Too be fair... If you combine the populations of Wyoming, North Dakota, Alaska, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia and Utah you have about the same number of people that live in Los Angeles county. That's just that single county the state has about 40 million people in it. Texas only has 29 million and Florida just 22 million.
It was. The secretary of state decided to allow votes to arrive in the mail up to nine days after the election. Trump fought that before the election and won. The other case was about the time frame allowing people to correct their ballots. Trump filed a case on 11/4 and that is the case he won unfortunately it only affected 2,136 ballots.
The year leading up to a national election is fraught with lawsuits from all sides to work out how they will be conducted. If the Trump campaign had won a case that was then violated it would be a slam dunk in a court case.
This post and Powell are clearly implying that Trump has won many of his court cases regarding election fraud but she clearly states these were about process/rules and not fraud. I quote:
"Twenty-two cases are completed (adjudicated). These are where the court heard arguments, considered evidence (where applicable), and then formally ruled on statutory issues (e.g. the legality of a state’s election process), etc. Of these: i) Fifteen cases were WON by Trump, et al... So, Trump (et al) have WON the majority of 2020 election cases fully heard, and then decided on the merits!"
Of those 15 cases Powell claims as victories 2 of them were after Nov 3rd and one of them was actually a loss.
Using her cited evidence she lists 79 complaints consisting of 43 cases (she is including other complaints not just Trump campaign) that are dated 11/4 or later. 31 cases are about Rules/Process no accusation of fraud. Cases she classifies as "Case Not Fully Heard" she isn't counting as a loss.
The reality is that Powell's list contains 30 cases that are lost and closed, one that is consolidated, one win and 11 listed as active but scrolling through them they appear to be refilings of older cases that have already been dismissed.
I am not suggesting that these cases were decided appropriately I am just pointing out that if the judge throws your case out for ANY reason rightfully or not you lost that case. I just wouldn't hold your breath that a refiling in Georgia about the watermain break and suitcases of ballots without additional evidence is going to get a different result than it did the first time.
Because anytime you point out that the headline doesn't match the text and it doesn't confirm the suggested "slam dunk" people lose their composure and act out. My offense was to actually click the links, read the document and then look at the cited backup. 99% of the people here just read the clickbait headlines and then repeat them to others. This why people think we are all nuts.... and why I get downvoted.