He doesn't NEED to get to 270, because the other side committed calculated, deliberate, methodical, widespread, systemic, organized fraud on an international scale...Fraud vitiates everything.
You:
some overzealous fans who watched too much biased news didn't think he'd win, so they shredded some of the ballots of people who voted for Mr D. Should DeSantis be disqualified, despite winning in a landslide? Fraud vitiates everything, right?
As if any rational person reading that would equate those two scenarios.
You hallucinated a laughably distorted caricature of what I said, and then spent half a wall of text virtue signaling, by mocking your own hallucination.
Dang, no need to be so aggressive and rude about it. I don't think it's irrational to compare those scenarios for the sake of debate. I think it's important to reach 270, because that's how you legally win elections. The point I was making is that we need to prove that we won legitimately too.
What if, for the sake of argument, Trump didn't get to 270 even without fraud, but Biden cheated in one state? In this situation, Biden is the nation's choice of President, and would win anyway without fraud. Should the fraud disqualify him entirely and subvert the will of the people, or should he be disqualified on a technicality?
It's a tough choice, and I won't pretend to know the answer. But personally, I don't think fraud should automatically vitiate everything. Optics are important; both sides of the political aisle should be convinced that the person We The People voted for is instated as President.
Me:
He doesn't NEED to get to 270, because the other side committed calculated, deliberate, methodical, widespread, systemic, organized fraud on an international scale...Fraud vitiates everything.
You:
some overzealous fans who watched too much biased news didn't think he'd win, so they shredded some of the ballots of people who voted for Mr D. Should DeSantis be disqualified, despite winning in a landslide? Fraud vitiates everything, right?
As if any rational person reading that would equate those two scenarios.
You hallucinated a laughably distorted caricature of what I said, and then spent half a wall of text virtue signaling, by mocking your own hallucination.
Dang, no need to be so aggressive and rude about it. I don't think it's irrational to compare those scenarios for the sake of debate. I think it's important to reach 270, because that's how you legally win elections. The point I was making is that we need to prove that we won legitimately too.
What if, for the sake of argument, Trump didn't get to 270 even without fraud, but Biden cheated in one state? In this situation, Biden is the nation's choice of President, and would win anyway without fraud. Should the fraud disqualify him entirely and subvert the will of the people, or should he be disqualified on a technicality?
It's a tough choice, and I won't pretend to know the answer. But personally, I don't think fraud should automatically vitiate everything. Optics are important; both sides of the political aisle should be convinced that the person We The People voted for is instated as President.