuliani from about 40 years ago sounds like a bad-ass. Present-day Giuliani is a drunken buffoon.

                1. And I know all about being a drunken buffoon, because I’m a sarcasmic sock.

          2. Oh hey there you go again letting your mask slip lololo

            1. By insinuating Rudy Giuliani is incompetent? It is a subject you have extensive first hand knowledge of, I suppose. Maybe you just stick to spamming. It actually makes you look less stupid.

      3. Mathematical analysis suggests the answer is: YES

        If any CFO tried to use numbers like this, they'd go to jail for fraud.

        1. Is this another use of the Binford’s Law talking point?

            1. OK, then what type of mathematical analysis?

              1. Wisconsin voter participation was 5.5 standard deviations above the mean.
                Can you show me any other states with such a spike?

                Trump's differential with down ballot candidates was consistent with historical averages. Biden's, on the other hand, was massive - only in those particular swing states. For example in Michigan, Trump got 7,000 more votes than the R senate candidate. Biden got 69,000 more votes than the D candidate for senate.

                In Cuyahoga County, OH Biden got 4,000 more votes in 2020 than Clinton got in 2016. In Wayne County, MI Biden got 70,000 more votes in 2020 than Clinton got in 2016.

                Just a couple examples.
                Feel free to check the data yourself.
                I'll be posting more in the coming days.

                1. Ever stopped tp think high turnout is probably because people are pretty much locked in their homes for covid and have nothing better to do than vote? Try harder, idiot. You lost. Suck it.

                  1. You should kill your self. Best thing for you really, your comments are going nowhere.

                    1. Trump lost. Keep crying like the pussy you are.

                  2. Wow look at your lame attempt at rationalizing fraud. Get back to eating Biden's ass.

                    1. What fraud? Lol.

                2. Ever think that maybe a lot of suburbanites voted Republican except for Trump? I think that's very likely because Trump is just so repugnant even to lots of Republicans.

                  1. Then that should be the case in other, if not most, states as well...

                  2. That's a weak argument. So these people all voted for Biden but didn't vote at all down ballot, because orange man bad (or something).

          1. "expected percentages predicted by Benford’s Law
            "use of the Binford’s Law"

            You cannot spell it right consistently and in typical fascist fashion accuse others of that which you are guilty.


        2. Computer says no

      4. Targeted fraud in a few jurisdictions is all it takes to flip this election.

      5. Pedo Jeffy, go back to your NAMBLA chat room.

      6. I'm not sure that there was significant fraud, but it would be good to really find out. Would be good to see a thorough, systematic investigation, either to prove those who have been claiming fraud right or wrong. I wouldn't be surprised either way.

        1. The burden of proving fraud rests upon the party positing the existence of the fraud. That burden never shifts.

          1. And that's why the Republicans are going to start faking votes in all future elections, just like the Democrats. Get ready for a fun couple of decades: elections don't exist anymore. It's all about who is better at cheating for all future elections.

  4. When my TEAM wins it's The Will Of The People!

    When their TEAM wins then someone cheated!

    1. I can see now why you plagiarize other people.

    2. "When my TEAM wins it’s The Will Of The People!"

      and last time when their candidate eeked out a 70,000 vote win in the EC while getting smashed in the popular vote it was a "mandate" for Trump. They will just never learn.

      interested to see their stance on the next shitty prez and his "mandate" (bigger margins all around, most votes ever...good luck convincing the other zealots they dont have a "mandate" too).

      clowns all of them

      1. ^^this. Karma's a bitch

  5. As per usual Reason does no investigative reporting and relies on twitter for their news feed.

    1. There is nothing to investigate. Just because you wish to find something does not mean it is out there.

      1. But you need to at least look.

        1. They have looked. What do want. The count is watched by election official and observers from both parties. In some part of the country the count was live screened. Election procedures are all documented, number of ballots, voters and results are all collected and reported.

          What is it exactly you want them to look at??

          1. So Lancaster County returning 142k ballots while only 108k were requested is totally not suspicious?

            1. So Lancaster County returning 142k ballots while only 108k were requested is totally not suspicious?

              if you're referring to Lancaster County Pa, please note it went double digits in Trump's favor...

            2. Whoops you forgot your citation

              1. Whoops you forgot you can verify it up very easily on a browser.

          2. "The count is watched by election official and observers from both parties"

            It is NOW. After it wasn't and a court stepped in.

            You seem REALLY desperate to get a play off before therefore can be done coach.

          3. I'd like someone to look into the Dominion Voting Systems... Are any of these ballots getting checked by people??? I'd also like to see someone look into if all these ballots have an actual PERSON behind them legally viable to vote and correct district permanent address... I'd also like to be sure no-one is jumping state line and casting multiple ballots. I'd also like to see all ballots posted in an online database with photo-pictures (name serialized) with an ongoing count so EVERYONE can actually SEE their ballot getting counted....

            Why; in this day and age more transparency isn't available is a mystery. And to see the corp board director of our voting system's an affiliate of the U.N. and Greenpeace is just entirely unpleasant.

            But frankly; the biggest think to look at is the 80%-90% rate that mail-in ballots went for Biden in states that voted in person for Trump at 60% levels... Did the entire left decide to boycott the polls this year or what?

            1. Why the obvious sockpuppet SQRLSY/Roberta?

            2. Yes. Most of the absentee ballots were democratic. That's because the dems believed Covid was a threat and Trump told his people not to vote by mail. Get it?

          4. So you see nothing wrong with all the instances where republican observers were kicked out or held back over 200 feet?

          5. Being presented with blatant evidence and willfully ignoring it doesn't count as "they have looked." Stop being dishonest.

      2. Aside from the numerous whistleblowers, “glitches” that flipped entire counties, statistical impossibilities, tens of thousands of dead voters, ballot harvesting, legal overseers being ejected and Supreme Court orders being ignored, there’s nothing to investigate.

        Let’s talk about how the Russians magically hacked un-networked voting machines because Drump is Lidderally Hitler, instead.

    2. It's not a news feed. It's a blog.

      1. Citation?

        Weird you expect more from the comments than the "bloggers."

        1. You can keep expecting a dessert topping to be floor wax, but it won’t change its nature.

      2. Some blogs are news feeds.

        Go away your schtick was old months ago.

  6. The president's assertion that the election was "stolen" posits massive, orchestrated fraud.

    It hardly needed to be orchestrated. The various hyper-partisans who run city governments all came separately to the same conclusion that they could not have another four years of Trump. Individually they put their practiced skills of election tampering to use. The only coordination was the concerted effort by journalists to demonize this boorish outsider president to make sure everyone knew their illegal efforts were justified.

    There is no question that voter fraud took place just like there can be no question that Russia troll farms created social media content regarding the U.S. elections. No question. These things occurred and it's ridiculous to deny it. But these false denials beg the question of whether their effect was material to the outcome of either election. I believe it's apparent was not in 2016. (The close 2020 race suggests as much.) I admit that I don't know about this year's election.

    1. What are you suggesting was done? You really can't hide the size of fraud that would be needed here. We are bot talking a few hundred votes, we are talking thousands.

      1. We've seen thousands of votes changed already. Only caught through people making claims against the results. Yeah, could never happen..

        1. 700,000 cashed in for Biden over-night making an 85% rate of ballets counted for Biden. Yes, we are talking about not just thousands; almost a MILLION...

          1. Why the obvious sockpuppet SQRLSY/Roberta?

            1. Sqrsly wouldn't even be on this side. Have you been smoking the *blue* crack?

              1. Oh, for fuck's sake I just realized that was probably going to be taken as a TEAM reference. It's not. It's a TV reference, I think.

            2. Is this supposed to be parody, or what?

          2. A situation created by Trump’s efforts to turn voting by mail into yet another partisan signal, like the politicization of wearing masks.

            1. No, that was done by state ag/IG in states like Pennsylvania who openly violated their state constitution and separation of powers by decreeing changes to an all **universal** mail in ballot system where everyone in the state, even ones in the ground but who voted 4 years ago, got a request form. If you requested a ballot, stole a ballot, or received nearly one of the 100k misprinted or duplicate applications you could then, upon arrival of your mail in ballot, (1) fill it out but not sign the envelope for signature verification which is the only part you were supposed to sign as the ballot itself is supposed to be secret, a change to existing law. (2) not have it postmarked after 8pm, or at all as long as it meets rule 3 below, when previous law stated it must be both postmarked and received by 8pm on election night. (3) allow any ballot received up to 3 days after the election no matter the status of signature or postmark, another violation of state law as explained above. (4) changed in person voting to paper ballots with NO TRACABLE SERIAL NUMBER OR IDENTIFIABLE CHAIN OF CUSTODY. literally high school scan trons fill in the bubble. Just grab one when you walk in the door!

              The PA constitution explicitly states power over elections resides in the legislature. That doesn't change because of covid or anything. Constitutionally any ballot that does not meet the previously existing law has very good grounds to be tossed. Which could be thousands knowing how sloppy ballot harvesters are, as project Veritas showed us in Texas. Let alone the fraud I'm sure was committed by people just filling out blank in person paper ballots leftover from the in person polling locations around Philadelphia. I'd guess with investigation we see it was the in person, no chain of custody, paper ballots that the dems were in a hurry to scan through the machine and only filling in the Biden bubble that has led to the discrepancies between Biden having tens of thousands of more votes than his down ballot senators in so many states.

              1. I think there was probably fraud, but one point of order: while the PA constitution might also stipulate that the legislature decides the election rules, the SCOTUS might get involved because the US Constitution specifies that state legislatures determine election rules.

                1. Oh, also, Alito (I think) ordered the late ballots in PA segregated- do the current PA results include those ballots? If not, it's a moot point. If so, then it's very germaine to the results.

            2. My state, WA, has had vote by mail for years. It took a long time to get it right. Even now we have irregularities. So this nonsense that the democrats could whip up vote by mail in a matter of months in multiple states without it being a crooked mess like this is utter bullshit.

              This was always planned to be a fraud fest. As if a guy who barely came out of the basement, and who couldn’t fill a closet at what few rallies he had suddenly pulls overwhelming numbers from the electorate is ridiculous.

          3. If you're going to lie, lie BIG. The democrats are just following the Nazi approach to their lies.

      2. You can hide that kind of fraud as long as nobody is looking. That's why recanvassing and recounting are important.

      3. “ You really can’t hide the size of fraud that would be needed here”

        So why do you keep hurling your frail frame on top of it all while screaming, “NAAAAOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!11111”?

    2. The various hyper-partisans who run city governments all came separately to the same conclusion that they could not have another four years of Trump.

      You mean the same hyperpartisans who gave Trump his victory in the first place in 2016?

      1. Yup. They weren't prepared then.

        1. And while they were fixing the Presidential vote they couldn’t take the time to whip up some fraudulent Senate votes?

          1. Well, that's a good question. For example, if fraud is committed by creating fake ballots, then filling in one bubble is faster than filling in multiple bubbles. If fraud is committed through manipulation of the software or database, manipulation of just the presidential result would be easier and less prone to detection than manipulation of multiple results. So, the unusual discrepancies that you acknowledge exist between votes for the Senate and votes for president are actually suggestive of some kind of fraud.

            As I was saying, I don't expect the election to flip, but these discrepancies should be looked into, and the way to look into them is for Trump to sue, regardless of final outcome. That's in everybody's interest.

          2. No, because the less time they spent forging down ballot, the more time they could spend forging QUANTITY of votes for Biden. It just wasn't the main priority and they had scant time after election day to know how many had to be faked.

            1. Prove your claims of fraud.

      2. Are you suggesting they unanimously flipped because Drumpf if just so much of a Hitler?

  7. My understanding that 2 of the suits for 2 states were both for less than 100 votes each.
    Not the sign of mass cheating, IMHO. If there were really good evidence of mass cheating one would think the numbers would be higher

    1. One county in Michigan ready changed 3k votes... 1 County. 47 other counties used the same software. Georgia reported the software glitching in GA. Both bernie and Warren have previously questioned the results of the software from Dominion...

  8. Trump is a vainglorious, vulgar, silver-spooned, delusional jerk.

    His supporters are half-educated bigots, disaffected clingers, superstitious slack-jaws, and downscale culture war casualties.

    He lathers the rubes but masterfully but he will be removed from the White House on January 20. It might take six Secret Service guys to carry his flabby carcass out of that building, but trespassers don't last long at the White House.

    I'm just glad my children and grandchildren will have the opportunity to compete economically with Trump supporters . . . just as I have profited from that opportunity.

    Carry on, clingers . . . but no further than your betters will allow, as usual.

    1. ahahaha your heroes are a senile old man and a dirty cop ahhahaajahha

    2. Joe Biden is a crook.

    3. Whatever, catcher. You'd know all about "betters", since everyone is yours.

    4. More projection from the good Reverend’s Koolaid Kult:

    5. *Yawn*......

    6. Half educated? I'm a Trump supporter and I'm much more educated than you. Based on your extreme case of TDS, I'm guessing you have no more than a gender studies degree, which doesn't count as an "education."

  9. "said election officials had not seen any "widespread irregularities."

    The bar for what evidence is required is gradually increasing.

    At first it was "no evidence of fraud"
    Now its "no widespread fraud", I also saw "no significant fraud" earlier today in a separate publication.

    You clowns get the same damn talking points using the same exact modifiers for how to argue with anyone who has figured out your synchronized BS.

    Trump still might lose. Biden might undue everything. But Trump's real legacy is showing us how the media hates us and everything we care about.. We aren't going to forget it that easily.

    1. " Trump still might lose."

      Trump might lose. Biden might win. Obama might have been born in Hawaii. The sun might reappear one of these mornings. Organized religion might turn out to be childish superstition.

      Evolution is merely a theory (like gravity). But Trump leaving the White House a discredited loser on January 20 (if not before) is the law.

      1. ahahaha your heroes are a senile old man and a dirty cop ahhahaajahha


      2. "is the law" --- According to the Associated Press.... Holy crap man; I thought you Lefties hated big-business, now they're writing the laws for you.

        1. Why the obvious sockpuppet SQRLSY/Roberta?

          1. SQRLSY isn't pro-Trump, dumbass.

      3. "But Trump leaving the White House a discredited loser on January 20 (if not before) is the law."
        Only if the Electoral College votes for Biden. The AP and Facebook don't count.

      4. Really? No winner has been legally declared. You appear to be confused on this point.

    2. Who exactly does the media hate? No President get an easy time from the media. Kennedy complained about the media, so has every President in my lifetime. You think President Obama had an easy time, go back through the tapes. Check out the Superbowl halftime interviews with Bill OReilly and then tell me Trump was treated worse. Name one President or one candidate for that matter, that SNL did not make fun of. What you have with Trump is a thin skin and rude manners. The fact is he complained more about the media, but he was treated no different.

      1. "Kennedy complained about the media"

        Indeed, he got tired of the media constantly harping on his infidelities, his drug dependence (even during major crises), his blackmailability, his illegal wiretapping...

        1. Kennedy, when asked by NBC journalist Sander Vanocur if he still read the news.

          “It is never pleasant to be reading things frequently that are not agreeable news,” he continued, “but I would say it is invaluable arm of the presidency as a check really on what is going on in administration.”

          1. "invaluable arm of the presidency"

            For some Presidents it is.

      2. Lol. Obama. Done. Move on dummy.

      3. “ No President get an easy time from the media.”

        Yeah, poor Obama had to give up two hours EVERY WEEKEND to have those closed-door meetings where he told the media what they were going to say for the week.

        That poor, poor baby.

      4. ‘No president gets an easy time from the media’

        Seriously? Obama got really tough questions like “why do we love you so much? I demand an answer!”. Trump gets questions like “why don’t you denounce white supremacy?” After he has done so literally dozens of times in public.

        You’re such a leftist blind partisan. It’s disgusting.

    3. The word "significant" means of large enough magnitude of changing the election results, and is precisely the correct word to use when talking about this.

      1. That's true enough. There's probably never been an election in the history of the republic that's been shenanigan free. We've mostly come to accept that elections deal in ballpark figures.

        The question is, how do you quantify the level of shenanigans? At what point do they invalidate the election?

        I submit that it's mostly psychological. There's no magic level of cheating that disqualifies an election, it's people's confidence in the integrity of the process. If a substantial number of people aren't convinced, you're likely to have problems.

        Whatever else, we're about to find out how much confidence people have in the integrity of the process.

      2. The fact that everyone with experince dealing woth you knew you would want the count finished prematurely should indicate how little your copinion is worth.

        1. My opinion about the meaning of the word, significant? I confess — I am repeating a “talking point” on the meaning of the word, significant, that I got from my college Physics department.

      3. Pure “It depends on what your definition of Is is”

        1. Math is hard.

      4. Goalposts moved ✔

    4. The 120% turnout in Wisconsin is just a new high for democracy.

      1. Cite?

        1. And the reason I’m asking for a cite is so that if you have one I’ll know what to forget about next time this claim is made.

      2. Bullshit.

    5. "The accountant accused of embezzlement tells us he has seen no evidence of significant widespread embezzlement."

      Well... alright then!

  10. Going to have a shot of Rum every time someone brings up a Koch Conspiracy

    1. I weep for your liver.

      1. Have a Koch and a smile.

  11. Reason cementing the fact they are firmly on the side of the media empire and the people who run it. Their dedication to refuse to do actual journalism is impressive.

    1. Again you can not investigate nothing and that what Trump has.

      1. it doesn't take much investigating to learn that the election isn't official for another month yet, with ballots still coming in for some states, recounts on the way, and numerous court challenges filed.
        you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to throw out a bit of caution or a few "too be sures" before joining the Biden victory party.

        1. Exactly. The media COULD be educating Americans about how the process works, but instead they are continuing the narrative.

        2. True, the media shouldn’t talk about the election being decided until the electoral college meets. On the other hand, projecting the winner is nothing new under the sun; it’s what the media has done for decades.

          It’s so common that Trump himself opined that the election must be decided by the evening of November 3rd. Apparently, he is so clueless he thought all those election night declarations of the winner on TV were actually the official process.

          1. Trump's lack of intellectual rigor is well known. It does not negate the validity of his complaints.

    2. Sullum writes a quick weekend blog post about what's going on in the news. CACLLs criticize Reason for not doing in-depth investigation.

      1. I see you're satisfied with no in depth investigation. You got what you wanted no matter how devilish the deal, eh?

        1. Hea a biden supporter. Of course he wants no investigation. Can't prove fraud if nobody looks.

          1. I voted for Jo Jorgensen. You know that.

          2. I voted for Biden. I won. You lost, Jesse.

        2. In-depth investigation is wonderful. I don’t particularly expect Jacob Sullum (or Reason) to be the one doing it.

      2. "CACLLs"

        Hi douchebag, this is an anti-tribaliat commentariat.

        1. Infested with Trump tribalists.

          1. What the fuck is a CACALL? Google gives me some Californian organization.

          2. That's because Trump tribalists are on the side of civilization and morality.

            Something libertarians like you know nothing about, else you wouldn't be cheerleading for Marxism in these comments.

            Tribalism is fine. It's human nature. The issue is making sure the correct tribe prevails.

    3. Delusion, bigoted clingers are among my favorite culture war casualties.

      Although Trump's Cracker Barrel-Waffle House army of paunchy White high school grads flying 12-foot flags on $1200 pickup trucks is gaining steadily.

      1. Fake reverend, fake lawyer, fake poll watcher.

        But your familiarity with junk food obesity sounds like your own personal experience, so I give you that one.

        1. Thks guy is a master troll, pisses me off too. Hits every button. Why do you engage him? If you ignore him, he will go look for his fix elsewhere.

      2. those pickup trucks are closer to 50K these days.

        1. Not the ones Trump fans buy at Cousin Cletus's $2,000-And-Under Lot ("We Put You On At Least Three Good Wheels For Less!),

          1. Cousin Cletus wasn't willing to finance your purchase, was he?

          2. Arty, my truck cost more than triple what your wealthy conservative boss pays you to clean his toilets.

          3. Man, you are such a yokel and you don't even realize it. The stupidity and bigotry of your posts do amuse me.

        2. The one I just bought was about $50k before TTL. That was after $12k in discounts too. They cost a mint these days.

      3. lol you can't even buy wheels for 1200 dumbass

      4. $1200 is not what a pickup truck costs, it's what antifa members spend on cocaine for a "pick ME up" so they can peacefully protest all night. You probably just got confused

        1. Your typical antifa member is way too broke-ass to spend $1200 on cocaine.

          1. Yup, they just got took and agreed to spend 200k on a degree that gets them a job at Starbucks. I'd be rioting, too, but it'd be about me being screwed, not about a bunch of bullshit they just paid 200k to be brainwashed into believing.
            Sigh. I guess you really can't fix stupid.

      5. You should get back to eating Biden's ass, you won't look so foolish.

    4. Idk bout y’all, but I’m too lazy to riot or even care that much. I mean, trump, like Slick Willy, will be missed as a form of entertainment. But that’s really all it amounts to.

      I’m not deluding myself into thinking a fucking President can do anything that significantly affects my life - at least no more than his political adversary could.

      If I wasn’t so apathetic to voting, I’d vote to end voting. As long as I get to keep living as good or better than before, I’m ok with hitler being President (just don’t tell me about my fellow citizens being gassed, I can’t stand feeling guilty).

      1. Ain’t that America.

      2. I use to feel mostly that way until the Obama Administration. I kid you not; you cannot even buy a wheel loader around here that isn't a wildly expensive high-maintenance, usually broken-down, sputter bucket which will eventually just burn itself to the ground after that B.S. EPA regulations. Thanks to Obamacare; I have no more health insurance --- So ya;;; It has been MAJORLY significant.

        And as long as the federal government has tyrant powers (i.e. [WE] mob's people support) to just do whatever; it'll only get WORSE...

        1. And getting back to Granite’s point, you thought Trump would save you?

          1. He fought a valiant rearguard

  12. https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1325268253241913346

    BREAKING: Here is the signed affidavit from Erie, Pennsylvania
    Whistleblower Richard Hopkins that is now in the hands of Sen. Lindsey Graham and the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    1. https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1325228146967400448

      ‘The South Carolina senator has received a sworn affidavit from Richard Hopkins, a postal worker in Erie, Penn., who says his supervisors planned to backdate ballots that were mailed too late to be counted under Pennsylvania law’

      1. No, no, remember that it hasn't even been established that a post-office whistleblower even exists - just some guy with his voice disguised pretending to be a postal worker in one of those fabricated videos by O'Keefe, who isn't a real journalist because he edits his interviews.


      2. If that happened, there should be evidence besides hearsay from one Newman-like character.

        1. It. Is. Not. Hearsay. If. Your. Are. The. p
          Person. That. Witnessed. Or. Heard. Something.

          Lefties are now expanding the narrowly construed definition of hearsay to include first hand witness accounts.

          Retarded. Dishonest.

        2. Newman like? Such disrespect for our honored postal workers! Through snow and sleet and all that! To make sure that the ballots are delivered- and never ever just thrown in a dumpster.

          1. Hopkins admitted he made up the story. Lol.

      3. Hopkins admitted he had lied. Lol.

  13. Joe Biden’s votes violate Benford’s Law (Mathematics)

    1. It does not take much looking at that page to realize that their "data" has serious issues and has signs of being manipulated.

      1. I see nothing of the kind.

        1. Jo Jo got about 2% the number of votes as Trump and Biden, but on those plots has similar number of data points analyzed. That needs some serious explaining. Also, the source of the data is not given.

          1. So, nothing at all like what you claimed then, just things you don't like.

            1. Exactly.

          2. Trump supporters are really gullible. They fall for any piece of social media evidence that seems to corroborate their worldview without bothering to check it for trustworthiness, accuracy, provenance, or supporting evidence, because they are not interested in truth, but only propping up their pathological cosmology.

            1. You hate your political enemies and want them desteoyed at all l costs, we get it already and it's so boring.


            2. Yeah, I'm pretty good at recognizing by own biases, which is why I'm trying not to go all in on the election stolen thing. But, the facts clearly show irregularities on a large enough scale to swing a close election. I think it should be addressed. If you think that makes me a conspiracy nut, well, maybe next time it's your candidate who gets the treatment, yeah?

          3. You are a complete and total moron with the reading comprehension of a 10 year old. Those are the percentages that the first number came up within each candidate's data set of votes.

      2. Yes. Bidens results appear to be manipulated. Multiple people have repeated this process fucktard. There are videos and blogs describing how to do the analysis yourself from the voting databases.

        Feel free.

        1. I did, see note below.

        2. Cry more.

      3. Did you fail statistics or something? I realize math is hard for liberals to understand. That's why they're all socialists.

    2. No it does not, because this claim violates the assumptions behind Benford's Law.

      You have to look IN THE AGGREGATE at ALL the numbers, not just a small selection of numbers. You have to look at a statistically representative sample. The voters in downtown Chicago or downtown Milwaukee do not represent a statistically representative cross-section of all of the Joe Biden voters or Donald Trump voters in the country.

      As a simple example, if you only looked at one specific household, you would, very often, find maybe 2 or 3 votes for 1 candidate, and zero votes for any other candidate. That type of distribution "violates" Benford's Law because the leading digit is not a 1. But that household, where all the votes go to 1 candidate, is not representative of the population at large. If you were to look at all the votes, then you would have a clearer picture of whether the distribution followed Benford's Law or not.

      So, don't be fooled by naive attempts to exploit ignorance of statistics.

      1. Benford's law applies to many distributions, including the distribution of "samples returned on Tuesday evening". Whether they are representative of something else is irrelevant.

        Iow, your comment is nonsense.

      2. Look at MollyDiva's comment. She got it right. You keep proving your ignorance.

      3. Chemjeff is a 2+2=5 type

        1. Anything that isn't radically right wing is the equivalent of saying 2+2=5

    3. I looked at the data and I know what is going on here. Benford's Law requires that the data sets in question have values that span multiple orders of magnitude. The data looked at is by precinct, which by design are supposed to have mostly the same number of voters. Thus the results well be on the same order of magnitude. Thus Benford's Law can not be used.

      1. Please educate yourself on the usage of Benford's Law for electoral fraud. There's even a good introduction on Wikipedia explaining this.

  14. https://twitter.com/hollandcourtney/status/1325509450430468096

    An affidavit from a Nevada whistleblower has claimed that election supervisors Clark County counted mail-in ballots despite personally witnessing disregard of signature verification.

    This affidavit has been sent to the DOJ

    Read more here:

    1. Youre missing Wisconsin direction to illegally fill in voter witness addresses which by law spoil the ballot.

    2. Signature verification is notoriously unreliable, because people's signatures vary day to day. That's why it is a preferred disenfranchisement used by Republicans, because when they are in power, they can reject ballots if two signatures look even slightly different (which of course they always do). Luckily, the courts see through this bullshit and will not toss ballots based on some imagined discrepancy between a name and signature.

      1. We use signature verification because Democrats consistently refuse to allow better identity checks.

        1. ^EXACTLY!!! Excellent point.

        2. Exactly the case in Pennsylvania. Ban requiring photo ID so signing the voter roll at the polling location or the outside of your mail in ballot envelope were the only forms of identity verification possible in Pennsylvania, and both got kneecapped by our secretary of state.

      2. they can reject ballots if two signatures look even slightly different (which of course they always do)

        You realize by this logic, not a single ballot would be accepted ?

        1. You "can" reject ballots based on slight discrepancies; that doesn't mean you "must." What it means is that you can usually justify rejecting the ballot you want to reject based on the signature, when you're really rejecting it based on for whom the ballot was cast. Get it?

      3. Signatures also do not match when someone else signs your name.

        "[P]eople's signatures vary day to day."

        They really do not, at least not in any appreciable way.

        Minor variances? Sure.

        A complete mismatch? No.

        People's handwriting does not fucking change THAT much.

  15. https://twitter.com/john_zealand/status/1325313144894451712

    Trump Attorney: Manual Recounts May Be Necessary in 30 States After Software "Glitch" Is Caught Erasing 6,000 Votes for Donald Trump in Just One County

    1. Ever wonder how many Biden votes were erased in Florida and Texas? Maybe that the real story.

      By the way got a reference for the glitch, because I did not find it on a search?

      1. "Maybe that the real story."

        You'vw already spent a great deal of time assuring us there is no story, but this new tack comes as little surprise.

      2. Find a single vote that was erased. We will wait.

        So far every error has been towards biden dummy.

      3. Yes, I do wonder. Which is why we should recount manually. This should not be a partisan issue.

    2. Chinese hacking?
      Or do only the Russians hack elections?

      1. Funny how our elections were previously so vulnerable to Russian manipulation. Now they’re beyond reproach, with absolutely no need to examine anything.

    3. You can post as many links as you want from questionable far-right blogs, websites, and Twitter accounts, but all this will amount to a can of beans when the lawsuits are tossed and the recounts do not overturn the unofficial tallies. But keep clinging on to hope, and, by all means, keep the tears flowing. You lost, get over it.

      1. Whether the recounts change the result is secondary. People just want more confidence that there was no major fraud.

        1. What people? Most of the country is satisfied with the results.

          1. Most of the country is satisfied with the results.

            Hi WK, can we see the data on that ?

            1. You’ll have to ask Moderation4ever since he posted the comment.

              I’m fine with investigation into possible instances of fraud.

          2. What people?

            People who don't want the US to turn into a one party banana republic.

            Most of the country is satisfied with the results.

            Fortunately, we don't live in a mobocracy. In a democracy, and in particular in the US form of democracy, minority opinions actually still matter.

            1. A one party banana republic would be fine as long as that party isn't Democratic.

        2. If Joe Biden were an honest man with a clear conscience, he'd be the loudest voice in the country demanding a full investigation to clear his name. He's not doing that, because he knows his handlers are stealing the election for him.


  16. https://twitter.com/Harry1T6/status/1325254143842381827

    Trying to understand how all the people who spent 4 years insisting that Donald Trump was a veritable fascist, authoritarian dictator, comparable to Adolf Hitler, are now convinced that they have swiftly and democratically voted him out of power and office

    1. Democracy was saved due to his laziness, stupidity and incompetence. Otherwise we would have been in real trouble.

  17. Government officials (Repubs and Dems) are in many cases willing to steal your very house. Would they hesitate to steal your vote if they thought it would help them?

    In this particular election cycle, the suspicious votes seem to come from Democratic areas. But of course that doesn't preclude the possibility that Republicans did some stealing, too.

    1. > ...the suspicious votes seem to come from Democratic areas

      Why do you find it suspicious that Democrat areas vote Democrat?

      1. I don't. It's the surrounding circumstances, which have been discussed here.

        1. lol... Right? Who here wants to protest that CA actually voted for Trump and Biden stoled the vote?? But I will say one thing; illegal immigrants stole anywhere from 2 to 6 Congress chairs. Maybe the right can counter-attack and start counting tourists too.

  18. Sportsmanship is not what you do when you win, sportsmanship is what you do when you lose.

    1. Sportsmanship is also not quitting early because you think the odds are against you.

      If you want to compare the election to a game.

    2. OK because you may have to be prepared for Biden to actually lose. The shenanigans going on here may just flip a few states. Unlikely? Maybe. But electors may disagree. If nobody can say definitely they have 270, it goes to the House. And Trump wins.

      Will you come back here and be a good sport. I doubt it.

      1. Brandy and the other eunuchs will whine endlessly, call people racist, and beg for leftist approval.
        So... not any different than any other day.

      2. Wait, can you explain why would Trump win if the House decides the election? The House is Democrat dominated.

        1. And white knight reveals its typical ignorance.

          And, no, look it up yourself.

          1. I was ignorant of the details, and looked it up. Apparently, it’s a sign of weakness to ask questions in Nardz world.

            1. I was ignorant of the details, and looked it up. Apparently, it’s a sign of weakness to ask questions in Nardz world.

              Your kind of question is a sign of rudeness and insincerity.

              1. Really. It was a straightforward question.

                1. You're right: it was a straightforward question. What makes you rude and insincere is that you shouldn't have asked it in the first place; your first reaction should have been to go look it up yourself, rather than assume that the other person was making things up.

              2. "If nobody can say definitely they have 270, it goes to the House. And Trump wins."
                This is next level stupid. You idiots don't even know who controls the House. You lost. Suck it.

                1. Lol

                  Speaking of someone who doesn't know...

                2. We do know who controls the House, and yet Trump wins should it go to the House! Imagine that!

                  Next level stupid indeed!

        2. The House doesn’t vote that way. The votes actually come from the states. Most of which are republican controlled.

  19. Hmm. Testing.

    1. Tried to post a link and got shut down, Jesse?

  20. The real question isn’t if there was fraud, but the magnitude of the fraud. Is it worth it politically for Trump to be president, if he wins by a razor thin margin, when the lawsuits are settled? Maybe, maybe not. But if massive fraud is uncovered, and fixers are actually publicly named and receive prison time, then Trump will be proven right once again. Much like when he right about the previous administration spying on his campaign.

    If massive fraud is proven, Trump will gain even greater support from his base. And the Republicans, who are all too willing to concede as things now stand, will have to pick a side, which may not be politically worth it to them.

    1. Its one of three scenarios imho.

      1) Trump is throwing a self indulgent tantrum
      2) trumps team think they can turn some states with lawsuits
      3) they know its futile, but are fighting for other reasons....like the future elections such as the sen runoffs in GA

      Time will tell. But the dems arent acting like its 1

      1. because that's the right answer.

        1. You stink of fear

          1. Cry more, loser.

            1. Nothing has been lost. Media organizations declaring victory for Biden carries as much authority as me declaring victory for Trump.

    2. Note also that if there is evidence for massive fraud, there won't be an attempt at divining the true numbers or a do over, but likely either the state legislatures or the House will determine the winner

  21. Apparently reason is blocking comments...

    Will piece meal it.

    Lancaster County is really amazing, returning 40k more ballots that were requested. Biden having 200% of the votes his down ballot demands received. An increase from 3% to 18% in single candidate ballots (only choose president).

      1. Fish swim, and JesseSPAZ lies!

        Did Lancaster County Count More Mail-in Ballots Than It Received?
        A flawed graphic on a local news program is not compelling evidence of widespread fraud.

        1. That's why i am not paying any attention to any of this stuff. Most of it is made up bullshit or doctored data. These are extraordinary claims, and they require extraordinary evidence. If such evidence exists, it will turn up in court. Otherwise, we can safely ignore this as the tears of some cultists after their cult leader is exposed.

        2. Why isn't the raw data available via a signed public feed?

        3. You are relying on Snopes? Lmfao. Moron

          1. Q: Who are you gonna believe? Snopes, or the voices in your head?

            A: The voices in your head, all day, every day!

            1. He didn’t get the information from voices in his head. Now go back to eating from your shit bucket.

    1. The fervor with which the media is declaring Biden the conclusive winner is telling. Elections are contested quite often. We have processes for this and it will play out. The only reason to argue against the process is if you are afraid of what will be found.

      Maybe trump has nothing. Maybe he does, We will see.

      But the media, and Jacob, and beclowning themselves with this syncophantic nonsense.

      1. The media, I expect. Sullum, on the other it's sad.

        Gillespie and Soave are about the only full time writers here who haven't trashed their reputation. Which is a shame.

        1. Sullum is a tool.

  22. And that's why people love Trump: he's a fighter.

    Never give up! Never Surrender!

    1. Never give up. Never surrender! Get carried out horizontally, kicking and screaming, with that thing you keep on your head flapping in the wind!

      1. I guess you're describing yourself again, in the most convenient way you know how.

      2. You're not familiar with the schedule for presidential transitions I take it?

    2. By Grabthar's hammer, by the suns of Warvan, you shall be avenged!!!

      1. Was that the suns of Warvan, or the sons of Warvan?

        Were they miners, or minors?

    3. “ And that’s why people love Trump: he’s a fighter.
      Never give up! Never Surrender!“

      Oh yes. Trump would absolutely “fight” the to the last drop of his supporters blood to win this thing.

      1. How does waiting for the resolution of the court cases hurt his supporters?

  23. The George W. Bush recount legal team in Florida featured three future Supreme Court justices; the leaders of the Republican Party legal team; dozens of big-firm partners; and former Treasury Secretary and Secretary of State.

    The Trump 2020 recount legal team for Pennsylvania includes Rudy Giuliani; Pam Bondi; Jay Sekulow; Corey Lewandowski; and Phill Kline.

    'But wait,' one might say. 'Lewandowski isn't even licensed to practice law.'

    True, but neither is Phill Kline -- at least, not since the resolution of the disciplinary proceedings. He's a law professor at the Falwell School of Law and Cuckoldry.

    This will resolve as it should.

    Trump and his team will file lawsuits; conduct the investigation(s) of which they are capable; request recounts; and continue to predict victory for Trump. His gullible, bigoted, uneducated followers will expect Trump to be vindicated.

    The rest of the American people and their government will advance relentlessly through the customary processes -- taking a bit of time periodically to taunt Trump and mock his delusional, deplorable, downscale fans -- until January 20, when Biden will be inaugurated and Trump will depart the White House, upright like a man or carried like a 250-pound baby.

    Carry on, clingers. And thanks for the laughs.

    1. So I guess you're not really into your guy Biden's conciliatory, "One America" rhetoric?

      1. No, Artie the pre-teen rape fantasist is not much into conciliation.

      2. “Fuck your feelings.”

        —T-shirt spotted at Trump rallies.

        Fucking Republicans. They take a shit all over every room of the house and then bitch when a Democrat doesn’t clean it all up to their standards.

        1. How laughable. Go back to licking up the loads off your local bathhouse floor.

    2. Ah I see you have praise now for Bush and his team.

      You're a fake reverend, a fake lawyer, a fake poll watcher, and a terrible democrat. You're kind of bad at everything.

    3. People like you vindicate Trump every day, whether he wins the recount or not. He's very unlikely to turn this around. He still shouldn't just roll over.

      I hope you enjoy Biden/Harris

  24. Conspiracy

    [ kuhn-spir-uh-see ]

    1. the act of conspiring.
    2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
    3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose:
    ex. He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
    4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
    5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

    What we're witnessing is, by definition, a legitimate conspiracy. Countless parties have conspired against Trump for 4+ years. The establishment et al has gone above and beyond screw Trump and attempt to gaslight the public at large that he is somehow the reincarnation of Hitler and a fascist.
    Donald Trump is irrelevant to this entire saga. If another political outsider who wasn't 'supposed' to win had unexpectedly won in 2016, what we would be seeing right now would likely look very similar, if not identical in nature.
    I am not a conspiracy theorist. I don't entertain wild conspiracies or events and ideas not backed by evidence. I'm also not a Republican and have little love for the R party or pols of any stripe. Anyone with a skeptical nature, regardless of 'party affiliation' surely sees the grand scale of the blatant fuckery. I've never seen anything like this before.
    If there's one great thing about the Trump presidency, it's that many bad actors around the world have overplayed their hands and exposed themselves to the public that's willing to pay attention. At this point I take comfort in 2 things:
    a) reading enlightened comments from thoughtful and like-minded individuals here.
    b) choosing to not think about politics.

    1. Calling Jesse Walker....

    2. If calling Trump a fascist is a mean conspiracy against him, maybe he shouldn’t try to steal an election by force and prove them all right?

      1. If calling Trump a fascist is a mean conspiracy

        Hehe, reading can be hard.

  25. Of course he’s paranoid. He’s shown that for the last 4 years. He couldn’t stand that Obama had a bigger inauguration crowd, Hillary had more general election votes, the media was out to get him he says including FOX (now that’s hysterical), a deep state conspiring against him...are you surprised? It’s been obvious to anyone with a shred of critical analysis skills.

    That leaves out you, phony libertarian commenters!

    By the way, please give us more about how the SC will overthrow the election. We need Sunday laughs! There’s your cue!

  26. Just to let everyone know, if I can do this here just like that, it may not be safe surfing this website. I don't know if everyone here is very techy, but this here should actually concern you. Not saying it really has to be that way, but I will not be here any longer

  27. Mean this

    1. This really isnt good

      1. Explanation ?

        1. that i can do this in color means i can insert certain code into my comment that will indeed be executed by a browser. i will not get into detail or give tips, there may or may not be measures of security in the background that can deal with the potential of this and therefore i will not be an alarmist about it. i will also not get myself in trouble by trying anything out. this is something to be addressed by someone else. i also saw someone else did this before i did.

          1. Understood, thank you.

          2. You're still here?

            You're absolutely right, that this sounds like a vulnerability. (I don't work in IT, so I don't know.) But if so, why are you continuing to expose yourself to it?

  28. Philly, Detroit, and Milwaukee - jurisdictions with decades long history of corrupt officials and government employees are all entirely clean and pure as the wind driven snow when it comes to operating an election.

  29. Isn't it interesting that the main sources of all this "massive fraud" seem to come from Twitter (which is allegedly a bunch of SJW's censoring conservatives) and rando websites. The actual court cases have been dismissed, Trump and Rudy themselves have not provided any meaningful evidence.

    If the evidence is there, then let's see it.

    1. The cases haven't all been dismissed. And the point is not to change the outcome of the election (they may or may not do that), the point is to ensure that the election system works.

      Trump should not concede until these questions have been cleared up.

      There is a broader conversation we need to have about the ridiculous way Americans vote.

    2. The cases haven't all been dismissed. I found the source documents for the one which went all the way up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Court ruled that it's ok to keep observers physically far from where the mail in votes were processed (to far to see written details, partially obstructed, but still able to see some movement). The reason it's ok to do that is because "meaningful access" has not been defined yet, by precedent (the observers in Philadelphia were requesting meaningful access, not just access to the building without the ability to observe the vote processing and counting); and that observers are not entitled to audit every individual ballot, only to observe the process as a whole. Make of that what you will.

  30. We don't know what the outcome of the legal process is going to be, so let's not jump to conclusions.

    It is crystal clear that various institutions have used the pretense of COVID to radically alert election procedures in an attempt to benefit Biden. That may or may not be legal, but it calls into question the integrity and future of US democracy.

    1. It is crystal clear that various institutes have used the reality of COVID to alter some election procedures to help individuals cast votes without having to risk their lives in doing so.

      There, FIFY

      1. Oh you are a credulous tool. Bravo Jeff for sticking to the corrupt lying democrat line even in the face of the massive abuse you receive. That is a kind of spine even though a morally and ethically challenged one.

      2. It is crystal clear that various cabinet officials superceding their state legislatures have ignored the reality of COVIDs shrinking death rate to alter some election procedures to help individuals cast votes without having to risk their lives less than driving to the grocery store in doing so.

        There, FIFY

      3. It is crystal clear that various institutes have used the reality of COVID to alter some election procedures to help individuals cast votes without having to risk their lives in doing so.

        The reality of COVID is that standing in line to vote does not transmit it; we know that from transmission patterns.

        The legal reality is that the executive branch simply lacks the authority to change voting procedures in violation of the law for any reason.

  31. Here is my take. Trump supporters want to believe the election was stolen based partly on the level of shenanigans Democrats were willing to take part in over the last 3+ years trying to oust him and overturn the 2016 election. After the verifiable crap they have pulled, voter fraud would be small potatoes, and stopping the count and having piles of ballots show up in the wee hours definitely smells fishy. But knowing how basically inept the left is, I have trouble believing at this point that they could quickly generate enough believable fake ballots to provide the margins we are seeing given by the various "swing" states. Investigation is good. If that many ballots are false it should be fairly easy to discover. Meanwhile someone needs to stop moaning and do the adult thing to make sure the (R) voters in Georgia show up for the Senate runoffs in January.

    1. Computers make it easy to do fast.
      List of who has voted, who is registered.
      Simple merge to find the difference and then go ahead and fire up the mailing label printers.

      As the ballots themselves have no identifying features, they would have already been prefilled and ready to go into the envelopes.

      "Find" a box in the post office, or behind some official's desk and voila. Mailed in ballots still sealed in the envelope.

      To my mind, integrity in mailed in votes demands that every absentee ballot must be in election officials hands on the day before the election or it will not count.
      A daily count of those returned each day must be kept and certified each day by the officials and poll watchers. Each day's received ballots must also be segregated by the day they are received. Any container storing ballots must be tamper resistant and a ledger of valid containers and the quantity within must be kept.

      When the count of absentees is known before the polls even close, and the containers in which they exist is known, you cannot easily 'find' a mystery box.

      1. So Trump’s legal team should be able to make a compelling case in front of all these Republican judges, no?

    2. "But knowing how basically inept the left is, I have trouble believing at this point that they could quickly generate enough believable fake ballots to provide the margins we are seeing given by the various “swing” states."

      The left thinks of the American people are stupid, brain dead sheep. To some extent, that's a reason for their ineptitude - on the other hand, it worked with covid and lockdowns. They control all levers of media and corporate America. Thus:
      A) if no one really looks, it doesn't matter how authentic the ballots look (or if any physical ballots are even necessary). But note here the aberrant proportion of single vote ballots in the decisive batches of mail ins, the ones counted after that mysterious pause in select states and in the dead of night. The numbers here as compared to other years and other states this year are pivotal.
      B) they are counting on Tech, Media, and squish politicians to make us lie back and take it. Biden has been announced the winner, so he's the winner because we say he is. Wouldn't want to make people upset, because when people get upset they get violent... so it would be unfortunate, and might not work out for you, if you make them upset - capisce?

      1. This coming from someone who believes a bunch of anonymous rumors and unverifiable anecdotes in a internet comment section is "mountains of evidence."

        If fraud is so rampant then I'm sure there are plenty of conservative Woodward and Bernsteins out there who'd love to blow the lid off of Biden. Where is the evidence? Why haven't the republican AGs or secretary of states in these swing states launched an investigation?
        That glitch in Michigan happened in a small county that is reliably GOP. That's why it was discovered and FIXED so quickly. If that was the Dems plan it wasn't very good. If that was only one place out of multiple areas where they wanted to cheat in Michigan it shouldn't be hard to find more right?

        Do you seriously believe everything Trump says? Are you really that dumb?

        I realize you're all really upset Trump lost. In another week if there still isn't any cheating discovered maybe you'll admit Trump lost.

        1. Mormons are better than you.

          1. I'm better and smarter than you because I realize conjecture and rumors on an internet comment form isn't "mountains of evidence."
            I also don't defend pervert worshipping Mormons.
            My life has more value than yours.
            If one of us needed to sacrifice our life to save others people would pick me to live because I'm not a braindead loser. Another reason is Trump is as popular as herpes and you LOVE Trump.

            Enjoy President Biden loser

            1. It hurts me to say it, but even Mitt Romney is better than you.

              1. Romney worships a pervert and gives 10% of his income to a bunch of criminals. When it comes to Mormons he's not that bad.
                Mike Lee is a horrible human being. He's more lke typical Mormons.
                Fuck Mormons, and fuck you for defending them!

                1. I'm not defending Mormons, I'm just saying you are a worse human being than probably 99.999% of them.

                2. Mormons are ok, you’re not.

                  Kill yourself.

    3. But knowing how basically inept the left is, I have trouble believing at this point that they could quickly generate enough believable fake ballots to provide the margins we are seeing given by the various “swing” states.

      They don't need to; they simply need to change some numbers in a computer or spreadsheet somewhere. And the manipulation only needs to remain undetected for a week or two; afterwards, people will stop looking.

    4. I'm forced to agree. You don't need fraud to steal an election when your mantra of Free Shit and I Will Treat Your Feelings As A Substitute For Fact is all you need to insure a huge turnout of parasites, criminals, perverts, drug abusers and blue haired students.

      Trump winning in 2016 was a fluke. A wonderful, glorious fluke, but still a fluke. Trump won despite our election system, not because of it.

      So it's little surprise that the broad ignorant masses would prefer media lies and hyperbole over Trump's tweets then any guiding principle of reason or common sense.

      Don't get me wrong. I would love for a massive fraud conspiracy to be uncovered and have these shameful election results over turned. But honestly I think Trump's followers would do better to reexamine the concept of democracy, majority rule, and the classical liberal sacred cows that are baked into our political culture. These are the reasons Biden is President now, not election fraud.

  32. “I can’t see any light even after shoving my head ALL the way up my ass, therefore the sun doesn’t exist.” -Jacob Sullum

  33. The last presidential election in which a glitch / "human error" accidentally awarded thousands of votes to a democratic candidate and temporarily dethroned a GOP candidate who had won his race was..... never?

    3 biggest states counted votes without major interruption, but a few battleground states kept seeing interruptions. An observer at TCF Center says 16,000 ballot arrived at 4am even though Detroit apparently isn't all that far away and worked stopped at 5 am. Everyone went home but apparently by 5 pm 100,000 new tallies were made.

    1. edit

      Everyone went home but apparently by 7 am 100,000 new tallies were made.

    2. "The last presidential election in which a glitch / “human error” accidentally awarded thousands of votes to a democratic candidate and temporarily dethroned a GOP candidate who had won his race was….. never?"
      That didn't happen in this one either. The "glitch/human error" was caught and fixed. It was only for 3000 votes as well and Biden won Michigan by over 140,000 votes.
      The "fraud" at the TCF center has been discredited.

      To be fair to Trump, his strategy of just claiming "our ballot watchers were denied access" has really duped a lot of his supporters. With so many different claims of"ballot watchers were denied access" it's believable and hard to disprove. However until there's evidence of ballot watchers not being allowed or fraud I think most people aren't buying it.

      Maybe if he hadn't spent the last 4 ears claiming fraud in an election he won more people would believe him. Or if hadn't claimed fraud would happen before voting even began. With him whining and all his nutjobs supporters looking so hard don't you think thered be concrete evidence by now?

      1. Don't trust Trump. Nobody is asking you to rely on his statements. Read the source documents for the PA case which went to the State Supreme Court instead. Observers were granted half-assed access in Philadelphia (that is, they were allowed to be in the same room, the room being a humongous convention center hall) but kept too far to see anything meaningful. The first table they were observing was 18-20 feet away and the subsequent tables were even farther, staggered at 6-foot intervals. There was also a metal barrier of some type partially obstructing their view. The State Supreme Court said that's basically ok, because observers are allowed to observe the process, not to audit individual ballots and envelopes, and because they couldn't find any precedent defining "meaningful access" in this scenario. So the observers should accept the limited access they had and that was that.

        1. Where can I access this evidence?

          1. I'm not sure I can post links here. Search for the PA Supreme Court ruling overturning a prior appellate decision. If you search for the ruling on November 5, 2020, No. 1094 CD 2020, at a place called Courthouse News, you should see the primary source documents in PDF.

        2. "Observing the process" is not just watching people over there sort of count votes.

          It's actually observing the process of counting and sorting votes.

  34. Sidney Powell seems to think there's something there and she's known as a straight shooter.

    1. Indeed. Very solid attorney.

  35. Apparently, there's no evidence of fraud because no one looked for evidence of fraud before declaring there's no evidence of fraud, or else they looked for it in about 30 minutes and found none.

    1. They’ve taken this to court, and courts need evidence of a crime before they can say a crime happened. The courts said “You don’t have any evidence.” It’s up to Trump’s lawyers to find the evidence dude.

      1. You have no clue what you are talking about. There are lawsuits being filed in the days to come.

        1. Doesn't mean they have merit. Why haven't Trump and his legal team presented their evidence? If he has evidence he needs to show it.

          Until them him and his cult followers need to shut the fuck up.

          1. If the various court cases are still active when the time to certify the vote count comes along and no one has 270 electoral votes, the election gets decided in Congress. And no, it's not a straight up and down vote in the House.

            1. They won't be because they're all baseless.

              1. The seriousness of the allegation ...

            2. Umm, no, not that simple. If that were the case then every election a candidate could just file some random suit and "throw it to Congress cause the court didn't have time to rule yet."

          2. “Doesn’t mean they have merit”

            Doesn’t mean they don’t.

  36. The Trumpers are really taking this hard.
    I shouldn't expect better, but the levels of stupid by the commenters seems to keep reaching new lows.
    Hilary conceded on election night. She didn't ask for recounts or claim fraud. She wrote a book explaining why she thought she lost. She included Russian interference as a reason because it happened (I personally don't think it's a big deal by itself, but Trump interacting with them is troubling. "Russia if you're listening" encouraged hacking. I wonder what he would do if someone hacked the RNC for files involving him).
    The Obama administration worked with the incoming administration (this is common). We'll see what happens with Trump working with Biden's transition.

    We'll have to wait and see if Trump and his supporters accept the loss. I don't expect his supporters to, but who knows.

    1. The Trumpers are really taking this hard.

      I don't see anybody "taking it hard".

      Hilary conceded on election night. She didn’t ask for recounts or claim fraud.

      Hillary lost decisively.

      The Obama administration worked with the incoming administration (this is common).

      The Obama administration sabotaged the incoming Trump administration in numerous ways; Obama's behavior upon leaving office was reprehensible.

      We’ll see what happens with Trump working with Biden’s transition.

      I expect that Trump will leave the same way he acted as president: lawfully, within the bounds of the executive branch, with a lot of noise, and falsely accused of all sorts of things. That is, Trump will be the complete opposite of Obama.

      1. Trump lost way more decisively than Hillary, moron. Hillary won the popular vote and lost three states by a combined 80,000 votes. Moron.

    2. I see very few people "taking this hard".

      What I see is people concerned about numbers that don't match what most saw on the ground in their own regions and wanting the process to investigate and clear up any questions.

      What I also see is the left and media acting in a desperate fashion to make any of those quesitons go away. Seems strange, and further nothing other then fanning the flames of discontent. We have a process for this, which Gore used for 37 days in 2000. What's the rush, bigot?

      1. It's not even what I saw on the ground for me.

        It's the numbers that don't match other states or other elections...

  37. I've also noticed some troubling comments on here.
    People saying liberals or progressives hate America. Once the Supreme Court intervenes and Trump's rightfully reelected we should round up the media. We need to implement the death penalty for violent and property crimes.

    I know people are butthurt Trump lost, but do they realize this is a libertarian website and they claim to be at least libertarian leaning. Authoritarian shit like this is not what I would expect from libertarians.
    It makes me proud when these same people tell me to kill myself and shit like that. I'm definitely on the right side if these monsters hate me. They also are really stupid because they said Trump would win in a landslide. They still can't accept he lost. Give em a few days. If they're still spouting this shit in a few weeks if I was their family (if they have family that hasn't disowned them) I'd be scared Trump losing broke them or something.

    1. Look at your screen name again...

      1. It's in jest to be honest.
        Are you a redneck or something?
        As long as you're not Mormon.

        1. I'm neither.

        2. Are you a redneck or something?

          Recovering intellectual with redneck friends. Nice people, unlike you or most progressives.

    2. People saying liberals or progressives hate America.

      Yes, according to themselves they do.

      Once the Supreme Court intervenes and Trump’s rightfully reelected we should round up the media. We need to implement the death penalty for violent and property crimes.

      I don't know of any serious conservatives saying that. But there have been several former government officials (e.g. Robert Reich) who have called for persecution and blacklisting of Trump supporters.

      I’m definitely on the right side if these monsters hate me.

      You're the same kind of monster as the extremists you hate.

  38. Very OT: Not that it matters but someone on this site has the proclivity to keep spoofing my handle and weighing in on dumb threadshitting catfights that I could not give less of a shit about. I don't come here for that kinda garbage, and that's the kind of shit that ruins discourse here. Kinda annoying, I’m guessing some of you who've been here long enough and are hip to whoever does that stuff are already aware of this. So whatever, I guess just a little PSA from Nail, if y'all see a post with my handle in some inane inflammatory sockpuppet thread, that's not me. Thanks.

    1. Nobody pays attention to you.

  39. Wait I thought Trump wanted the lamestream media to call it on election night. Do they call it or not?

    Hey Trumpers, as you’ve so spectacularly failed to internalize, facts don’t care about your feelings.

    1. The returns showed that Bush had won Florida by such a close margin that state law required a recount. A month-long series of legal battles led to the highly controversial 5–4 Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, which ended the recount.

    2. Tony
      November.8.2020 at 9:32 pm
      "Hey Trumpers, as you’ve so spectacularly failed to internalize, facts don’t care about your feelings."

      Hey, shitstain! As you've demonstrated constantly for many years, you have no familiarity with those things known as "facts", nor those things known as "principles", nor that quality known as "honesty".
      Fuck off and die; make your family proud, the world a better place and even your goldfish happy!
      And increase the measurable IQ of the human race!

    3. Facts? Who cares about facts when you have CNN and Facebook to hide them for you?

  40. Question for all the geniuses here. If the dems really were trying to commit massive fraud, wouldn’t they also do it for close senate races too to give themselves the prized trifecta? Either they’re too stupid, or there was not (much) fraud.

    1. I'm not of the tin-foil hat group, assuming any sort of institutional fraud (or racism, for that matter), but localized fraud wouldn't mean all races would be subject to the effect.
      I think you're assuming that since X, Y, and Z races were not effected, W race must be clean also.
      Dunno how old you are, but read of history makes clear that Joe's money, spent through Chicago's Mayor Daly in 1960 was pretty much the deciding factor in JFK's election (and I am NO fan of Nixon)"
      "[...]1960: Did the Daley machine deliver?
      The 1960 election pitted Republican Vice President Richard Nixon against Democratic U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy.
      The popular vote was the closest of the 20th century, with Kennedy defeating Nixon by only about 100,000 votes – a less than 0.2 percent difference.
      Because of that national spread – and because Kennedy officially defeated Nixon by less than 1 percent in five states (Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico) and less than 2 percent in Texas – many Republicans cried foul. They fixated on two places in particular – southern Texas and Chicago, where a political machine led by Mayor Richard Daley allegedly churned out just enough votes to give Kennedy the state of Illinois. If Nixon had won Texas and Illinois, he would have had an Electoral College majority.
      While Republican-leaning newspapers proceeded to investigate and conclude that voter fraud had occurred in both states, Nixon did not contest the results. Following the example of Cleveland in 1892, Nixon ran for president again in 1968 and won..."

    2. Kinda like the way bank robbers also hit every convenience store on their way to the main event...

    3. Because they had no time. They underestimated the amount of fraud needed, and when their baked I fraud wasn't up to the task they stopped the counting, filled put a bunch of ballots, and added them to the total. Which is why the percent of ballots with only the president selected went from 3 to 18%. Or 57% of the 26% increase in voter turnout.

    4. wouldn’t they also do it for close senate races too to give themselves the prized trifecta? Either they’re too stupid, or there was not (much) fraud.

      Given infinite time and opportunity, they would. But given limited time and opportunity, they can't do both easily. Therefore, unusual discrepancies between presidential and senate votes are suggestive of fraud.

    5. As others mentioned, the premise is that they were caught unawares by Trump's unprecedented voter turnout. His numbers were up hugely over 2016 and upon realizing how things were going after the polls closed, the dems went into panic mode, shutting down counting inexplicable in the middle of the night, 'dumping' large blocks of Biden ballots in the wee hours, and running around like idiots trying to prevent a loss.
      If this is true, there will be evidence and probably a lot of it. Time will tell.

    1. https://twitter.com/jackmurphylive/status/1325639614569328640?s=19

      This made me a little sick to my stomach. Whoa. I tried it and yes it is real.

  41. https://twitter.com/PetiteNicoco/status/1325661229067669504?s=19

    “Asking for people to be peaceful is white supremacy”

    These people don’t care how you voted. They just want you to submit to the mob (who doesn’t even know what they themselves want).

  42. https://twitter.com/michaelmalice/status/1325658365603815434?s=19

    The corporate press spent three years on electoral irregularities from 2016 but won't spend three days on them in 2020.

    This is the difference between having a bias and having an agenda.

  43. Why, it's as if Reason doesn't understand that most Republicans in high office are establishment Republicans.....and most of them hate President Trump.

    At this point it is just willful ignorance on Jacob. Absolute, unadulterated willful ignorance.

    1. Or wishful thinking by the Trump Cult members

  44. Hallo, nama saya adalah angelina saya hobi bermain togel hongkong dan saya juga sering mencari prediksi melalui DATA HK yang paling update

    1. Makes more sense than the Trump Cult members pulling fraud out of their ass.

    1. About 3.5 years older than Trump. Two doddering old men.

      1. lol they definitely both come off like exactly the same grandpa

  45. And he's right.

  46. The President is upset because his political opponents are trying to steal this election.

    And yes, nearly 'everyone' is conspiring against him in the past 4 years, at least the establishment, including RINOs, the media, big tech, 3 letter agencies, academia, the EU, etc... it's not 'everyone' everyone, but it's still an awful lot of resistance, and the greatest offensive that had ever been launched against a POTUS.

    1. Nobody is stealing shit, moron.

  47. Next time around, Republicans will be better prepared to cheat and stuff ballots to the 10's of thousands. YOU set the precedent, Democrats, the future of American elections is HERE!

    1. Nah, then the media would suddenly remember how to do investigative journalism again

      1. But only in some states.

  48. While I glad that Trump lost, I very sad that Biden won.

    We are in a continuing sorry state under the current "Two Party System" farce. The corporate media force-feed the this false narrative down our throats. it's sad that so many people buy into their BS.

    It's sad that so many independents and libertarians don't actually vote. The only way to change the current "Two Party System" farce is to get enough votes to shake up the stranglehold of the corporate media's narrative.

    It really doesn't matter much what third party you vote for, just that you don't vote for the Republicrats and you actually vote. Biden is claiming that he got 51% of the vote, but in reality he received less than 30% of the eligible voters vote.

    There is no mandate and there has not been one during my life time. The closest would be Ronald Regan in 1984 and I wouldn't say that he had a mandate.

    To effect a change of the current farce, we independents and libertarians, should vote and should vote 3rd party. We need to get enough votes to be counted that are not for either faction of the Republicrats to not be ignored.

    Jo Jorgensen and Howie Hawkins deserved national media attention and to be on the debate stage. They deserved to be included in all of the presidential polls. The corporate media are forcing their narrative down our throats and we must fight back.

    While neither Jo Jorgensen or Howie Hawkins may have been 100% in alignment with your personal views, I sure that one of them was closer than either of the two old out-of-touch geezers offered by the Republicrats.

    1. I agree that we need something better than the two party system, but perhaps not that we deserve anything better.

      Human tribal behavior defines us versus them. Human emotional thinking feeds on simple confrontational narratives. And human ignorance allows if not encourages others to supply the narratives.

      Blame the media and power brokers, but human desire to conflate politics, religion, and sports (and use this melange to ponder just about everything in the universe) means that we will continue to get the disgusting public shit show that passes for society, and especially for political discourse and process.

      As we see over and over, Mencken was right.

  49. Add Pfizer to the list

  50. From this story: "But one study after another has found that voting fraud is very rare, and there is no evidence this year is an exception."

    To be polite, this is extremely misleading. If you are familiar with statistical analysis to any degree you would take a close look at several studies of key districts/cities using Benford's Law. There is absolutely no doubt that significant fraud has been perpetrated in this election.

  51. Our system requires the losing parties to accept the results, being confident that all was conducted fairly.
    The nonstop hyper-inflating of Biden as "the declared winner" or "president-elect" is deeply corrosive to a smooth transition of power. Almost as if its geared towards manipulation....the antithesis of a fair and open election.
    Trump has every right to contest results and utilize the legal options afforded to him. Not unlike Gore's 37 days of legal action in 2000 before he finally conceded. Attacking Trump's right to contest does nothing except fan the flames of discontent. There is no rush. Biden isn't president-elect until the Electors say he is and Trump is POTUS until Jan 20th.
    You should be ashamed of yourself Jacob.

  52. Since Biden couldn't get more than 40 people at any of his rallies, does anyone truly believe more people voted for Biden than voted for Hillary in 2016 and for Obama in 2012?

    1. That is a huge issue. I live in PA. There are counties in my area....Berks, Lancaster, that are very red. Somehow, Biden managed to increase his vote count a lot over Hillary's in 2016 in these counties. Pretty bizarre when driving through those areas, there wasn't a Biden sign to be seen. No enthusiasm for Biden, and little Trump-hatred. How did Biden bring out 10-20% higher vote turnout in these counties then any prior Dem had even done before?
      This kind of stuff directly contradicts local observations of people and raises all sorts of questions of legitimacy.
      It's critical we let the process play out as its Trump's legal right to contest/recount/sue. The frantic efforts to squash the questions and declare Biden the "president-elect" before the Electors even vote is irresponsible.

      1. >>Somehow, Biden managed to increase his vote count a lot over Hillary’s in 2016 in these counties.

        ya ... somehow lol


    My most-senior inside contact at the White House has surreptitiously slipped me an advance copy of the lame-duck POTUS’s concession speech. Without further ado, here it is:

    Friends, non-foreigner-type True Americans, and all who Make America Great Again, lend me your ears! I come to bury Biden, not to praise him. Biden and his minions stole the elections, and we must dishonor that! To Make America Great Again, we must invent the most fantastic, fabulous, YUUUGEST BIGNESS EVAH SEEN, in the ways of truly factually fictitious, but Spiritually and Metaphorically True, NEW Republican ballots! Because I have directed My Generals and Scientists to research the current and past performance, efficacy, and patriotism of one-party states, versus multi-party states. As I have directed them to, My impartial, unbiased, data-driven council of My Generals and Scientists have determined that yea verily, one-party states work better! Therefore, we must all strive for the Glorious Day, when America becomes a one-party state, under the One True Party, the Republican Party! (Pause for applause).

    But for now, the courts have sided with Biden and his camel-toe, and Antifa, BLM, and all the Marxist terrorists. We must let the courts have it their way, with mayo on the side. I mean, with Mao Tse Tung on the side, but without the Proud Boys standing back and standing by. Thank you, Proud Boys, for having stood by me. Also, thank you, Steve Bannon, Vladimir Putin, Kim Ill Dung, and Pepe the Stolen-Intellectual-Property Frog. Pepe, watch out for Miss Piggy, she and her “pre-nuptial contracts” will clean your clock, just like Melania is set to clean mine soon! But I digest.

    So we can’t disrepute what the nasty courts have said, or there might be civil war. Sad! The courts aren’t very American these days! And if you don’t like what I just said? Well, I’m sorry that you feel that way!

    So congratulations to Biden for having stolen the elections! This is America, so we must properly honor the decisions of the courts, in a dishonorable way! Biden can come and live with us in the White House, per the wishes of the courts. He can pour our covfefe for us, for Steve Bannon, Pepe the Frog, and I, and Jill can make sandwiches for us. We promise to call him POTUS, and her, First Lady! POTUS of covfefe, and First Lady of sandwiches, that is! Hey Biden! Get yer butt over here! Pepe needs some covfefe!

    That setup will get us by for a little while! Meanwhile, we can schedule the NEW run-off elections, this time without any fraudulent so-called “Democratic” votes being allowed, and we can do this RIGHT the next time!

    Meanwhile, congratulations to Joe Stalin-Biden, on being elected POTUS of pouring covfefe for Pepe!

  54. Hey Reason, this is what actualy journalism looks like..
    “Dominion Voting Systems has ties to prominent Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Bill and Hillary Clinton.”

    Please fire Sullum immediately.

  55. I heard this in 2014 and 2016, and now again in 2020. That elections rightfully belong to a certain candidate. WTF? Trump did not have a moral right to a victory. His job was to convince enough voters that the electoral college will swing his way. There is no right to an office. Ditto for Hillary before him.

    This is going down as one of the closest races in our history, and he's still whining. What a sore loser.

    1. "This is going down as one of the closest races in our history, and he’s still whining."

      2000 was a lot closer, or was that before you were born? Gore contested the election for 37 days before conceding. There's nothing wrong with Trump contesting the results as is his legal right.

      1. In 2000 one state hinged upon a few hundred votes. Here Biden is leading by tens of thousands of votes in multiple states. Trump has the right to sue, but he lacking two essential elements. Admissible evidence sufficient to overcome Biden´s margins and a viable legal theory.

  56. "Everyone" is an exaggeration.

    The literal non-stop shrieking for the past 4 years of voter fraud/collusion came primarily from the media and the Democrats.

    Thats only about half of the country.

  57. This is a classic case of one side saying there's nothing to see, and the other imaging the largest conspiracy in history. Pretty much a perfect flip of Russia in 2016.

    Luckily, despite all the noise and nonsense, the courts will allow credible allegations (if they exist) to see the light of day soon enough.

    Also funny how this tiny article has inspired such a massive number of comments.

  58. The nefarious scheme evidently includes Republican officials and Trump-friendly news outlets.

    All one of them.

  59. There is no evidence of widespread fraud.

    Scott Adams harps on this. He points out that it is a response to an accusation that's not being made.

    It is obfuscation.

    The accusation is that there was targeted fraud. Fraud aimed at swinging swing states just enough. And this is what is being found.

    Is there enough proof? That will be for the courts to decide.

    The sad thing is that the real election results are visible amongst the rubble of our system.

    Trump wins, but the House stays blue, and the Senate goes blue or the margin tightens.

    Either way--gridlock until 2022. A similar gridlock that many in the GOP hope for with the senate if Biden prevails. Of course, they're then hoping to get large majorities in the Congress in 2022 so that an imperial Congress can halt the destruction of the US.

    Personally, I think that we are too far down the path towards Civil War. Either Trump will cause it by winning, or Biden will cause it via overreach, or Harris will cause it by a combination of overreach and impatience.

    But we are no longer a fractured nation, the US has been shattered.

    Except that nearly every county is red. All the food production is in red areas. All the manufacturing is in red areas. All the power and resource generation is in red areas.

    Most of the media is in blue areas. Most of academia is in blue areas. Most of the political life of the US operates in blue areas.

    It is not hard to see how this shakes out.

    1. Calm down Susan. Trumpers think the world is ending because they can’t be rude to trans people. They wouldn’t know good economic policy if an orangutan spelled it out in feces. What, are farmers gonna stop selling product because the president is a Democrat?

      Trump overreached despite never having the support of a majority of voters. He made deliberate mass death the official policy for handling a pandemic for the first time in human history. That’s overreach. Yet no civil war. Just lots of dead people.

      This country could be functional again with all the normal, sane political disagreements intact if only we could somehow rid ourselves of the rightwing propaganda that turns so many people so stupid. Do you think Trumpers even know what they want out of government? All I’ve seen for four years from them are spasms of emotions, not ideas. They couldn’t get over how liberated they were now that a president gave them permission to hate all the people they like to hate. Now it’s time for a study in contrast. Actual ideas and actual policy. If you don’t like them, try running a Republican campaign on ideas instead of flinging monkey shit next time.

      1. They wouldn’t know good economic policy if an orangutan spelled it out in feces.

        You just described Democratic economic policy.

      2. Trumpers think the world is ending because they can’t be rude to trans people.

        And yeah, it's all about just being 'nice' to trans people.

        1. You’re going to have to spell out the point you’re trying to make.

      3. It's just about compassion!

        Quit being mean to trans people!

        Since detransitioning, they have lost the support of the trans community, often both online and in person. Some report that they are vilified if they speak about their experience as a detransitioner. And so, in addition to suffering from their pre-existing conditions, they also now suffer social isolation and a lack of peer support.

        1. Be clear about what point you are making. I did just accuse you of having emotions instead of ideas, so you might want to offer one.

  60. Anyone mathematically literate knows that the president is telling the truth. See:

  61. Now let me wax conspiratorial.

    In a recent election, the incumbent had well attended rallies, support from the base, and looked like a shoe-in.

    The challenger did not have well attended rallies and was not really expected to do well.

    So his party chose an issue and stuck with it, bringing it up over and over, in conjunction with ever more far fetched ideas. At some point the entirety of the message became 'well, yes, he's done that, but people REALLY hate that he did this. They repeatedly suggested that he could lose the election over it.

    And the election came. And the incumbents party swept. They lost no contest--often winning by tens of thousands of votes--sometimes more.

    Except for the incumbent.

    He lost.

    And no one blinked.

    Whose coattails did these people ride if their incumbent was so hated he could not get in on these huge vote margins?

    This was Kentucky, 2018. There are several similar races that took place that year. Tests of targeted voter fraud?

  62. "has found that voting fraud is very rare,"

    Or maybe it never got caught?

    Don't Democrats rig their own primaries?


  63. Am I missing something? Aren't they still counting in some states? Aren't some heading to recounts and some potentially towards an audit like in PA? Aren't there eight states still contested?

  64. Esper out as SecDef. Trump preparing to try the military option to "change people's minds?"

    1. Preparation for use of the Insurrection Act for the pending riots when biden loses the recounts

  65. I tend to laugh at conspiracy theorists but they have a point on this one. The media spent four years pushing the phony Russian Conspiracy, cheered Gore when he dragged out his failed Florida Recount Conspiracy, and actively ignored any of Obama’s transgressions. Now they are quick to belittle Trump (and the 71 million who voted for him) for questioning how 700k vote lead in PA can simply disappear, or ask how 138k ballots in Michigan can be delivered in the dead of night without a single vote for Trump or any third party candidate. Let’s not forget the 450k ballots that were only marked for Biden - no vote for the senate races, House of Representatives races or even dog catcher. Now add to that the media censoring him and the social media overlords trying to stop people from even discussing it. Yeah, how could he think anything was amiss.

  66. Gosh. It's like we can't even trust looter politicians to behave with honesty and integrity anymore. And talk about hurting? My sides are aching from laughing at formerly smug altruists wailing and gnashing that their fellow honorable gentlemen are slitting their throats with no reach-around. These are the same fat cowards that bullied the girl candidate off their debate stage. Schaisstloads of schadenfreude on all their houses, and may the sewers of Rangoon back up in their breakfast cereal--BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

  67. And just like that Trump gets the entire focusing on the election fraud.

    You people are in a fucking daydream...honestly 4 years later and you have no clue...

  68. On 1.29.2020 2:15 PM Mr. Sullum wrote the the President needed to be investigated for wrongs found by the Progressives.

    Now that the President wants to know who and how actually voted for him or Biden and we are to bury our heads in the sand and simply believe the Dems and the MSM about what happened between TRueday nite and Wednesday morning.

    1. This the new normal. Progtards get their way.

      Except they don’t. It just proves their numbers should be thinned.

    2. Umm, what happened between TRuesday [sic] nite and Wednesday morning was that votes were legally counted. Just like in every election before this one.

      1. Except that isn’t necessarily the case. Counting was paused, then pallets of ballots showed up. All for Biden. None of this is business as usual. At least not legal business.

        1. Trump lost. Cry more, bitch.

          Everything you just said is horseshit.

  69. The stupid/fascists sure are strong here

    no evidence, must be the MSM hiding it

    Republican run states faking ballots for Biden

    the russians did interfere in 2016, and in 2020, as is evidenced by the propaganda being repeated here

    if the ballots were faked, first where is your evidence?

    second, why didn't they take the senate while they are at it?

    when trumpski forms his NewFascist Republic, the second amendment dies with the rest of the constitution

    1. There is evidence. More of it being gathered by the day. It’s hard to find it given the suppression from the media and social media platforms.

  70. Amazing, "nearly everyone" is conspiring to deny Trump his rightful victory. He got about 70 million votes, very strange way to deny victory.

    1. Just as amazing is that they're conspiring only against him. They must have forgotten to steal the Senate and increase the lead in the House.

      1. Giving up the senate is the perfect alibi.

  71. Headline: "According to Trump, Nearly Everyone Is Conspiring To Deny Him His Rightful Victory" Now that's a pretty psychotic interpretation of Mr. Trump wanting to eliminate cheating.

    1. Paranoiac, not psychotic. Although Trump is both.

  72. Every candidates, whether he is professional or fresh entrants, intends to move forward in his career and become Microsoft Azure Fundamentals certified professional. But the professional knowledge is not enough to pass, you need to have a strong grip on recommended Microsoft AZ-900 course outline of Microsoft Azure Fundamentals exam. Thousands of candidates plan to appear inMicrosoft Azure Fundamentals AZ-900 exam but they skip the plan due to the unavailability ofMicrosoft Azure Fundamentals exam preparation material. But you need not to be worried about the AZ-900 exam preparation now, since you have landed at the right site. Our Microsoft Azure Fundamentals (AZ-900) exam questions are now available in two easy formats, PDF and Practice exam. All theMicrosoft Azure Fundamentals AZ-900 dumps are duly designed by the Microsoft professional experts after an in-depth analysis of Microsoft recommended material for Microsoft Azure Fundamentals (AZ-900) exam. ExamsGeek is most reliable platform for your ultimate success, we are offering services for last 10 years and have gathered almost 70,000+ satisfied customer around the world.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.