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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric who wrote (1493036)	10/12/2024 12:41:26 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576865

>> Where are the hundreds if not thousands of court case wins that would prove your assumptions? There aren't laws to protect against cheating. The cheating was so egregious no one thought laws were needed. So, for example, Zuckerberg contributing a half billion dollars to election operations on a one-sided basis was obviously wrong. No one really did that before in an apparent effort to manipulate election outcomes. But Zuck did. More than half the states, mostly red states, have enacted legislation that simply does away with the cheat. Blue states are fine with the cheating, for the most part, if that's what it takes. Changing election laws at the last minute, everyone could plainly see was a partisan tactic which leftist local officials got away with by weaponizing Covid: "We have to relax our standards and allow more absentee voting because, you know Covid will kill people." And idiots in many states fell for it. As though Covid attacks voters. It was also determined that it was a great opportunity for operations decide just not to enforce signature requirements in Georgia/Fulton County. So, signature mismatches magically dropped from around 3-4% to pretty much anything goes -- 0.3%. These are examples of courts failures. But, in Houston/Harris County, A county judge decided if only he had the money, he would mail unsolicited ballot requests to the "last known addresses" of people, many who were dead. Someone need only sign it, and mail it back and suddenly they're voting the ballot. No matter who they are. The intended voter might well be dead, no one is going to know. He was stopped cold. Courts are run by Democrats at this level. So, cheating means, "You get the idea, I'll make it legal". So, yes, cheating was extensive. Now, we just have to wait and see if anything is different in that regard. While it is clearly Marc Elias is staying busy, Republicans -- this time -- are fighting back. Don't know how effective that is.