• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

So you wanted evidence of widespread voter fraud? Here it is.


Uhhh, genius, YOU are the one claiming voter fraud doesn't exist.

Are you trying to make the Guiness book by being the stupidest person ever to post thoughts on a public forum? If so, you are in the running.
 
Uhhh, genius, YOU are the one claiming voter fraud doesn't exist.

Are you trying to make the Guiness book by being the stupidest person ever to post thoughts on a public forum? If so, you are in the running.
When you’ve lost an argument, turn to a strawman.
 
When you’ve lost an argument, turn to a strawman.

My God, you REALLY are this stupid, aren't you? Yes, YOU are the one bleating on and on about how voter fraud is a myth, those saying any politician ever lost an election due to fraud is a conspiracy nutjob. YOU, Floggy Manbun Booster Shortbus, changed the entire discussion when I told you to link to the "50 dismissed lawsuits" so I could show how you don't understand at all what is going on. YOU then responded by linking to three stories about voter fraud because REPUBLICAN!!

"Ahhh, that'll show him - I'll link to stories about something I claim never happens because those times it is proven that what never happens happened but involved REPUGNICANS! GOT HIM! Then, to top it off, I'll accuse HIM of a strawman! GENIUS!!"
- Floggy Booster Manbun Shortbus

Here is a comprehensive list of proven voter fraud over the past 25 years, dingelberry - more than 1400 instances. Great job finding three out of 1400 involving a Republican. Your 2nd grade teacher must be so proud.

 
My God, you REALLY are this stupid, aren't you? Yes, YOU are the one bleating on and on about how voter fraud is a myth, those saying any politician ever lost an election due to fraud is a conspiracy nutjob. YOU, Floggy Manbun Booster Shortbus, changed the entire discussion when I told you to link to the "50 dismissed lawsuits" so I could show how you don't understand at all what is going on. YOU then responded by linking to three stories about voter fraud because REPUBLICAN!!

"Ahhh, that'll show him - I'll link to stories about something I claim never happens because those times it is proven that what never happens happened but involved REPUGNICANS! GOT HIM! Then, to top it off, I'll accuse HIM of a strawman! GENIUS!!"
- Floggy Booster Manbun Shortbus

Here is a comprehensive list of proven voter fraud over the past 25 years, dingelberry - more than 1400 instances. Great job finding three out of 1400 involving a Republican. Your 2nd grade teacher must be so proud.

1,400 over 25 years! Is Trump pressuring Raffensperger for 11,780 votes one of those instances? That’s a big one!
 
Except President Trump didn’t do any such thing. The Grand Jury did find that those claiming he did likely committed perjury though.
 
How about a separate thread for those who have " thrown their hat in " the political race. The sh!t slinging is cranking up.
 
1,400 over 25 years! Is Trump pressuring Raffensperger for 11,780 votes one of those instances? That’s a big one!

I genuinely no longer understand why I respond to your stupidity. Honestly, I don't - siiiigh. Here goes:
  • The 1,400 convictions include instances of the defendant fraudulently generating dozens, even hundreds, of votes. One poll official was waiting until the polling place was slow and would simply fill out and turn in ballots by the dozens. He did that over at least 10 years in multiple elections.
  • Only the dimmest bulb in a tiny lamp during a brownout believes that even a tiny fraction of election cheats get caught. Jesus Christ, Chicago solves less than 50% of homicides - do you think even 5% of election cheaters are caught??
  • So put this together, you intellectual giant. (That's like me calling a really fat guy "Tiny.") If the 1,400 convicted is 5% of the total, that means 28,000 cheaters - a conservative estimate.
  • If those 28,000 cheaters each accounted for 20 votes (illegal ballot harvesters get paid by the vote so the 20 figure is low), that is 560,000 votes.
  • Are you stupid enough to believe 560,000 votes don't matter? Yes. Yes, you are.
 
I genuinely no longer understand why I respond to your stupidity. Honestly, I don't - siiiigh. Here goes:
  • The 1,400 convictions include instances of the defendant fraudulently generating dozens, even hundreds, of votes. One poll official was waiting until the polling place was slow and would simply fill out and turn in ballots by the dozens. He did that over at least 10 years in multiple elections.
  • Only the dimmest bulb in a tiny lamp during a brownout believes that even a tiny fraction of election cheats get caught. Jesus Christ, Chicago solves less than 50% of homicides - do you think even 5% of election cheaters are caught??
  • So put this together, you intellectual giant. (That's like me calling a really fat guy "Tiny.") If the 1,400 convicted is 5% of the total, that means 28,000 cheaters - a conservative estimate.
  • If those 28,000 cheaters each accounted for 20 votes (illegal ballot harvesters get paid by the vote so the 20 figure is low), that is 560,000 votes.
  • Are you stupid enough to believe 560,000 votes don't matter? Yes. Yes, you are.
Speaking of Stupid enough, did you really not know, or did you simply not care? If it’s that you didn’t care, you’re more pathetic than I thought.

 
Speaking of Stupid enough, did you really not know, or did you simply not care? If it’s that you didn’t care, you’re more pathetic than I thought.


When defeated, out smarted, left with no other recourse, you can always count on one thing.

Floggy to deflect.

200w.webp
 
Tell me, in one sentence, what that has to do with THE POINT I MADE.
You haven’t made a point. When has it ever altered the outcome of an election? Or even come close? It’s all inconsequential… pointless.
 
You haven’t made a point. When has it ever altered the outcome of an election? Or even come close? It’s all inconsequential… pointless.

You have no idea - zero, none, nil - of how many elections have been altered due to election fraud.

Also, you blithely and stupidly ignore the blatant election rigging and cheating that resulted in Zuckerberg getting fined millions of dollars and the media corruption that only the dumbest, most blindingly devoted leftists refuse to acknowledge that occurred in the 2020 election.



The blatantly corrupt media and hundreds of millions of dollars of illegal campaign spending by Zuckerberg obviously changed the 2020 outcome, to the massive detriment of this great nation. Only a blithering idiot, the intellectual equivalent of a monkey obsessively tapping a button to get another peanut, fails to admit those obvious facts.

So go ahead and get another peanut, boy.
 
You have no idea - zero, none, nil - of how many elections have been altered due to election fraud.

Also, you blithely and stupidly ignore the blatant election rigging and cheating that resulted in Zuckerberg getting fined millions of dollars and the media corruption that only the dumbest, most blindingly devoted leftists refuse to acknowledge that occurred in the 2020 election.



The blatantly corrupt media and hundreds of millions of dollars of illegal campaign spending by Zuckerberg obviously changed the 2020 outcome, to the massive detriment of this great nation. Only a blithering idiot, the intellectual equivalent of a monkey obsessively tapping a button to get another peanut, fails to admit those obvious facts.

So go ahead and get another peanut, boy.

There are many cases of fraud altering the outcome of elections. For instance, you could share this with Floggy...but he won't read it.

Mark Harris was riding high on Election Day in 2018. The Republican candidate for North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District had beaten his Democratic opponent in a very close race. Next stop: the U.S. House of Representatives.

Or so it seemed. Harris had won by 905 votes, a margin of only 0.3 percent of all ballots cast. The state’s Board of Elections refused to certify the results, though, when evidence surfaced of “concerted fraudulent activities related to absentee by-mail ballots,” including illegal vote harvesting by a political consultant and his associates.

The board’s investigation turned up so many cases of fraudulent activity, including forged signatures and widespread ballot harvesting, that a new election was ordered in the congressional race as well as two local races. A new candidate, Dan Bishop, took Harris’ place and went on to win the seat in a special election last year.

A Wake County grand jury, meanwhile, indicted the political consultant on charges of felony obstruction of justice, conspiracy to obstruct justice, possession of absentee ballots, and perjury.

Or....
The Alabama 2016 Wetumpka County Council’s District 2 election, which was decided by three votes in favor of Percy Gill. It was overturned by a judge when at least eight absentee ballots were discovered in which the signatures had been forged or not notarized or witnessed as required by state law.

Or...
Kaufman County, Texas - an election for the city council was overturned and a new election ordered by a Democrat judge due to vote harvesting and absentee ballot fraud.

Or...
In St. Louis, Missouri, a 2016 Democratic primary election was overturned due to absentee ballot fraud. The incumbent, Penny Hubbard, seemed to win the Democratic primary race by ninety votes, but her opponent, Bruce Franks, challenged the results because of the large (and suspicious) number of absentee ballots cast for Hubbard. A judge ordered a special election after determining that many improper absentee ballots had been cast. Franks won that special election by a 3:1 margin.

Or...
In the 2018 mayor race in Mission, Texas, a judge overturned the initial results after hearing two weeks of testimony about bribery and manipulated absentee ballots by the campaign of incumbent Armando O’Caña. The judge found that over 158 votes were cast illegally.
 
You have no idea - zero, none, nil - of how many elections have been altered due to election fraud.

Also, you blithely and stupidly ignore the blatant election rigging and cheating that resulted in Zuckerberg getting fined millions of dollars and the media corruption that only the dumbest, most blindingly devoted leftists refuse to acknowledge that occurred in the 2020 election.



The blatantly corrupt media and hundreds of millions of dollars of illegal campaign spending by Zuckerberg obviously changed the 2020 outcome, to the massive detriment of this great nation. Only a blithering idiot, the intellectual equivalent of a monkey obsessively tapping a button to get another peanut, fails to admit those obvious facts.

So go ahead and get another peanut, boy.
Are you sure they’re not telling you what you want to hear?
 
Yes. I reasonably cannot read an article behind a pay wall.

I also know the Fox and Murdoch topic is a different topic than "widespread voter fraud."

You really do suck at this (repeated 23,472 times now)
Free for me, odd that.

The Fox lawsuit isn’t about voter fraud but it is about attempted election fraud. Split hairs much? It’s about a media corp aiding what they knew to be an illegitimate attempt to overturn an election (fraud) by defaming Dominion (among other things). Any reasonable person understands that.
 
Are you sure they’re not telling you what you want to hear?

Your comment is so incredibly revealing - Zuckerberg was FINED $24 million for violating election laws in Washington and is being investigated for criminal violations of election laws in Georgia and Wisconsin. Know why the fine was $24 million? Because that is the maximum allowed.

A judge in Washington state fined Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta, the parent company of Facebook, $24.7 million for violating campaign finance disclosure law.

King County Superior Court Judge Douglass North on Wednesday issued the maximum penalty allowed for more than 800 violations of the state’s 1972 Fair Campaign Practices Act.




And you think I'm the one guilty of refusing to acknowledge the truth?

giphy.gif


Get another peanut, Shortbus. Good boy.
 
Free for me, odd that.

You're a Democrat Socialist. Errything's free for you all.

The Fox lawsuit isn’t about voter fraud

Admission that you deflected and changed subjects.

but it is about attempted election fraud.

No, specifically it is about how a news network reported on allegations at the time regarding Dominion.

Split hairs much?

It's not splitting hairs in the least. You're comparing an apple and an orange.

How Fox news covered news at the time about allegations against Dominion is not the same thing as a judge overturning an election in Alabama due to documented voting fraud involving forged signatures.

One is about news reporting, the other is about an actual case.
 
More "organized" voter fraud. @Steeltime gonna eat this up like an Ogurr eats at a dung farm.

Liberal Group Running Massive Election Bribery Scheme in Supreme Court Race​


It starts with a text from a random number and an offer that sounds too good to be true.


“Hi! It’s Wisconsin Takes Action,” the mysterious texter begins. We are helping to elect a progressive majority to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. We are offering an opportunity for you to earn $250-plus by talking to your friends and family about voting.”

63fe03230147babd7fe9375a


It’s not nearly that simple and in fact amounts to Election Bribery, a felony in Wisconsin punishable by a maximum sentence of more than three years in prison.


The texts have been sent to thousands of Wisconsinites, many of whom have jumped at the chance to, in the words of one Wisconsin Takes Action organizer, “not only get paid…but also to influence a really important election.”


Those who respond to the text expressing interest in the offer are given instructions to log in to a live training session on Zoom in which organizers explain how the program works. A video recording of one such training session the day after the Supreme Court primary reveals that people aren’t just talking to their friends and family about voting, but rather adding their names and contact information to Wisconsin Takes Action’s database and then repeatedly contacting them to ensure that they vote for liberal candidate Janet Protasiewicz.



This was made abundantly clear during the hour-long training session.


“The primary was just last night for the Supreme Court so we know who will be on the ballot in the general election,” said one organizer who introduced himself as Christian. “We have Dan Kelly, the conservative former Supreme Court justice and then Janet Protasiewicz—the progressive circuit court judge currently—and she is the progressive candidate who just won the primary.

“Of course, Wisconsin Takes Action is focused on putting forth progressive ideas and implementing progressive laws, so, you know, we really are looking forward to her as the candidate for this upcoming election.”

To get her elected, Christian explained, the group is using a technique called “relational organizing.”

“It’s really simple. In traditional organizing in campaigns, we may think about campaign offices, someone making a call to a constituent and telling someone to go vote, someone they don’t know. In relational organizing, you’re talking to people who you do know and that’s really effective because you talking to your father to go vote or your sister or your friend is a lot more effective than me telling them to go vote because I don’t know them. But with you, there’s a lot more connection or relationship built and more reason for them to be compelled to go vote.”

However, people who take part in this relational organizing campaign—whom the group calls “community mobilizers”—are paid per person who they deliver to the Wisconsin Takes Action database and, ultimately, to the polls to cast a vote for Protasiewicz.

This is in direct violation of Wisconsin Statute § 12.11, which provides that “any person who offers, gives, lends or promises to give or lend...anything of value...to, or for, any elector, or to or for any other person in order to induce any elector to go or refrain from going to the polls, vote or refrain from voting [or] vote or refrain from voting for or against a particular person" commits felony election bribery.
 
More "organized" voter fraud. @Steeltime gonna eat this up like an Ogurr eats at a dung farm.

Liberal Group Running Massive Election Bribery Scheme in Supreme Court Race​


It starts with a text from a random number and an offer that sounds too good to be true.


“Hi! It’s Wisconsin Takes Action,” the mysterious texter begins. We are helping to elect a progressive majority to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. We are offering an opportunity for you to earn $250-plus by talking to your friends and family about voting.”

63fe03230147babd7fe9375a


It’s not nearly that simple and in fact amounts to Election Bribery, a felony in Wisconsin punishable by a maximum sentence of more than three years in prison.


The texts have been sent to thousands of Wisconsinites, many of whom have jumped at the chance to, in the words of one Wisconsin Takes Action organizer, “not only get paid…but also to influence a really important election.”


Those who respond to the text expressing interest in the offer are given instructions to log in to a live training session on Zoom in which organizers explain how the program works. A video recording of one such training session the day after the Supreme Court primary reveals that people aren’t just talking to their friends and family about voting, but rather adding their names and contact information to Wisconsin Takes Action’s database and then repeatedly contacting them to ensure that they vote for liberal candidate Janet Protasiewicz.



This was made abundantly clear during the hour-long training session.


“The primary was just last night for the Supreme Court so we know who will be on the ballot in the general election,” said one organizer who introduced himself as Christian. “We have Dan Kelly, the conservative former Supreme Court justice and then Janet Protasiewicz—the progressive circuit court judge currently—and she is the progressive candidate who just won the primary.

“Of course, Wisconsin Takes Action is focused on putting forth progressive ideas and implementing progressive laws, so, you know, we really are looking forward to her as the candidate for this upcoming election.”

To get her elected, Christian explained, the group is using a technique called “relational organizing.”

“It’s really simple. In traditional organizing in campaigns, we may think about campaign offices, someone making a call to a constituent and telling someone to go vote, someone they don’t know. In relational organizing, you’re talking to people who you do know and that’s really effective because you talking to your father to go vote or your sister or your friend is a lot more effective than me telling them to go vote because I don’t know them. But with you, there’s a lot more connection or relationship built and more reason for them to be compelled to go vote.”

However, people who take part in this relational organizing campaign—whom the group calls “community mobilizers”—are paid per person who they deliver to the Wisconsin Takes Action database and, ultimately, to the polls to cast a vote for Protasiewicz.

This is in direct violation of Wisconsin Statute § 12.11, which provides that “any person who offers, gives, lends or promises to give or lend...anything of value...to, or for, any elector, or to or for any other person in order to induce any elector to go or refrain from going to the polls, vote or refrain from voting [or] vote or refrain from voting for or against a particular person" commits felony election bribery.

"SeE? rEpuBLiCan bAd!"
- Floggy Booster Shortbus
 
Top