There are others... That was just a shortcut that most can understand.

Yeah I know, just more nitpicking

The whole point of campaigning is to influence the vote, but I know what you are saying. It's no different than offering carpools to drive people to the polls. And both sides have the ability to do the same thing. It's not like it favors one over the other.

@TaLoN132 both sides can do the same thing, but both sides are not _prepared_ to do the same thing on _short notice_

changing the rules like that this fast is _always_ going to raise suspicions

this is part of why trump was saying what he was saying

ofc trump added on a bunch of idiocy

but the impetus for this situation is NOT just trump

I very much disagree with that

it is Covid, and the responses to covid

@TaLoN132, I don’t think Trump needed a crystal ball to foresee that largely Dem politicians and media were advocating for mail-in + absentee ballots which have the greatest chance of fraud/tampering. I think pragmatically you could make the argument that if more ballots can be tampered with... then there will be a greater risk of irregularities. 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️ Correct me if the logic doesn’t follow through, but I think that’s a fair assertion.

If there is more opportunity for fraud then it’s not crazy to expect more fraud.

At the very least, if you assume everybody is honest and never lies, cheats, or steals to promote their agenda, this election had significant irregularities and those should be investigated.

it isn't just opportunity for fraud

it is changing the calculus of the election

its like changing the election to mandatory voting in 3 months before an election

or some other dynamic-changing change

🤷🏻‍♂️ Maybe that’s just me. Apparently saying “count the legal votes” is politically incorrect as of Nov. 3

See, @realz, it’s those changes that were made that implicate the left and warrant skepticism.

@yetiCodes, you just advanced to level 2!

The very assertion that mail-in votes have the greatest chance of fraud/tampering is not accurate. People say this, but tend to overlook the fact that committing mail-in voter fraud by assuming someone else's identity requires committing 3 felonies for each offense (identity theft, mail fraud, and voter fraud) in a way that by definition will lead the authorities to your doorstep. That's why Braynard made a point of looking into people who used postal mailboxes, but those also require identification and an application to rent.

In the same way if the GOP had made questionable alterations to the voting process months before the election and he won with irregularities the media fire would be claiming illegitimacy and corruption. 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️ Double standard, no?

the punishment only matters if they think they have a chance to get caught

It is further complicated, because you can only expect to use addresses that you alone have access to the mail that is delivered and you can only reasonably have so many non-related voters at an address.

For the same circumstances to occur in four states simultaneously is... curious to say the least. 🤷🏻‍♂️

You mean like in GA - where their changes were made by a Republican legislature, Rep Gov, and Rep Sec of State?

Hey, let’s all just be grateful that we live in a country where you can challenge the vote, present your case, and if there is nothing there, big whoop.

...and walk away with thousands of people who won't believe any conclusion that they didn't have from the start.

@yetiCodes That's what I have been saying all along. My issue has always been the fervent belief in massive voter fraud without proof. I am always skeptical of both sides. I think it's a healthy approach. I am certain there are bad actors on both sides. And I am certain there are sincere Patriots on both sides. The engineered divide in this country is not in the best interest of us commoners. I am trying in my own small way to point this out to as many that might be willing to hear me out.

I have a question, let’s pretend all of this is true for a minute, switched votes to one side. Should we just sit back and let it go? Just walk away and not fix anything?

No

@TaLoN132 I agree with all of that. If there is a case to be made I’d like to hear it. And that’s about it.

Many people will not disagree that they'd rather be safe than sorry, even if it's not their side that lost.

That's what risk limited audits are for... That's are relatively new phenomenon.

There is, however, a point where they will say: "Enough is enough."

Indeed.

https://youtu.be/BOH8O5zI0Wg

tldr all the youtube lawyers agree that the current court cases are headed for doom

(if you needed more convincing)

oh insulting that he didn't mention Robert

he mentioned Evil Robert (Barnes) but not Good Robert

someone needs to let Uncivil Law know about R&R channel