Will Trump become the first US Dictator?

E

ElenaJ

Well-known member
david starling said:
You're supposing widespread voter fraud. Five States, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah are already almost entirely no-excuse vote-by-mail.
No evidence of fraud in those States. If Republicans weren't afraid of higher numbers of registered Democrats voting, they wouldn't be making this an issue.
Click to expand...

"You're supposing widespread voter fraud. Five States, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah are already almost entirely no-excuse vote-by-mail."
As I wrote earlier, if everyone is registered and knows they will receive a ballot by mail, it's controlled.

"If Republicans weren't afraid of higher numbers of registered Democrats voting, they wouldn't be making this an issue.[/QUOTE]"
Again, your supposition.
I could just reply by saying the Dems want mail in votes because they plan to stuff the ballot boxes, they know it's the only way they can win.
This type of discussion based on supposition and presumption gets no one anywhere.

Did you read the treatise I sent you by link?
 
E

ElenaJ

Well-known member
david starling said:
Elena, are you also allowed to vote in Italy? Or is there no dual-citizenship allowed? :unsure:
Click to expand...

I have dual citizenship.

However to vote everyone must be present in person, exhibit their voter registration card plus an official document, for example a national ID.
Your name is then crossed off as having voted.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
ElenaJ said:
"You're supposing widespread voter fraud. Five States, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah are already almost entirely no-excuse vote-by-mail."
As I wrote earlier, if everyone is registered and knows they will receive a ballot by mail, it's controlled.

"If Republicans weren't afraid of higher numbers of registered Democrats voting, they wouldn't be making this an issue.
Click to expand...
"
Again, your supposition.
I could just reply by saying the Dems want mail in votes because they plan to stuff the ballot boxes, they know it's the only way they can win.
This type of discussion based on supposition and presumption gets no one anywhere.

Did you read the treatise I sent you by link?[/QUOTE]

It was pdf and it's too small-print to read. I can't print it out. Can you send it in a different format? Or, msybe summarize it for me?
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
Elena, you're evidence-based. So, hypothetically, if Trump were to claim there was voter fraud due to mail-in balloting, with no evidence to back up his assertion, and declares the Election invalid, would you support his action? You're supposing he wouldn't do that, I'm supposing he might do that.

You're also supposing he's going to win, and that's not a given.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
chiamaria said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWNFlJofjKA
Click to expand...

Each ballot that's actually mailed in is matched for both signature and against death records. Also, no reason to assume that desperate Trump supporters wouldn't attempt to commit voter fraud as well. Like Elena says, it's all about about unproven suppositions. And, since no-excuse, mail-in ballots are already in widespread use among the States, with no evidence of voter fraud in past elections, there's no convincing evidence that mail-in voting is a cause of voter fraud.

Clearly, Trump is setting the stage to attempt to fraudulently declare the Election invalid due to mail-in balloting in case the Electoral vote goes against him.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
Here's a direct quote from Trump's Pennsylvania rally last month. It's in regard to abolishing term limits. Notice that he uses the "royal 'we'":

We ran one time and we're 1-and-0. But it was for the big one. Now we're going to have a second time. And we're going to have another one.
And then we'll drive them crazy. And maybe if we really like it a lot, and things keep going like they're going, we'll go and we'll do what we have to do. We'll do a three and a four and a five."

i kid you not!
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
ElenaJ said:
David, you can increase the size of the page so it is easier reading....
Click to expand...

Apparently the tablet won't permit it. It has to be sent to a real computer.

Why can't you just summarize it? Since it's a rebuttal of something I wrote, such as the amazingly few times the less populated States have been out-voted by the more populated (meaning the number of times that the Electoral and Popular vote haven't matched up).

You mentioned that Electoral College representatives have been "pressured" in some way that contradicts Electoral/Popular agreement?
When did whatever that' refers to begin, and who's doing the pressuring?

As for "no problem" with public voting in regard to Covid-19, Italy was the "poster child" for how not to contain the spread of the virus.
Now, I'm glad to read that Italy is doing much better.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
chiamaria said:
Why don't they check who's actually dead or alive first and where they actually live before wasting so much paper and sending out mail-in ballots indiscriminately? I thought they wanted to be environmentally friendly? 112% of the population getting ballots already is enough to show how wrong it is. ILLEGAL immigrants can vote that way too, and if it doesn't require one's ID anymore, then your cat can vote, too.

No reason to assume that desperate Trump supporters wouldn't attempt to commit voter fraud as well? So dems may commit voter fraud?

Kayleigh Mcenany has basically provided in 2 minutes real life examples of corruption using mail-in voting, and she's not the only one who proves it either.
Click to expand...

There have been accusations of voter-fraud in Red States as well, in favor of the Republicans, mostly about tampering with the voting machines.

Bottom line: Without even considering the need for evidence of significant vote-fraud by his opponents, and the possibility of frsud bybhis supporters, Trump has clearly stated that, if he WINS, the vote was " fair", but if he LOSES, it was "rigged", on that basis alone.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
The "as well" goes to the unproven assumption that Democrats are cheating in significant numbers. For example, I can say that Trump colluded with the Russians in getting them to significantly and illegally alter the outcome of vote in 2016. How do I know this? Well, why wouldn't he, and he's buddies with Putin. Do I have the evidence to actually prove it? Well, no, but who needs evidence? The Republicans certainly don't need evidence to back up the assertion that the Democrats are somehow going to "rig" the vote.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
david starling said:
Here's a direct quote from Trump's Pennsylvania rally last month. It's in regard to abolishing term limits. Notice that he uses the "royal 'we'":

We ran one time and we're 1-and-0. But it was for the big one. Now we're going to have a second time. And we're going to have another one.
And then we'll drive them crazy. And maybe if we really like it a lot, and things keep going like they're going, we'll go and we'll do what we have to do. We'll do a three and a four and a five."

i kid you not!
Click to expand...

No comments?
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
ElenaJ said:
Trump has a wonderful sense of humour, and this was aimed at people like you, David.
Sorry.
Click to expand...

Knew it! He was "Just JOKING!"

His ENTIRE Presidency is a JOKE! Some think it's a good joke, others think it's a bad joke. It's just a matter of taste, and no accounting for that.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
All right, here's the real problem regarding the 2020 Election:

Avid Trump supporters, and they are many, have a cherished but ENTIRELY unfounded ASSUMPTION that there's NO WAY he could POSSIBLY LOSE a FAIR Election.

So, based upon this unfounded assumption, if he does APPEAR to have lost, it can ONLY be because the Election was SOMEHOW rigged against him.
NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE required!

Well if Biden does win, there's always New Zealand!
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
chiamaria said:
Being "buddies" with someone doesn't automatically mean that they've colluded. That's a logical leap. So since the extensive Mueller report came back saying that there was no evidence for the Russia collusion, suddenly you don't need evidence? You just feel like believing that he did collude, no matter what anyone says. What a waste of taxpayer money and man-hours on the report then if, turns out, evidence wasn't necessary to begin with.

I guess "Who needs evidence?" is now a democrat slogan.

And "Why wouldn't he?" is not an argument. It's not any more of an argument than "Why wouldn't Hillary Clinton?" Just because she lost doesn't automatically mean she didn't play dirty, and just because someone won doesn't mean they did play dirty.

There is, however, evidence that mail-in voting is rife with fraud. Mcenany has provided it. Take it or leave it. And not all democrats would engage in voter fraud, btw. Just a certain faction who are hell-bent on seeing Trump lose at all costs.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying: There IS sufficient evidence that there was illegal foreign interference in the 2016 election. But NOT sufficient evidence to prove that Trump colluded in it. There's NO sufficient evidence that mail-in voting is "rife with fraud", just isolated cases. The voting machines have been proven to be hackable. That doesn't mean they're all being hacked on a regular basis. And, not all Republicans would in engage in voter fraud either. Just those who are hell-bent on seeing Trump win.

Btw, no-excuse mail-in voting has been going on for years, in both Democratic and Republican-leaning States, including some where nearly all ballots cast are mail-in.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
Since Trump is a joker, and fools people into thinking he always means what he says, here's one that would be a GREAT joke on the Democrats if that's what he's planning: IF, after fighting tooth and nail from having to reveal his tax records and business accounts, it turns out that they're all on the up and up, nothing illegal or even shady about them, including that he paid his fair share of taxes! Burn!

[That's IF it's a joke!]
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
Trump told another joke, and it worked really well to "rile up" Nancy Pelosi. He said, with a serious face, that he'll "have to wait and see" if he accepts the results of the Nov. 3rd Election. Hilarious, especially how she overreacted!
 
Top