Zemmour: France's new potential "far right" presidential candiadate

He's basically saying in intellectualist terms the ideas that Trump was basically communicating.

That's not me knocking Trump by the way. Trump is an outstanding communicator. A fact that thankfully most liberals are too arrogant and stupid to realise.

https://communicatemedia.com/donald-trump-effective-communicator/

Such an outstanding communicator he lost to a man who can barely stay awake or finish a sentence by 7 million votes.

Election fraud is a terrible thing...



Reminder Trump gained millions more votes then he won in 2016, iirc the first time that's ever happened and yet he "lost" (Obama, Bush etc lost millions and still won) , and the first time a president has won Ohio, Florida and Texas and yet somehow "lost". This also "conveniently" happened to occur when mail on ballots were used en masse for the first time ever (another "coincidence")

One day these people including the corrupt and cowardly judiciary will be put on trial for high treason.

You do realise how the Electoral College works right? The candidate that gets 270 EC votes or more wins. Not hard to understand. It's what allowed Trump to win in 2016 despite getting 3 million votes less than Clinton. Trump did indeed win Florida, Ohio and Texas, but so what? He lost Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. He got less than 270 EC votes. The composition of the states that make up the votes is irrelevant.

The fact no one has lost the presidency while winning those three states is neither here nor there. There haven't actually been that many US elections, and even fewer when all three states have been contested. But I any event it means nothing. Labour won Canterbury, in 2019 and lost hugely, yet they didn't win Canterbury in 1997 when they won a landslide. Does that mean the 2019 election was rigged? Of course not!

Demographic change means that diffeneet states will go on diffeneet directions. With the likes of Ohio becoming safer R and the likes of Arizona and possibly even Texas drifting to D.

It's utterly absurd you think that counts as proof the election was stolen. You'd be laughed out of court if that was your 'evidence'. You haven't provided any evidence because there is none.

You've become such a part of the cult that you don't acre about what's true or false, or things like evidence. Anything that inconveniences you is just branded by you as fraudulent.

It's very very silly.

Reminder : Biden won 7 million more votes than Trump and neither the Trump team nor anyone else has provided even the smallest shred of evidence of voter fraud.

You do realise how the Electoral College works right? The candidate that gets 270 EC votes or more wins. Not hard to understand. It's what allowed Trump to win in 2016 despite getting 3 million votes less than Clinton.

Trump did indeed win Florida, Ohio and Texas, but so what? He lost Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. He got less than 270 EC votes. The composition of the states that make up the votes is irrelevant.

The fact no one has lost the presidency while winning those three states is neither here nor there. There haven't actually been that many US elections, and even fewer when all three states have been contested. But I any event it means nothing. Labour won Canterbury, in 2019 and lost hugely, yet they didn't win Canterbury in 1997 when they won a landslide. Does that mean the 2019 election was rigged? Of course not!

Demographic change means that diffeneet states will go on diffeneet directions. With the likes of Ohio becoming safer R and the likes of Arizona and possibly even Texas drifting to D. In almost every election there's various stats along the lines of "this is the first time a presidential candidate has won/lost while winning/losing xyz states".

It's utterly absurd you think that counts as proof the election was stolen. You'd be laughed out of court if that was your 'evidence', and indeed the Trump campaign were, even by Trump fridnly judges.

It's very, very silly. It's also quite telling how you slate SJWs for believing and pushing things for which there is no evidence, yet here you are doing exactly the same. It's why, despite your protestations you have far more in common with the far left than you care to admit. Your tactics are identical.

Can't possibly say anything remotely bad about their leader,

Sure i'm not contesting that. Biden may well have won more votes than Trump. What I'm contesting is the swing seats.

Canterbury is not a "bellwether" seat. If say in 2019 Corbyn increased his vote share, gained a number of bellwether seats and had similar "irregularities" occur I would be just as highly suspicious even though I preferred Boris.

Demographic change helps shift the vote in the Democrats favour? I thought that was a far right conspiracy theory and the left supports immigration out of the goodness of their hearts?

Meh. See above. I do not trust the judiciary or the media in America which have been proven again and again to be working to destroy Trump overtly and covertly. They are all part of the same establishment. Eg see the record number of former spies and spooks working in the media etc. So for instance most of the "failed " audits which "prove" Biden did win literally just recounted the ballots, which doesn't mean anything if they are fake.

No, not really. I'm still on record for saying that even if there was no voter fraud I would still 100% support Trump seizing power. It just so happens to be I have a strong "hunch" that there was.

PRSOM, but there's no point trying to argue with them. You've hit the nail on the head with your last comment, Trump fanatics will continue to cry fraud even if there is no evidence. Can't possibly say anything remotely bad about their leader, after all, which is why the idea that there was fraud is so vital.

What about the swing states are you contesting exactly? If anything Biden underperformed in the swing states - he won the popular vote by 7 million while scraping the swing states. That's because of demographics. Democrats stack up millions of extra votes in states like California and NY, while Republicans win lots of smaller states narrowly. See also UK Parliament and the Labour vote in the cities. What exactly are you alleging was odd about the swing states in 2020?

'Swing states' in the US constantly change and evolve and it benefits and disadvantages both parties. Ohio used to be a real bellwether but is becoming solid R, Texas was ultra safe Dem, then Ultra safe R and is now becoming a swing state again. The rust belt which was safe D has come more into play. Safe R states like Georgia and Arizona have become D.

All of that reflects the changing demographics and voter realignments that are taking place globally, as well as in the USA. Urban, young and ethically diverse areas are going increasingly D while older, whiter areas more R. Absolutely none of that suggests there was voter fraud. What even is your claim here? What are the odd results you think are explainable only by there being huge voter fraud?

There is simply no evidence at all to back up your 'hunch'. None. The fact that your go to argument was that Trump won three particular states and still lost, says it all about the weakness of your 'argument'. And when challenged on why you can prove it, you have nothing to say of substance.

You slate the far left for believing things on the basis of no evidence. You are doing exactly that here.

I'm saying there were a number of electoral irregularities that occured in these swing states where there were high levels of mail in ballots.

I watched the whole thing live where without any reasoning they "stopped counting" for two hours or so - told poll watchers to leave- (whilst Trump had a large lead) and then suddenly started counting again with Biden suddenly ahead.

Now I believe it's very likely that Biden did in fact do very well with legitimate mail in ballots.

But there was a lot of suspicious activity around these mail in ballots and what went on on election night and since then we have seen files have been deleted and mass obstruction.

Eg

https://mobile.twitter.com/realLizUSA/status/1446157081556488195?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1446157081556488195%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thefreedomtimes.com%2F2021%2F10%2F07%2Fmaricopa-county-officials-admit-to-deleting-election-data-after-receiving-a-subpoena-from-az-senate%2F

@DSilva let me put it like this.
You're watching the 2017 election live and they're counting the last few seats. Corbyn is currently ahead of May. Suddenly without reason it's reported that they have stopped counting and asked poll watchers to leave. Three hours later and suddenly May is beating Corbyn due to a sudden surge in mail in ballots.

Numerous people including poll watchers are alleging that there is fraud going on which is then amplified by Corbyn and his associates. This is then rounded on by The Sun and all the anti Corbyn press screaming that he is a violent communist. Corbyn is then basically banned from media and is persona non Grata among "respectable" media.

Numerous labour figures overtly and covertly hostile to Corbyn such as John Woodcock and Keir Starmer refuse to do anything about it and some of these appear happy that he lost.

In some seats there is an investigation but they either simply recount the vote instead of fully investigating it or they delete records and/ or obstruct the process and is dismissed by the judiciary who don't even bother to investigate it. Corbyn and key supporters maintain that the election was stolen.

Are you honestly telling me you wouldn't be at all suspicious?

Doesn't really work that analogy because UK constituencies don't declare until the constituency has reported as a whole.

There wasn't a several hour break in the counting of the votes across the board. Remember the "stop the count" chants in Arizona? And not even Trump appointed judges found certain poll watchers accounts credible evidence of voter fraud. Often poll watchers were claiming things that were perfectly legal were fraud.

The key questions is 'do you have any evidence' and despite a year and hundreds of court cases, the answer remains a resounding no. This isn't a case where there is some evidence, there is simply none. As shown by you arguing that Trump winning Texas while losing is evidence of voter fraud 🙄.

You even admit Biden won the popular vote, but find it impossible to believe he won a handful of swing states narrowly.

In your heart of hearts, I bet you know that the whole 'voter fraud' claim was and is a nonsense.