Jack Bauer said:

---

I know California is a big state but if you take that out of the election, the results are:

Trump: 70.6M (+5.8M)
Kamala: 64.8M

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Hmmmm

Once again, a 3:30am ballot dump lost us a critical race in Wisconsin pic.twitter.com/Ea7Pbn6I2V

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 11, 2024

---

Especially weird since the 10:30 PM ballot drop seemed to have won it for Red.

I fear we are dealing with powerful magicks on both sides.

---

lol, expand the graph or put on your glasses

Both the blue and red lines moved up, not just the blue line only like 2020 and 330am

---

You're missing the point. Spikes happen. Where's the rule that says they always benefit both parties equally? They don't.

---

Show some graphs with similar red spikes, and I will take it as normal. Haven't seen those yet.

---

Why would those necessarily exist? It was predicted in 2020 that mail-in ballots would favor Democrats, and so they did. There's no rule that says both parties have an equal right to warm fuzzies every time there's an update.

---

There are states where Democrats are not the majority. Do those have one sided spikes?

---

They certainly could, depending on where the votes are coming from.

But all of this was thoroughly litigated back in 2020. Republicans won this year. There's no need to keep dwelling on the paranoia that Trump was selling back then.

---

Saying that the issues were "thoroughly litigated" is dishonest, really, Hardly any of the issues actually made it to a case in court. Most were tossed for "lack of standing." I do wonder who it is that actually does have standing for such a case, especially the cases involving thwarting of state law and constitutions.

---

That's not true.

---

And yet it is.

Just checked and of 82 suits brought by Republicans, only 6 had a conclusion beyond dismissed or denied.

The four suits filed against Republicans went beyond this with three going longer than two years.

---

Nope.

https://www.cato.org/blog/trumps-2020-stolen-election-claims-are-wrong-merits

---

I think you're so busy googling articles to "debunk" ideas you disagree with, you often times don't even read the **** you link.

What you posted didn't refute anything in his post. Hell it even acknowledges that many of the suits were dismissed based on standing issues. He's absolutely correct that the vast majority didn't get past the dismissal stage.

Now that's not to say that Trump has sufficient evidence to illicit a ruling in his favor. He clearly didn't. But your link didn't refute a thing in his post.

---

I hate to break this to you, but standing issues have to be addressed first. The fact remains that the courts went out of their way to address the merits.

---

Do you recall what the poster you attempted to "debunk" said?

I think you need to read it again.

---

You should too.

---

At your suggestion, I did. Here is what the poster wrote:

Saying that the issues were "thoroughly litigated" is dishonest, really, Hardly any of the issues actually made it to a case in court. Most were tossed for "lack of standing."

Just checked and of 82 suits brought by Republicans, only 6 had a conclusion beyond dismissed or denied.


The four suits filed against Republicans went beyond this with three going longer than two years.

Nothing that your article posted debunked any of the above. In fact, it actually confirmed that most of the poster's statements, confirming that many of the lawsuits were dismissed for lack of standing.

Perhaps you need to do so more googling. Surely you can do better.

---

Doing fine, thanks.

---

Keeping the expectations low. I get it.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Hmmmm

Once again, a 3:30am ballot dump lost us a critical race in Wisconsin pic.twitter.com/Ea7Pbn6I2V

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 11, 2024

---

Especially weird since the 10:30 PM ballot drop seemed to have won it for Red.

I fear we are dealing with powerful magicks on both sides.

---

lol, expand the graph or put on your glasses

Both the blue and red lines moved up, not just the blue line only like 2020 and 330am

---

You're missing the point. Spikes happen. Where's the rule that says they always benefit both parties equally? They don't.

---

Show some graphs with similar red spikes, and I will take it as normal. Haven't seen those yet.

---

Why would those necessarily exist? It was predicted in 2020 that mail-in ballots would favor Democrats, and so they did. There's no rule that says both parties have an equal right to warm fuzzies every time there's an update.

---

There are states where Democrats are not the majority. Do those have one sided spikes?

---

They certainly could, depending on where the votes are coming from.

But all of this was thoroughly litigated back in 2020. Republicans won this year. There's no need to keep dwelling on the paranoia that Trump was selling back then.

---

Saying that the issues were "thoroughly litigated" is dishonest, really, Hardly any of the issues actually made it to a case in court. Most were tossed for "lack of standing." I do wonder who it is that actually does have standing for such a case, especially the cases involving thwarting of state law and constitutions.

---

That's not true.

---

And yet it is.

Just checked and of 82 suits brought by Republicans, only 6 had a conclusion beyond dismissed or denied.

The four suits filed against Republicans went beyond this with three going longer than two years.

---

Nope.

https://www.cato.org/blog/trumps-2020-stolen-election-claims-are-wrong-merits

---

I think you're so busy googling articles to "debunk" ideas you disagree with, you often times don't even read the **** you link.

What you posted didn't refute anything in his post. Hell it even acknowledges that many of the suits were dismissed based on standing issues. He's absolutely correct that the vast majority didn't get past the dismissal stage.

Now that's not to say that Trump has sufficient evidence to illicit a ruling in his favor. He clearly didn't. But your link didn't refute a thing in his post.

---

I hate to break this to you, but standing issues have to be addressed first. The fact remains that the courts went out of their way to address the merits.

---

Do you recall what the poster you attempted to "debunk" said?

I think you need to read it again.

---

You should too.

---

At your suggestion, I did. Here is what the poster wrote:

Saying that the issues were "thoroughly litigated" is dishonest, really, Hardly any of the issues actually made it to a case in court. Most were tossed for "lack of standing."

Just checked and of 82 suits brought by Republicans, only 6 had a conclusion beyond dismissed or denied.


The four suits filed against Republicans went beyond this with three going longer than two years.

Nothing that your article posted debunked any of the above. In fact, it actually confirmed that most of the poster's statements, confirming that many of the lawsuits were dismissed for lack of standing.

Perhaps you need to do so more googling. Surely you can do better.

---

Doing fine, thanks.

---

Keeping the expectations low. I get it.

---

Yeah…mine.

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Hmmmm

Once again, a 3:30am ballot dump lost us a critical race in Wisconsin pic.twitter.com/Ea7Pbn6I2V

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 11, 2024

---

Especially weird since the 10:30 PM ballot drop seemed to have won it for Red.

I fear we are dealing with powerful magicks on both sides.

---

lol, expand the graph or put on your glasses

Both the blue and red lines moved up, not just the blue line only like 2020 and 330am

---

You're missing the point. Spikes happen. Where's the rule that says they always benefit both parties equally? They don't.

---

Show some graphs with similar red spikes, and I will take it as normal. Haven't seen those yet.

---

Why would those necessarily exist? It was predicted in 2020 that mail-in ballots would favor Democrats, and so they did. There's no rule that says both parties have an equal right to warm fuzzies every time there's an update.

---

There are states where Democrats are not the majority. Do those have one sided spikes?

---

They certainly could, depending on where the votes are coming from.

But all of this was thoroughly litigated back in 2020. Republicans won this year. There's no need to keep dwelling on the paranoia that Trump was selling back then.

---

Saying that the issues were "thoroughly litigated" is dishonest, really, Hardly any of the issues actually made it to a case in court. Most were tossed for "lack of standing." I do wonder who it is that actually does have standing for such a case, especially the cases involving thwarting of state law and constitutions.

---

That's not true.

---

And yet it is.

Just checked and of 82 suits brought by Republicans, only 6 had a conclusion beyond dismissed or denied.

The four suits filed against Republicans went beyond this with three going longer than two years.

---

Nope.

https://www.cato.org/blog/trumps-2020-stolen-election-claims-are-wrong-merits

---

I think you're so busy googling articles to "debunk" ideas you disagree with, you often times don't even read the **** you link.

What you posted didn't refute anything in his post. Hell it even acknowledges that many of the suits were dismissed based on standing issues. He's absolutely correct that the vast majority didn't get past the dismissal stage.

Now that's not to say that Trump has sufficient evidence to illicit a ruling in his favor. He clearly didn't. But your link didn't refute a thing in his post.

---

I hate to break this to you, but standing issues have to be addressed first. The fact remains that the courts went out of their way to address the merits.

---

Do you recall what the poster you attempted to "debunk" said?

I think you need to read it again.

---

You should too.

---

At your suggestion, I did. Here is what the poster wrote:

Saying that the issues were "thoroughly litigated" is dishonest, really, Hardly any of the issues actually made it to a case in court. Most were tossed for "lack of standing."

Just checked and of 82 suits brought by Republicans, only 6 had a conclusion beyond dismissed or denied.


The four suits filed against Republicans went beyond this with three going longer than two years.

Nothing that your article posted debunked any of the above. In fact, it actually confirmed that most of the poster's statements, confirming that many of the lawsuits were dismissed for lack of standing.

Perhaps you need to do so more googling. Surely you can do better.

---

Doing fine, thanks.

---

Keeping the expectations low. I get it.

---

Yeah…mine.

---

Well for you there's no place to go but up.

---

Kamala Harris is the 1st candidate since Herbert Hoover 1932 who did not flip a *SINGLE* county pic.twitter.com/nqWds9ms8x

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) December 2, 2024

BREAKING: California has officially certified its 2024 election results.

— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) December 14, 2024