Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (235045)	5/2/2022 12:23:11 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362705

>> What you have never seemed to grasp is that enabling people eligible to vote to actually vote is in no way 'stealing' an election. It depends 100% on HOW you "enable" it. If, as in 2020, it is through blatant cheating, it is stealing an election. While I don't agree with most people that we are better off as a country with only those voting who are correctly informed and who desire to vote actually casting ballots, that's sort of beside the point. If someone wants to vote and is eligible they should be able to do so. The problem comes with you have a billionaire funding election operations so as to CONTROL who votes and who does not. And that is what was done. They didn't control it by refusing anyone their right, but they controlled it by creating awareness mostly on the parts of Democrats. That is cheating. There is a reason they did it in an underhanded way: Because they wanted to maintain control. If, in fac,t they had wanted to do it in a way that wasn't corrupt, they could have just as easily done this: 1. Set up a new 501(c)(3) OR used CTCL with a bipartisan staff, managed by a non-partisan board of directors whose objective was to fairly distribute the funds; 2. Made public the availability of funds to all election operations who needed only explain why they were applying; 3. Provided the board assurance that funds were being distributed evenly between political parties with similar requirements. 4. Required expenditure confirmation before election day; 5. Insisted on an accounting of funds not spent and a reconciliation of impartiality of expenditures by voting precinct. =========== Basic steps required to prevent the Z money from being corruptly used. What they did was to guarantee the money was heavily spent in areas that would help swing the election to Democrats. Numerous organizations have determined that this money swung the election: How Mark Zuckerberg's Millions Saved the 2020 Election : NPR And you have seen the previous post from TIME which was glaring statement of guilt of election theft. Here's another: A former federal election official on Thursday called the $400 million-plus that Mark Zuckerberg spent to help finance local elections a “carefully orchestrated attempt” to influence the 2020 vote — and recommended that all states ban private funding of election offices. Hans von Spakovsky, a former Federal Election Commission member, said the billionaire Facebook founder’s donations to a pair of nonprofits that doled out the cash to nearly 2,500 counties in 49 states “violated fundamental principles of equal treatment of voters since it may have led to unequal opportunities to vote in different areas of a state.” “My reaction is that this was a carefully orchestrated attempt to convert official government election offices into get-out-the-vote operations for one political party and to insert political operatives into election offices in order to influence and manipulate the outcome of the election,” said von Spakovsky, a Republican who now runs the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative. He added: “All states should ban private funding of government election offices no matter the source.” The Post’s publication of a report that said Zuckerberg effectively “bought” the 2020 election also sparked outrage from the New York State Republican Party, which retweeted a link to the paper’s front-page coverage. “Zuckerberg spent $419 MILLION trying to infiltrate a private takeover of our elections through ideological non-profits designed to turn out the Dem vote in 2020. All while silencing Republican voices. (including the NYGOP) We MUST rein in big tech NOW,” the state GOP tweeted. Zuckerberg election spending was orchestrated to influence 2020 vote (nypost.com) You stole it, Chris. Stop denying it. Everyone who isn't just stupid knows it at this point. Hell, I told you 15 months ago or more.