Why so many people believe the election was rigged

[Ingomike]

You mean like some Democrats voted for Trump in the 2016 "Republican" primaries?

Not because they wanted to vote for him in the general, but because they thought he was the easiest to beat?

They certainly did. I was concerned about that at that time. I actually feared Trump would be a bigger RINO than Romney, and he might have been if the left had a modicum of common sense and did not push him to be the conservative champion he became...

 

[KG1]

They certainly did. I was concerned about that at that time. I actually feared Trump would be a bigger RINO than Romney, and he might have been if the left had a modicum of common sense and did not push him to be the conservative champion he became...

I believe Trump originally reached a hand out to the Democrats before they slapped his hand away. From then on out Trump said OK. 'Game On" and went full pedal to the metal conservative.

 

[Ingomike]

I believe Trump originally reached a hand out to the Democrats before they slapped his hand away. From then on out Trump said OK. 'Game On"

And it was evident in his cabinet choices trying to be a bipartisan moderate, but in their bloodlust, fueled by fake news Russian collusion the left could not see it…

 

[KG1]

And it was evident in his cabinet choices trying to be a bipartisan moderate, but in their bloodlust, fueled by fake news Russian collusion the left could not see it…

Could you imagine how much greater, prosperous and united this country could've been even more that it was if they didn't try to undermine Trump and actually attempted to work with him.

 

[DragonGunner]

How do you believe the Indiana primaries are “rigged”? Are you just referring to the regulations to get on the ballot or something more? I believe people like Young* are supported by money people, whose money is used to get on the ballot and get voters to vote for them. That is how it is done. I also believe if INGO could agree on a candidate, funded that candidate equally to what Young’s supporters did, they too would be on the ballot and have an equal chance to win.

* In case you forgot, Young was a Marine.

Wasn’t even talking about IN. NH is New Hampshire and SC is South Carolina.

 

[Ingomike]

Could you imagine how much greater, prosperous and united this country could've been even more that it was if they didn't try to undermine Trump and actually attempted to work with him.

Maybe. Some things would be better for us, but other would not.

 

[Ingomike]

Wasn’t even talking about IN. NH is New Hampshire and SC is South Carolina.

I interpreted this “own political primaries” as Indiana. Sorry…

 

[smokingman]

Bridgeport Democrat Mayor Wins Race After His Associate Is Caught Stuffing the Local Ballot Drop Boxes with Bags of Ballots | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Mayor Joe Ganim won another victory on Tuesday in the Bridgeport, Connecticut special election for the Democratic primary for mayor.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[JCSR]

We saw this in 2016, 2020 and it's still happening today.

Bridgeport Democrat Mayor Wins Race After His Associate Is Caught Stuffing the Local Ballot Drop Boxes with Bags of Ballots | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Mayor Joe Ganim won another victory on Tuesday in the Bridgeport, Connecticut special election for the Democratic primary for mayor.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[SheepDog4Life]

They certainly did. I was concerned about that at that time. I actually feared Trump would be a bigger RINO than Romney, and he might have been if the left had a modicum of common sense and did not push him to be the conservative champion he became...

I believe Trump originally reached a hand out to the Democrats before they slapped his hand away. From then on out Trump said OK. 'Game On" and went full pedal to the metal conservative.

I agree with both of these statements... he found a "lane", it resonated and he hit it hard. There was nothing in his "prior life" to indicate he was a conservative.

Absent bumpstocks and something else, I forget what it was, relatively minor, I had zero issue with his administrations policies... I posted previously and maintain, policy-wise, best president in my lifetime.

 

[Ingomike]

I agree with both of these statements... he found a "lane", it resonated and he hit it hard. There was nothing in his "prior life" to indicate he was a conservative.

Absent bumpstocks and something else, I forget what it was, relatively minor, I had zero issue with his administrations policies... I posted previously and maintain, policy-wise, best president in my lifetime.

The one thing I would add is that he was always a big voice on trade imbalances and loss of manufacturing. I believe even back in the early 80’s.

 

[KG1]

I agree with both of these statements... he found a "lane", it resonated and he hit it hard. There was nothing in his "prior life" to indicate he was a conservative.

Absent bumpstocks and something else, I forget what it was, relatively minor, I had zero issue with his administrations policies... I posted previously and maintain, policy-wise, best president in my lifetime.

The one thing I would add is that he was always a big voice on trade imbalances and loss of manufacturing. I believe even back in the early 80’s.

Looks like we can maybe come to a consensus here without the usual bickering and at least agree upon the main points in both of these posts about Trump. That's exactly what happened. Good job fellas.

Now while I don't agree with everything about Trump, in the end policy wise, it wins the day for me and that is why I plan on voting for him again.

 

[asevans]

Because people are eager to believe information that confirms what they want to believe.

Same goes for you dude.
You’re in the minority.
Anybody with half a brain could see the election was stolen except people with TDS.

 

[jamil]

Same goes for you dude.
You’re in the minority.
Anybody with half a brain could see the election was stolen except people with TDS.

Idunno. Maybe calm down a bit here. You got your feathers all ruffled up. I mean it's not a great look. J/K, but probably still could use a

Of course that goes for me. I am in the set I named "people". My bias is towards believing that, if the election were completely fair, Trump would have won. That clear things up for you? Prolly not. I don't believe in the Kraken, the mystical claim which we never got to hear, and the phantom evidence we never got to see. I include general whatshisface's wild ass claim about CIA raids in germany. Some of you guys are really fond of that stuff. There's is no reason to believe it other than it confirms people's fantasies.

I suspect the reason you judge me this way is a conflation of standards and what we're applying them to. So I state some facts that apply to standards of how the outcome could be changed. That's different from the standards which I apply to my own opinion, which is that had everything been above board, Trump should have won the election. A practical outcome requires a higher standard than your belief.

 

[Ingomike]

I include general whatshisface's wild ass claim about CIA raids in germany. Some of you guys are really fond of that stuff. Theirs is no reason to believe it other than it confirms people's fantasies.

Let’s unpack this.

Do you believe the CIA possesses the software and hardware to affect the outcomes of elections?

If yes, next question, if no, we’re done here.

Do you believe they would deploy it to stop Trump?

 

[firecadet613]

Let’s unpack this.

Do you believe the CIA possesses the software and hardware to affect the outcomes of elections?

If yes, next question, if no, we’re done here.

Do you believe they would deploy it to stop Trump?

Yes to both. You're blind if you say yes to the first and no to the second.

 

[Ingomike]

Yes to both. You're blind if you say yes to the first and no to the second.

Right! Saying no to the second requires one to believe that the corrupt establishment that committed criminal acts and fraud while they spent millions in taxpayer money to try to take Trump down just wouldn’t cross that line.

 

[firecadet613]

Right! Saying no to the second requires one to believe that the corrupt establishment that committed criminal acts and fraud while they spent millions in taxpayer money to try to take Trump down just wouldn’t cross that line.

They took JFK down...

 

[jamil]

Let’s unpack this.

Do you believe the CIA possesses the software and hardware to affect the outcomes of elections?

If yes, next question, if no, we’re done here.

Do you believe they would deploy it to stop Trump?

I don't know if they have it or not. I suspect they might, so I wouldn't be surprised.

I don't know if they would deploy it to stop Trump. I wouldn't be surprised.

But regardless. Let's say for the sake of argument, that both are true. Someone having the means, and having a reason that they might do it, is not a reason to believe that they did. Especially when there isn't any evidence that they even did other than some general, who has a reason to lie, claims it happened with no corroboration. Is it that important to you to believe it happened?

Trump is alleged to have sexually assaulted whatsherface years ago. It's reported that Trump has a dick. So he has the means to do it. It's been widely reported that Trump likes to grab women by the *****. So he has a reason he might sexually assault her. Given only that information, did he sexually assault her?

Do you think that to be confident in a "yes" answer, you would need much more information about it than just those two things? What would you say about people who confidently say yes with no more information than that?

 

[Ingomike]

I don't know if they have it or not. I suspect they might, so I wouldn't be surprised.

I don't know if they would deploy it to stop Trump. I wouldn't be surprised.

But regardless. Let's say for the sake of argument, that both are true. Someone having the means, and having a reason that they might do it, is not a reason to believe that they did. Especially when there isn't any evidence that they even did other than some general, who has a reason to lie, claims it happened with no corroboration. Is it that important to you to believe it happened?

Trump is alleged to have sexually assaulted whatsherface years ago. It's reported that Trump has a dick. So he has the means to do it. It's been widely reported that Trump likes to grab women by the *****. So he has a reason he might sexually assault her. Given only that information, did he sexually assault her?

Do you think that to be confident in a "yes" answer, you would need much more information about it than just those two things? What would you say about people who confidently say yes with no more information than that?

If the two questions were all the info available, but it is not. You say similar things on every individual topic on vote threads, but in their totality they form a preponderance of evidence to me.

Now please show who was saying Trump should be reinstated on INGO or stop saying that folks did…