One question I've had is how is it possible that up to 26 million more voters cast ballots in 2020 vs 2016. It doesn't add up on the Dem side. Trump had immense support of GOP voters as witnessed by incredible rally turn out. Meanwhile, there was no enthusiasm for Biden anywhere, he just wasn't Trump. Tell me, what Democrats would have picked Biden over Hillary? None. So how did Biden get 15 million more votes than Her Royal Highness, Hilary Rodham Clinton and not take them from Trump?
Dominion
They had an algorithm to up Biden's vote total. When Trump was trouncing him at midnight, Dems shut things down in key states while they reprogrammed. See, they underestimated the vote totals for Trump and he was killing it.
That certainly explains the outcome better than the idea the Dems were hyper mobilized. For Biden to get 15 million more votes than Hillary, he'd have to take them from Trump. You know, the angry suburban White Karen women. But Biden DIDN't take votes from Trump because Trump got more votes in 2020 than 2016.
Compare this map of 2016 & 2020 in terms of over/under performing counties. It is virtually identical.
65 million voted for Hillary in 2016 62 million for Trump
Biden got 79 million in 2020???? Trump got 73.5 million votes in 2020
So tell me other than electronic fraud how a sitting President increases his vote total by nearly 20% and loses? That is absurd!
Tell me how a Dem candidate with zero enthusiasm among his followers gets almost 23% more than Hillary Clinton who had feminists all fired up to elect the first woman POTUS? Over Hillary who the Democrat Party WANTED in office. They don't want Joe, they just don't want Trump.
With the enthusiasm for Trump, you could see him getting more votes as an incumbent.
For Joe to get 23% more votes than Hillary WITHOUT taking any away from Trump defies all reason and logic and only leads to one conclusion - fraud.
How can 2020 have more people vote than for the Hillary-Trump election? There was more on the line - SCOTUS, you had Obama's popularity that the Dems wanted to continue, you had Dems who backed Hillary in 2008 wanting to get her in. There are a hundred reasons that Hillary was a stronger candidate and better vote getter than Joe. Hillary didn't make gaffe ofter gaffe.
I think Sidney Powell is on to a reasonable explanation on how this was pulled off.
"The Democrat Party looks like Titanic survivors. Partying and celebrating one moment, and huddled in lifeboats freezing the next". Hatari 2017
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." Han Solo
Hatari many people have proffered this same rationale for the numbers that were tallied by Trump and Clinton in the 2016 election and compared these to the 2020 election.
None of these numbers makes any sense.It defies not only common sense but logic as well.
There is more information that defies probabilities coming forth in the next few weeks.This will all combine to prove fraud on a massive scale.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." **Edmund Burke**
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." **Benjamin Franklin**
Sidney has tall order to fill. The low information crowd will need a STUPID SIMPLE explanation that takes less than a minute to adequately explain, in order to be persuaded. Something along the lines of a photo of biden himself stuffing a ballot box. Her evidence and explanation needs to be that powerful and that level of simple. Anything less and the nuance will drown out all the details just like in all the other democrat scandals of the last 10 years. Look no further than the retards on this forum, who despite being shown the evidence, can't and refuse to even try and make the connection.
And the same applies with the courts. No judge (or judges) want to be the party that overturns a presidential election, not to mention this election. Anything short of bombastic and irrefutable evidence will permit enough room for them to wiggle out of doing the right thing.
Sidney has tall order to fill. The low information crowd will need a STUPID SIMPLE explanation that takes less than a minute to adequately explain, in order to be persuaded. Something along the lines of a photo of biden himself stuffing a ballot box. Her evidence and explanation needs to be that powerful and that level of simple. Anything less and the nuance will drown out all the details just like in all the other democrat scandals of the last 10 years. Look no further than the retards on this forum, who despite being shown the evidence, can't and refuse to even try and make the connection.
And the same applies with the courts. No judge (or judges) want to be the party that overturns a presidential election, not to mention this election. Anything short of bombastic and irrefutable evidence will permit enough room for them to wiggle out of doing the right thing.
What they will do is up for speculation, but I am pretty sure SCOTUS can follow this.
Sidney has tall order to fill. The low information crowd will need a STUPID SIMPLE explanation that takes less than a minute to adequately explain, in order to be persuaded. Something along the lines of a photo of biden himself stuffing a ballot box. Her evidence and explanation needs to be that powerful and that level of simple. Anything less and the nuance will drown out all the details just like in all the other democrat scandals of the last 10 years. Look no further than the retards on this forum, who despite being shown the evidence, can't and refuse to even try and make the connection.
And the same applies with the courts. No judge (or judges) want to be the party that overturns a presidential election, not to mention this election. Anything short of bombastic and irrefutable evidence will permit enough room for them to wiggle out of doing the right thing.
What they will do is up for speculation, but I am pretty sure SCOTUS can follow this.
I agree they can follow it. My point with the courts is if the see a way to get out of having to overturn an election, they will.
Sidney has tall order to fill. The low information crowd will need a STUPID SIMPLE explanation that takes less than a minute to adequately explain, in order to be persuaded. Something along the lines of a photo of biden himself stuffing a ballot box. Her evidence and explanation needs to be that powerful and that level of simple. Anything less and the nuance will drown out all the details just like in all the other democrat scandals of the last 10 years. Look no further than the retards on this forum, who despite being shown the evidence, can't and refuse to even try and make the connection.
And the same applies with the courts. No judge (or judges) want to be the party that overturns a presidential election, not to mention this election. Anything short of bombastic and irrefutable evidence will permit enough room for them to wiggle out of doing the right thing.
I think they know which ballots are the fraudulent ballots. The thousands of ballots they keep mentioning that only have Biden selected and no other races. All the SCOTUS has to do is order a monitored serious audit on those specific ballots in every state where they have signatures on the ballots to prove to the idiot masses there was a lot of fraud...Once the audit determines the signatures dont match the original voter registration file, the person on the ballot is dead, or they call that person and find out they didnt vote at all...
Sidney has tall order to fill. The low information crowd will need a STUPID SIMPLE explanation that takes less than a minute to adequately explain, in order to be persuaded. Something along the lines of a photo of biden himself stuffing a ballot box. Her evidence and explanation needs to be that powerful and that level of simple. Anything less and the nuance will drown out all the details just like in all the other democrat scandals of the last 10 years. Look no further than the retards on this forum, who despite being shown the evidence, can't and refuse to even try and make the connection.
And the same applies with the courts. No judge (or judges) want to be the party that overturns a presidential election, not to mention this election. Anything short of bombastic and irrefutable evidence will permit enough room for them to wiggle out of doing the right thing.
I think they know which ballots are the fraudulent ballots. The thousands of ballots they keep mentioning that only have Biden selected and no other races. All the SCOTUS has to do is order a monitored serious audit on those specific ballots in every state where they have signatures on the ballots to prove to the idiot masses there was a lot of fraud...Once the audit determines the signatures dont match the original voter registration file, the person on the ballot is dead, or they call that person and find out they didnt vote at all...
My ballot is not signed. My ballot envelope is signed. How do you track the ballot?
Originally Posted by BrentD
I would not buy something that runs on any kind of primer given the possibility of primer shortages and even regulations. In fact, why not buy a flintlock? Really. Rocks aren't going away anytime soon.
I’ll agree with your statement if in 6mo we’re 4mo into DJT’s 2nd term.
She mentioned John James’ run against Gary Peters for the Mi senate seat. I felt that he had an equal chance of flipping that seat as DJT of carrying the state. Them also proving that James rightfully won that seat and shoring up a senate majority would be the cherry on top.
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/nhqZTmxJ/Screen-Shot-2020-11-08-at-5-01-55-PM.png)
