3 ms·
The side that says there's virtually 0 fraud is correct, and the other side is living in a fantasy land because they feel their party is becoming less and less
by EasyMark 2y ago
The side that says there's virtually 0 fraud is correct, and the other side is living in a fantasy land because they feel their party is becoming less and less relevant. That side has never produced an iota of proof that there is widespread fraud of that it has affected elections in major races, especially the presidential one. Sometimes "both sides" works in an argument, but when one side has all the proof and the other side has only accusations, I comfortably give my allegiance to the one that has the proof.
- rightbyte 2y agoUS election process is a joke. Pretending otherwise is some sort of gaslighting that could backfire. If 'one side' break the silent understanding of 'do not criticize our complex, convoluted and arcane election process', well, bad luck if 'the other side' defends it instead of agreeing there is a need to do something about it. I don't like how about every question becomes some sort of thrench warfare around strawman extremes.
- wtcactus 2y agoI can not bypass the fact that basically no other developed country allows citizens to vote without proper official photo identification, neither that the sates that allow people to vote without any identification, are the ones where the Democratic Party always wins elections. I know correlation doesn't mean causation, but I also know that where's there smoke, there's usually a fire.