Trump 2024 ???

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[buckwacker]

I think the things we know for sure explain the election outcome. Now if you’re speculating, and want to say it’s possible, sure. No problem with that. But if you’re saying it did happen, you better show me something besides wild as claims from a hasbeen attorney claiming she has “the kracken” which is predictably never shown.

What are the things you are claiming we know happened?

 

[BugI02]

In some ways he’s better. In some ways he’s not. It’s up to you to decide which one you think is better. I’ll do the same. Except I’ll make that decision in May. If there is a choice by then.

Isn't it already May?

Live in the future! It's just starting NOW!

 

[jamil]

What are the things you are claiming we know happened?

We know that rules were changed to extend deadlines in key states, loosened around mail in ballots, chain of custody issues, massive ballot harvesting, “the cabal” including Lincoln Project Republicans working behind the scenes to ensure Trump couldn’t win, admitted to by Time Magazine. I could name more but that’s enough to explain it.

 

[jamil]

Isn't it already May?

Live in the future! It's just starting NOW!

Well, you’re not stupid. I think I should be able to assume you know which May I’m talking about.

 

[BugI02]

in reference to the posts I've made relating to what indyblue posted a few days ago where I gave both Trump and DeSantis praise for their common beliefs

Oh ... kay ...



Keep in mind that I loathe nuance

 

[Ingomike]

I think the things we know for sure explain the election outcome. Now if you’re speculating, and want to say it’s possible, sure. No problem with that. But if you’re saying it did happen, you better show me something besides wild as claims from a hasbeen attorney claiming she has “the kracken” which is predictably never shown.

I believe Occam’s Razor says this is normalcy bias…

 

[buckwacker]

We know that rules were changed to extend deadlines in key states, loosened around mail in ballots, chain of custody issues, massive ballot harvesting, “the cabal” including Lincoln Project Republicans working behind the scenes to ensure Trump couldn’t win, admitted to by Time Magazine. I could name more but that’s enough to explain it.

Ok, how do we know these changed the outcome of the election? I think a bit of speculation is required to claim so. You're saying all these things pushed Biden over the top. I'm saying they weren't going to trust a system that failed them in 2016.

We know they manipulate elections, we know they weren't going to allow trump to win again, and there will be no proof of the kraken or whatever we want to call it absent the veritable gutting of the Agency and the airing of their secrets. It's not going to happen.

 

[jamil]

I believe Occam’s Razor says this is normalcy bias…

What, to ask for more solid evidence before I just blindly accept someone’s word for it? Nah. You’re welcome to believe unsubstantiated wild ass claims if you wish though.

IOW, if you like your kraken. You can keep your kraken.

 

[jamil]

Ok, how do we know these changed the outcome of the election? I think a bit of speculation is required to claim so. You're saying all these things pushed Biden over the top. I'm saying they weren't going to trust a system that failed them in 2016.

Evidence?

We know they manipulate elections, we know they weren't going to allow trump to win again, and there will be no proof of the kraken or whatever we want to call it absent the veritable gutting of the Agency and the airing of their secrets. It's not going to happen.

I said the things I mentioned can explain the outcome without having to believe wild ass claims. Those are things we know happened.

 

[buckwacker]

Evidence?

I said the things I mentioned can explain the outcome without having to believe wild ass claims. Those are things we know happened.

Evidently, those are the things you WANT to believe. When you describe other things you DON'T want to believe, for which there is also evidence, as "wild ass claims", youre providing evidence of what you're willing to believe, and what you're not.

 

[BugI02]

If you believe they do not exist we have nothing to discuss as we have both looked at the evidence and come to a different conclusion.

But jamil looked at BOTH sides of the evidence, his side and his version of your side

 

[jamil]

Evidently, those are the things you WANT to believe. When you describe other things you DON'T want to believe, for which there is also evidence, as "wild ass claims", youre providing evidence of what you're willing to believe, and what you're not.

The evidence for the things you want to believe is based on unsubstantiated claims. The stuff I mentioned, no one is disputing. You have to take the word of people who have a reason to lie.

 

[BugI02]

Evidence?

I said the things I mentioned can explain the outcome without having to believe wild ass claims. Those are things we know happened.

So I'm guessing you believe Oswald killed Kennedy, acting alone? After all, there is no 'evidence' otherwise that rises to your lofty standards. 'Reasonable doubt' requires reasonableness

 

[jamil]

But jamil looked at BOTH sides of the evidence, his side and his version of your side

I looked at what there is substantiated evidence for and not. What Sydney Powell claimed has never been substantiated. Why should I believe her? She made claims. Promised evidence. And then nothing. But to keep your faith in the Kraken, you guys just insist she was thwarted. Again without evidence of that.

I don’t need to make up excuses for Trump’s loss. I think the confirmed things that happened in the key states where Trump lost, explains why he’s not president. Did Trump get ****ed? Yeah he did. But you guys need to believe there’s so much more to it than that. And maybe there is. But we kinda need proof for that. Which you don’t care about. You’re satisfied with intuiting your way through the world.

 

[KG1]

Oh ... kay ...

View attachment 274538

Keep in mind that I loathe nuance

Yeah ok.

 

[jamil]

So I'm guessing you believe Oswald killed Kennedy, acting alone? After all, there is no 'evidence' otherwise that rises to your lofty standards. 'Reasonable doubt' requires reasonableness

I don’t know. All I have is the official narrative. I have a hell of a lot more than that on 2020 election. No one is disputing those things.

 

[buckwacker]

The evidence for the things you want to believe is based on unsubstantiated claims. The stuff I mentioned, no one is disputing. You have to take the word of people who have a reason to lie.

I've heard lots of people disputing that the stuff you mentioned occurred. If we're insisting on evidence to back claims, I guess you'd need to provide such to prove that those things swung or changed the outcome of the election. Who had a reason to lie, the kraken people or the intelligence people?

 

[jamil]

I've heard lots of people disputing that the stuff you mentioned occurred. If we're insisting on evidence to back claims, I guess you'd need to provide such to prove that those things swung or changed the outcome of the election. Who had a reason to lie, the kraken people or the intelligence people?

Both.

 

[KG1]

Oh ... kay ...

View attachment 274538

Keep in mind that I loathe nuance

Howbout being a little less nuanced and tell me exactly what was crazy about what I posted.

Are you gonna deny that you tend to have a pattern of dropping subtle jabs at times which I happen to pick up on? I don't think I'm the only one to notice it.

Based on that I got a vibe that you were taking subtle jabs since you repeatedly mention the word "beliefs" after I had made a number of posts talking about core beliefs. Were you just playing off my vibe as being crazy to try and proffer deniability that you engage in subtle jabs? Or are you talking about the substance of what I posted when I gave credit to Trump as well as DeSantis as being crazy?

Tell me what you mean Bug.