• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Supreme Court has denied Texas' last-ditch effort to overturn the election results in four battleground states that voted for Joe Biden.

Nope, only the legislatures of the states can control elections.
Even if so, as AGAIN came up in the PA challenge before the election, if there was disagreement, those state legislatures had the ability to challenge those process changes. BEFORE the filing deadline. And in PA, they failed to do so. After the deadline, they no longer had standing to sue to dismiss the changes.

And to me it seems obvious altho I dont know if it's accounted for under the law, certainly one reason to stand by that filing deadline is to prevent what TX and The Donald are trying: to throw out votes made in good faith AFTER you dont like the outcome.
 
they can and so did other states Trump won yet they were not included in the suit
If you are going to bring a suit like this I would say ALL states that changed their rules have to be included NOT just the ones Biden won
Have a nice day
That's what I've been saying all along. Sand Castle posted a list of red states that did the same things, changes 'not by state legislature, etc'. And he also gave a link that listed all 50 states.

How obnoxious and arrogant is it to produce a suit so obviously created ONLY to undermine the results from states that directly had a negative affect for The Donald and could reverse the outcome?

I'm glad that our high court didnt waste their valuable time on it...they are supposed to be serving all of us, not just The Donald.
 
I do strongly believe the Dems cheated in the election and likely in a very significant way.
Really? Can you prove that and lay out for us precisely how we Dems cheated? Realize that DHS (with Trumplicans in charge) said it was the safest election ever and Barr said there wasn't any fraud enough to change the outcome. So please, what do you know that DHS and Attorney General and the rest of us do not?
 
If it's a fact than prove it. Show me that I'm deluded, if you can.
Prove something DIDN'T happen when there's no evidence of fraud? How does one do that? It's up to YOU to prove that fraud did happen but of course, you can't nor can anyone else. It IS DELUSIONAL to believe this as a fixed election. How anyone can cling to the notion that it was fixed when there's literally zero evidence that any court would consider is the definition of DELUSIONAL.
 
Prove something DIDN'T happen when there's no evidence of fraud? How does one do that?
if you're going to claim that someone's delusional, you must demonstrate that they are rejecting reality and substituting their own warped reality if you want to have any credibility at all.

Otherwise you're just calling me names because I don't agree with you.
 
if you're going to claim that someone's delusional, you must demonstrate that they are rejecting reality and substituting their own warped reality if you want to have any credibility at all.

Otherwise you're just calling me names because I don't agree with you.
No! You said that you believe that Trump won and that there was widespread voter fraud that caused Biden's victory. Right? THAT IS DELUSIONAL. Sorry if the truth hurts but perhaps a harsh slap in the face will snap you out of your delusions? Try it! Slap yourself really hard in the face and see if you still have delusions that the election was fixed
 
Even if that's true, it doesn't mean that they couldn't devise another remedy. They wouldn't have been required to grant the remedy requested, if they ruled in Texas favor. That wouldn't have been a reason to dismiss the suit.

It avoids having to deal with the issue completely - few have (lifetime) jobs which allow simply opting out of them with full pay and benefits.
 
No! You said that you believe that Trump won and that there was widespread voter fraud that caused Biden's victory. Right? THAT IS DELUSIONAL.
why?

If you're going to accuse someone of being delusional as though you're a psychologist and can determine such a thing. Then you must be able to show them that they are delusional.

If you can't you're just calling them names because they don't agree with you.
 
why?

If you're going to accuse someone of being delusional as though you're a psychologist and can determine such a thing. Then you must be able to show them that they are delusional.

If you can't you're just calling them names because they don't agree with you.
From Google definition of DELUSIONAL:

" Delusional comes from a Latin word meaning "deceiving." So delusional thinking is kind of like deceiving yourself by believing outrageous things. ... Delusional thoughts are often a sign of mental illness, but the word can also be used more loosely to describe behavior that is just not realistic." AND: A delusional person believes things that couldn't possibly be true.
Your posts indicate that you believe "outrageous things," that is not realistic and you believe things that couldn't possibly be true."

I understand that the truth hurts and maybe a good first step is acknowledging that Trump lost and then perhaps the delusions will go away?
 
From Google definition of DELUSIONAL:


Your posts indicate that you believe "outrageous things,"
show me that they are outrageous remember it is your positive claim that I'm suffering from a psychological disorder and therefore it's your burden of proof.
 
show me that they are outrageous remember it is your positive claim that I'm suffering from a psychological disorder and therefore it's your burden of proof.
Stop it! You believe that the election was fixed - that's DELUSIONAL. You can't prove that the election had widespread fraud that allowed Biden to win yet you claim there was fraud. Anyone who thinks that Trump won because the election was fixed IS DELUSIONAL. Snap out of it! Trump lost fair and square at least on Earth One - perhaps on Earth Two (aka Delusional Earth) Trump won but I live on Earth One.
 
Stop it! You believe that the election was fixed - that's DELUSIONAL.
I will not stop it until you explain why what I think is outrageous and therefore delusional.

You can't prove that the election had widespread fraud that allowed Biden to win yet you claim there was fraud.
I can't prove I fell off a letter last winter, does that mean it's delusional for me to believe I fell off a letter last winter?
Anyone who thinks that Trump won because the election was fixed IS DELUSIONAL.
again why? Explain why it's outrageous or erroneous to think that the election was rigged
Snap out of it!
snap out of what?
Trump lost fair and square at least on Earth One
feel free to prove your claims at any time you don't seem to be capable of it but I suppose I have to keep reminding you.
 
It avoids having to deal with the issue completely - few have (lifetime) jobs which allow simply opting out of them with full pay and benefits.
What do you think their motive is, if that's the case? If we dont believe that they are the experts on the Const...I guess we should just eliminate SCOTUS altogether? Other Const scholars have weighed in on why the suit had no standing, was bullshit, etc.

Why not examine those opinions before implying that SCOTUS 'just didnt bother?'
 
Do you know the difference between an opinion and fact?
yes saying something is lame because you disagree with it is an opinion and that's what I was responding to do you know the difference?
Where is there widespread voter fraud?
Who said the only way to rig an election is to commit fraud?

I think you specifically asked for fraud and nothing else because it's particularly hard to prove fraud.

I would request that you try being a little more intellectually honest.
 
Absolutely.

And they have been:

1-58 so far.

And the one they won was just to allow observers a few feet closer to the poll workers.
Biggest victory ever!!!
You're entitled to your opinion.
Reality is not an opinion, regardless of what cultists say...
 
yes saying something is lame because you disagree with it is an opinion and that's what I was responding to do you know the difference?

Who said the only way to rig an election is to commit fraud?

I think you specifically asked for fraud and nothing else because it's particularly hard to prove fraud.

I would request that you try being a little more intellectually honest.
He saying it's lame because it's fact that there isn't widespread fraud. Yes I stand corrected. He had an opinion that he thought your belief in a false fact not because you guys differ in opinions.

What? Rigging isn't fraud? What does rigging involve then? Magic? What are you implying happened if it wasn't fraud.
 
Absolutely.

And they have been:

1-58 so far.
And that one win let observers stand a few feet closer to the poll workers...

It was the biggest win in election fraud history!!!

People are saying they've never seen anything like it!!!

Only trump can win soooo bigly!!!
:ROFLMAO:
 
Image
 
Back
Top Bottom