re: If Biden won 2020 legitimately

quote:

---

Now if Kamala happened to be from California, had statewide resources in place there, did a huge amount of fundraising there, etc. it might be different?

---

She underperformed 2020 Biden by 1.8M votes

Again, where Kamala lost the most support, the majority of the 6M difference from Biden in 2020 was....liberal areas



This shows both

1. 2020 was an outlier in terms of participation
2. 2024 DEM enthusiasm was low and Kamala was low-key hated

However, even with the issues in 2024, Kamala still smoked Obama and Hillary.

quote:

---

If side stepping a point was toting the rock you’re Barry Sanders . Geebuz man have some integrity.

---

Oh I'm sorry did NC not try to take issue with rulings on standing? You sure about that?

quote:

---

There is nothing funny about critical theory, or those who practice it. You have come to a conclusion. In doing so, you refuse, demean, and deflect challenges to your conclusion. You manipulate facts to that end.

---

You keep calling it “critical theory,” but a label isn’t an argument.

A case dismissed for lack of standing isn’t a ruling that every allegation was false. I have never said otherwise. It is also not proof that the allegations were true or that the evidence would’ve survived scrutiny.

You may believe some courts should have heard more. Fair enough. But the claim that an election was stolen still has to be proved. So far, you’ve explained at length why the door stayed closed. You still haven’t shown there was anything behind it but your own certainty.

quote:

---

Why would they cheat in CA in 2020?

---

To give Biden the popular vote assuming Trump would win and challenge it. You really let Dems get past you on a lot of things.

Was Fauci's research involved with gain of function?

Why was Fauci "pardoned"?

quote:

---

This is a lie. You just scoff at everything.

---

I have scoffed at 0 examples of direct, credible evidence.

I've pointed out how the vast majority of "evidence" is indirect at best, and how credibility is a major issue with a few eye witness accounts (many which have been debunked)

quote:

---

To give Biden the popular vote

---

They didn't need to cheat to do that

Biden beat Trump by almost 7M votes

The GOP is at a deficit in winning the popular vote. That's why 2024 is such an indicator of (1) how bad the DEMs had hurt their rep and cratered enthusiasm and (2) how terrible Kamala Harris is

quote:

---

producing direct, credible evidence?

---

WHO is responsible for producing this credible direct evidence? and at what point does it become actual evidence?

If I report seeing a man get shot in the street - is that 'evidence?' - OR does some 'official' have to confirm a dead man with a bullet hole in hm before it becomes 'evidence'/ What it it is a dirty cop - hell - suppose it was the cop that shot the man - and what if that cop sends a henchman out to clean up the scene and then looks around and sez - 'I don't see anything wrong here - prove that a man got shot.'

Who is 'right' and who is "wrong" in that scenario?

I'm not talking about your saintly 'law book' here - I am talking about MORALITY and TRUTH.

UNLESS the people in charge of the ballots are honest, or have honest overseers, or have honest judges and governors - any simple crime like stealing an election is hard to "prove" in a court of law.

ALL us unwashed noobs want is for some UNAFFILIATED and HONEST official take a look at the data that FAILs EVERY sane analysis of the event.

but go ahead with your exercise in moot court -

When I was at LSU Boy's State back in 55 the law department entertained us one night by putting on a 'moot trial" (where I first heard the term) it was all about a lawsuit against a builder who put all the rest rooms on the second floor but did not put any stairs or elevators to gain access to the second floor.

You sound exactly like the lawyer defending the builder - any sane person knows who is right - but the arguement over the "wording" goes on to everyone's delight.

Except in real life, it becomes an accessory to the 'wrong' that was committed - It is only funny when put in the light of entertainment.

YOU, my friend, are defending the builder who put all the bathrooms on the second floor with no access.

quote:

---

WHO is responsible for producing this credible direct evidence?

---

Those making the claims requiring it.

In this instance, those claiming whatever 2020 election fraud they're referencing.

quote:

---

and at what point does it become actual evidence?

---

The evidence itself typically establishes that.