That's your first problem . Every fact checking site I looked at all say this is not the case. Here's one... https://globalnews.ca/news/7443979/wisconsin-registered-voters-2020-election-trump-biden/
Well I think: - We'd need actual proof. - If there was an agenda to ensure Trump wasn't re-elected, then we'd never see that proof. The US has a lot of practice with elections, after all. - More votes than registered voters is a bad strategy anyway. Easier to fudge the numbers, misattribute votes (are you really going to check that who you voted for is who you voted for?), vote on behalf of the dead / those that don't historically vote, etc.
Hm.... looks like a dud for sure. Never had reason to specifically doubt this particular friend before. Lesson learned From what I've come across it looks like there might be old information mixed with new information floating about, and one article I read suggested Wisconsin allows people to register to vote on election day, which might also result in vote tallies looking inflated.
What next!? Moving into pre-diabetes. Not happy. Studying Ketogenics. See if I can adapt - will likely need to create a personal kitchen or something. I have the facilities. Low carbs, big fat, zero politics. If/when I relocate to Cal, I'll have someone else manage that for me.
Probably. The President sowed the seeds of doubt about this early on (and just a carry-over from 2016) with no real justification for it.
It sucks at first, then it doesn't. Just make sure to keep your electrolytes up, drink water, and keep in mind that it's not a carnivorous diet. Low carbs, lots of vegetables, high fat, some protein. And then maybe do something like 'Keto lite', as 'pure' keto is quite hard to maintain. If you were to cut carbs + sugar that on its own would do quite a lot.
I think a lot of the doubts over mail-in ballots are justified, even if overplayed. When there's no chain of custody it's easy to see how the system could be manipulated, and it's not as if USPS is well known for its efficiency in getting all pieces of mail to their destination at the best of times, even without literally millions of extra pieces of mail to process. The combined potential for manipulation and just general incompetence doesn't seem like something that inspires a whole lot of confidence.
Since I was curious about the history of mail-in ballots, I found a Time article about this. https://time.com/5892357/voting-by-mail-history/ In 2016, reportedly one quarter of all ballots were mailed in. Several states are already completely mail-in. Fraudulent mail-in ballots are a very small subset of the total amount, and I assume these were invalidated during scrutinizing stage. "When there's no chain of custody it's easy to see how the system could be manipulated..." How is is easy to see? I'm not necessarily seeing it, but I don't have a deep knowledge of the handling of mail. Time of arrival of the ballots is irrelevant - the post-marking date is all that matters.
The trouble with the notion that the post-mark date is all that matters is that it means it's almost impossible to determine a final cutoff date where the vote tally is final. In a state like California there's little point even counting the ballots - everybody knows the Democrat candidate will win it. In a state that reports a small margin (I remember in the 2000 Gush-Bore election a few states had razor-thin margins), what happens if a handful of ballots arrives after the votes are counted and announced? I've personally had things go missing in the mail, including some official post that caused some problems because I never received it, so it wouldn't necessarily take very many votes going missing in the mail to change the result of an election. ETA: I remember reading an article a few months back that looked at (I think) the NJ primaries and reckoned something like 20% of the votes were rejected for one anomaly or another. It could be a one-time glitch because people weren't used to mailing in ballots and did something silly but it's still a lot of ballots to be rejected. I forget how many ballots there were in total but it was a good number, not the kind of headline-grabbing percentage that turned out to be a remote hamlet where 15 people voted but 3 of them forgot to sign the paper.
I guess that means we sometimes have to trust the processes put in place. Right now, the cry of "fraud" just sounds like a poor loser.
I have no doubt the election was manipulated to ensure a Biden victory (Project Veritas isn't untrustworthy, and he's claiming backdating), but until or unless it's demonstrated (if ever - the story seems to have died fairly quickly, go figure), Trump should still act gracefully. It's not as if shenanigans don't happen during the primaries (oh hey, Bernie), and it's not far from there to the Presidency in an election where those in power know better than those voting.
We’ve never had a former president head a loyal opposition out of government I think that might be fun
Usually I'd say yes, although a sudden surge in the number of mailed ballots seems like an obvious opportunity for either fraud or just incompetence to have a disproportionate effect, especially when some states were extremely close. Sometimes we just have to trust processes, but when processes clearly have opportunities for failure, whether through deliberate manipulation or genuine error, it doesn't seem hugely unreasonable to be wary of attempts to just push it all through without looking for ways to mitigate the likelihood of failures. It seems a lot of the issues that both sides complain about (the left complains about voter ID requirements being racist, the right complains about mail-in being open to fraud) could be addressed if both sides had the will to come together to make it happen. It seems that both sides are more interested in winning the race rather than making sure the whole process is sound. It's really hard to know to what extent concerns about irregularities are genuine, exaggerated or simply fabricated, although from the results I'm seeing it seems like launching a bunch of lawsuits when you have to win every single one to change the result does look like someone grasping at straws rather than accepting the result.
Actually, that's just one thing that matters. How got the ballot Were they eligible to vote How many ballots did they fill,out Who actually filled out the ballot Was the voter coerced or promised anything in return for the vote Was the ballot altered after it was filled out Postmark is not even required in some states So no, postmark is the most unimportant of many important things