Ramaswamy 2024

[HKFaninCarmel]

That’s a good quote. The revenge campaign crap plays well with the most ardent Trumpers. I don’t think it matters to most other people.

I have a strong feeling that those who cannot accept defeat in 2020 will surely claim with full confidence that the same happened in 24. Much like Trump, you never acknowledge defeat, you just call people and demand they find you the votes.

 

[Ingomike]

I have a strong feeling that those who cannot accept defeat in 2020 will surely claim with full confidence that the same happened in 24. Much like Trump, you never acknowledge defeat, you just call people and demand they find you the votes.

Will you acknowledge that election interference is going on right now with the indictments, ballot removal, and lawfare?

 

[KG1]

I have a strong feeling that those who cannot accept defeat in 2020 will surely claim with full confidence that the same happened in 24. Much like Trump, you never acknowledge defeat, you just call people and demand they find you the votes.

Doesn't necessarily mean that he wanted them to manufacture votes. In my estimation he strongly urged them to find the votes that he believed were already out there.

 

[jamil]

I have a strong feeling that those who cannot accept defeat in 2020 will surely claim with full confidence that the same happened in 24. Much like Trump, you never acknowledge defeat, you just call people and demand they find you the votes.

Well, I have no reason to doubt what Democrats and establishment Republicans did in 2020 they will do again. They’ll exploit voting by male in the same way. No doubt there’ll be reports of “Kraken” and many will sink their efforts into complaining about that. The reaction to what happened in 2020 should be preparing for what they’ll do in 2024. But no. Revenge. As if Trump is practically in office already being ahead in the polls before the first primary election has take place. There’s a lot of shenanigans that can be played between now and November. Maybe work towards securing that before dreaming about the taste of revenge.

 

[Ingomike]

No doubt there’ll be reports of “Kraken”

Do you believe the government, particularly the CIA have software that can hack election equipment as former DOD generals said they had? The generals called it hammer and scorecard.

Why did TPTB lie to the people saying that election equipment was not internet connected, but it actually was in many places, critical places, with statistical anomalies similar to those that spark federal investigations into fraud?

 

[jamil]

Doesn't necessarily mean that he wanted them to manufacture votes. In my estimation he wanted them to find the votes he was sure that were out there.

Could be that Trump saw the same videos we did where Democrats were finding many boxes of ballots in storage rooms, trunks of cars, closets, etcetera, and wanted the GA governor to find his. Don't republicans have closets too?

 

[Dr.Midnight]

I have a strong feeling that those who cannot accept defeat in 2020 will surely claim with full confidence that the same happened in 24. Much like Trump, you never acknowledge defeat, you just call people and demand they find you the votes.

Perhaps. Let me see if the Democrat candidate can draw more people to his/her rally than my niece's soccer game, then I'll know more.

 

[jamil]

Do you believe the government, particularly the CIA have software that can hack election equipment as former DOD generals said they had? The generals called it hammer and scorecard.

Why did TPTB lie to the people saying that election equipment was not internet connected, but it actually was in many places, critical places, with statistical anomalies similar to those that spark federal investigations into fraud?

The problem with this is that you have to first believe that the CIA has such equipment. Then you have to believe they used it. Then you have to believe the extent to which they used it changed the outcome. Then you assume that the self-evidence of all that makes Trump the rightful President, just like the so-called "self-evidence" of his insurrection makes him ineligible to be a candidate. When "self-evidence" is this subjective, it identifies that the prescription is ideologically derived rather than logically derived.

 

[jamil]

Perhaps. Let me see if the Democrat candidate can draw more people to his/her rally than my niece's soccer game, then I'll know more.

How many people show up to rallies does not determine who will be the winner. No one liked Joe Biden. He's a two-time loser who was caught plagiarizing. Hell, he was caught plagiarizing in the 2020 election with the whole build back better speech. People voted for him to vote against Trump. But, keep in mind a great share of that 81M people were ballot harvested, and/or from blue states.

The large population centers along the coasts have just hordes of Democrats and low information voters who showed up to vote against Hitler. Trump's antics after losing the election helped to drive many of those to the polls, and of course the army of almost attractive blue hair ho's canvassers ballot harvesters offering simps handies, likely worked really well.

When the Democrat voters are diluted by swing state Trump voters, the margins of victory were much less. There, it's likely there, that voting irregularities and down right cheating helped Democrats more than Republicans. It's not as self-evident as people think that Kraken stole the election though.

 

[Ingomike]

The problem with this is that you have to first believe that the CIA has such equipment.

Do you believe they possess the software? Simple question.

Then you have to believe they used it. Then you have to believe the extent to which they used it changed the outcome.

No this is not necessary to determine if they used it or not. One can believe that statistical anomalies similar those that trigger federal financial investigations should trigger federal vote irregularities investigations.

Then you assume that the self-evidence of all that makes Trump the rightful President, just like the so-called "self-evidence" of his insurrection makes him ineligible to be a candidate. When "self-evidence" is this subjective, it identifies that the prescription is ideologically derived rather than logically derived.

Cart before the horse, let’s see the results of unbiased investigations and determine the proper corrections…

Starting off the new year telling me what I believe and assume…

 

[jamil]

Do you believe they possess the software? Simple question.


No this is not necessary to determine if they used it or not. One can believe that statistical anomalies similar those that trigger federal financial investigations should trigger federal vote irregularities investigations.


Cart before the horse, let’s see the results of unbiased investigations and determine the proper corrections…

Starting off the new year telling me what I believe and assume…

You’ve said the things you believe, and have stated what are assumptions. I don’t think there’s any problem with me saying it. More on the rest later. Got new year’s **** to do.

 

[foszoe]

FIFY...

Like my wife, thinking I need fixin'

 

[Dr.Midnight]

How many people show up to rallies does not determine who will be the winner. No one liked Joe Biden. He's a two-time loser who was caught plagiarizing. Hell, he was caught plagiarizing in the 2020 election with the whole build back better speech. People voted for him to vote against Trump. But, keep in mind a great share of that 81M people were ballot harvested, and/or from blue states.

The large population centers along the coasts have just hordes of Democrats and low information voters who showed up to vote against Hitler. Trump's antics after losing the election helped to drive many of those to the polls, and of course the army of almost attractive blue hair ho's canvassers ballot harvesters offering simps handies, likely worked really well.

When the Democrat voters are diluted by swing state Trump voters, the margins of victory were much less. There, it's likely there, that voting irregularities and down right cheating helped Democrats more than Republicans. It's not as self-evident as people think that Kraken stole the election though.

Of course rally sizes don't decide who is President. I simply threw that out as an example of how little enthusiasm there was for the current turd residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Thanks for breaking it down for me though.

 

[KG1]

Do you believe the government, particularly the CIA have software that can hack election equipment as former DOD generals said they had? The generals called it hammer and scorecard.

Why did TPTB lie to the people saying that election equipment was not internet connected, but it actually was in many places, critical places, with statistical anomalies similar to those that spark federal investigations into fraud?

The problem with this is that you have to first believe that the CIA has such equipment. Then you have to believe they used it. Then you have to believe the extent to which they used it changed the outcome. Then you assume that the self-evidence of all that makes Trump the rightful President, just like the so-called "self-evidence" of his insurrection makes him ineligible to be a candidate. When "self-evidence" is this subjective, it identifies that the prescription is ideologically derived rather than logically derived.

Calling @buckwacker to jump in and rehash this argument again with these guys.

 

[jamil]

Do you believe they possess the software? Simple question.

I don't think this has any relevance to what I said. But to humor you, I do not know if they do or not. I suspect they may have it.

No this is not necessary to determine if they used it or not. One can believe that statistical anomalies similar those that trigger federal financial investigations should trigger federal vote irregularities investigations.

I think investigations should have happened. I guess whether it's necessary for you to believe that the CIA possesses the equipment to do it is dependent on what you think happened. We're talking about the supposed raid and the CIA involvement. Part of what I've referred to in shorthand as "the Kraken". To believe the CIA participated you would need to first believe they have the equipment to do it. So in terms of proof, I think we could start there.

Cart before the horse, let’s see the results of unbiased investigations and determine the proper corrections…

Starting off the new year telling me what I believe and assume…

I'm talking about the confidence you and others expressed right after the election that Trump should be reinstated because Democrats stole the election. As if the self-evidence you feel is the only process required.

I have agreed with you all along that all the accusations about "the steal" should have been investigated transparently, because people need to be able to trust elections. That didn't happen.

To SD4L's point though, the court filings Trump's attorney's actually made were different from Trump's public statements of what he claimed happened. I think that's a relevant point that I haven't heard anyone from the pro-Trump side answer. Not that it proves anything about Trump believing he lost and conning people. But in terms of getting to the bottom of all that happened, why didn't Trump include his public claims in the court filings? Is that not true? Did SD4L just make it up?

 

[HKFaninCarmel]

Will you acknowledge that election interference is going on right now with the indictments, ballot removal, and lawfare?

Sure. Will you acknowledge that the Republicans held like 15 Benghazi hearings before the 2016 election. Was that rigged too?

 

[Ingomike]

I don't think this has any relevance to what I said. But to humor you, I do not know if they do or not. I suspect they may have it.


I think investigations should have happened. I guess whether it's necessary for you to believe that the CIA possesses the equipment to do it is dependent on what you think happened. We're talking about the supposed raid and the CIA involvement. Part of what I've referred to in shorthand as "the Kraken". To believe the CIA participated you would need to first believe they have the equipment to do it. So in terms of proof, I think we could start there.

What would you consider “proof”? Government whistleblowers, former generals from DOD that are now blackballed and worse, or as I often say to you a NYT or CNN report?

I'm talking about the confidence you and others expressed right after the election that Trump should be reinstated because Democrats stole the election. As if the self-evidence you feel is the only process required.

I have agreed with you all along that all the accusations about "the steal" should have been investigated transparently, because people need to be able to trust elections. That didn't happen.

To SD4L's point though, the court filings Trump's attorney's actually made were different from Trump's public statements of what he claimed happened. I think that's a relevant point that I haven't heard anyone from the pro-Trump side answer. Not that it proves anything about Trump believing he lost and conning people. But in terms of getting to the bottom of all that happened, why didn't Trump include his public claims in the court filings? Is that not true? Did SD4L just make it up?

I keep asking you to stop accusing me of saying things I did not. A INGO search by my user name indicates that I have never used the word “reinstated” in the Trump context, however the same search reveals that you use the word often with around TEN uses in the Trump context. Sounds like you have a fetish you try to push on others…

 

[Ingomike]

Sure. Will you acknowledge that the Republicans held like 15 Benghazi hearings before the 2016 election. Was that rigged too?

Acknowledged, they certainly did, as the democrats in congress that later followed them investigated Trump. Completely constitutional.

What is unprecedented is a sitting President using his DOJ to go after a predecessor and current rival…

 

[BugI02]

Applicable yes. Revenge? No.we’re not doing that. If people broke the law prosecute them. Weaponize your FBI and you’re no better. Making America Great Again means restoring rule of law.

Either way, the biggest impact I want to see Trump make regarding elections isn’t to look back to the past. Just make elections trustworthy again.

And how would he do that? Does FedGov have authority over state's elections?

Do you want them to?
Maybe an EO?

In order to sample a tasty Trump critique, you'll even take the opposite of your earlier viewpoints. Be careful what you wish for

 

[BugI02]

2020 is over. It's almost 2024.

If you got robbed in 2020, nothing will change that outcome. Fix election issues when you get reelected.

Whining about last week annoys me when it's a sports team no matter how bad the officiating was. Start playing this week's game

So, just lie back and enjoy it, eh?

That will certainly keep them from trying the same playbook again. No wonder republicans have to be taught how to fight, they are the weak men that good times create