MovieChat Forums > Politics > How have you enjoyed living in a "delete...

How have you enjoyed living in a "deleted scene" for the last 4 years?


So um, we all know that the ending for the 2020 election that............... "didn't play well with test audiences" was chosen and the real ending was taken off.


That ending was - where Obama's dopey embarrassing senile sidekick gets to be in the White House for four years.

If that had been "popular with audiences", it wouldn't have taken the Dems 4 days of ballot stuffing in swing states, in order to make the idiot "president". lol


That's why life has been so weird for the last 4 years (not to mention more expensive)

reply

no uvas

reply

The Democrat rectum is supported by a brained c💙lt of 30 million lemmings. Rigging elections has been going on since the 90s.

reply

There's been a joke going around that we were all zapped into an alternate reality on December 21st, 2012, and we've been living in a nastier reality than what should have actually happened, and frankly, anyone with sense really hates the reality we're living in right now.

reply

Stolen elections have consequences.

reply

Dude, we're not in a deleted scene...we're in a Family Guy cut-a-way.

reply

It feels more like an episode of Sliders to me, or for the younger crowd, a parallel universe from Rick and Morty.

reply

Rick and Morty stopped being funny after season 3

Here we are in the... fourth year of Biden lol

reply

I'd say that show peaked at season 2 actually, whereas the Biden Administration hasn't been funny since the first episode and now after season 4 it's time for it to be cancelled.

reply

the Dems 4 days of ballot stuffing in swing states

Is that allegation included in the over 60 times when Trump's claims of election rigging were thrown out of court?

reply

"Thrown out"


Not shown to be false, but thrown out?

You could throw me out of your basement but I'd still be better than you.

reply

Thrown out for lack of merit

https://campaignlegal.org/results-lawsuits-regarding-2020-elections

In addition "a federal judge in Michigan began questioning Sidney Powell and eight other pro-Trump lawyers to decide whether to sanction the group for submitting a lawsuit crafted on false information that sought to overturn the results of the presidential election. On August 25, the judge imposed sanctions on Powell and the other pro-Trump lawyers, recommending that their respective state bars investigate whether they should be suspended or disbarred. "

If the 60-plus cases were without merit why were they not re-filed with merit?

reply

They believe what they want to believe. Current lies corroborated by past lies.

reply

60-odd cases thrown out of court is not a matter of 'belief', it is one of record. And I don't think it is the courts who are lying...

reply

Thrown out for lack of merit

https://islamostalinistdogshit.org/results-lawsuits-regarding-2020-elections


They weren't inspected by the top court the Supreme Court, presumably because they were intimidated by geeks like you shrieking "CONSPIRACY THEEERRY!!!" etc.

The fact we're still arguing about this like 4 weeks away from the next one, is proof of your total insanity at least. And only an insane person would say the 2020 election wasn't OBVIOUSLY and brazenly rigged.

You poisonous ISIS-swooning DORK.

reply

geeks like you shrieking "CONSPIRACY THEEERRY!!!" etc.

I love the smell of irony in the morning.
he fact we're still arguing about this like 4 weeks away from the next one, is proof of your total insanity at least.

No it is proof I read the OP's reference to " it wouldn't have taken the Dems 4 days of ballot stuffing in swing states," and replied to it with the facts. If anything, it is they who first brought it up are insecure.
And only an insane person would say the 2020 election wasn't OBVIOUSLY and brazenly rigged.

As shown this is not a view of 60-plus court decisions when asked to examine such claims. Sorry about that.
You poisonous ISIS-swooning DORK.

Do you know that an ad hominem is not an argument? I do. It just makes you look defensive.

reply

Thrown out before any of the evidence was actually considered, chump.

reply

Actually the deciding factor very often was that there was no evidence to consider. EG Ward v. Jackson (Ariz. Sup. Ct., Maricopa Cnty. Dec. 4, 2020) – The superior court denied relief requested by the plaintiff in an election contest because the plaintiff failed to meet the evidentiary standard necessary for such a contest.

chump

Do you know that an ad hominem is not an argument?

reply

Most cases were dismissed because it "lacked standing" and they refused to accept the evidence.

There were actually 93 cases, with only 32 decided on the merits, and of those 32, Trump and/or the GOP plaintiff prevailed in 24 of them.

reply

And your source is?

"After the 2020 United States presidential election, the campaign for incumbent President Donald Trump and others filed 62 lawsuits contesting election processes, vote counting, and the vote certification process in 9 states (including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) and the District of Columbia. Trump, his attorneys, and his supporters falsely asserted widespread election fraud in public statements, but few such assertions were made in court

Nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped due to lack of evidence or lack of standing, including 30 lawsuits that were dismissed by the judge after a hearing on the merits. Among the judges who dismissed the lawsuits were some appointed by Trump himself."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_U.S._presidential_election

This is not to say that electoral fraud has not happened and there have been no successful cases of course.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search

The point is though we are talking of those specifically brought by Defendant "find me some more votes" Donald and his crew, and especially those which purported to affect the result of the election.

reply

The MSM and Wokepedia = Mis/Dis-information.

They didn’t mention the other 31 cases because they didn't want to include the 24 cases that he actually won.

And no, there was never any “lack of evidence”, the ones that were rejected based on “lacked standing” proves that as well as the 24 where they prevailed.

"find me some more votes"

Yes, from the ones they stole using duplicate and triplicate ballot scans, dead people votes and non-existent voters.

reply

The MSM and Wokepedia = Mis/Dis-information.

Why do you say that? Just because they don't support your preference?
Here's Reuters as alternative
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/fact-check-courts-have-dismissed-multiple-lawsuits-of-alleged-electoral-fraud-p-idUSKBN2AF1FQ/
or here:
https://www.justsecurity.org/95313/trump-trials-court-jury/
saying more or less the same thing. Sorry about that.

They didn’t mention the other 31 cases because they didn't want to include the 24 cases that he actually won.

Still waiting for any source for this claim. Evasion noted. If those extra cases were not related to Trump btw then my point stands about his efforts failing miserably.

And no, there was never any “lack of evidence”,

Please see the typical example of exactly that I gave a message or two back giving full case details. It really helps if you read stuff.

"find me some more votes" Yes...

Yes indeed; said by Defendant Donald. No interference there then lol

he ones they stole using duplicate and triplicate ballot scans, dead people votes and non-existent voters.

Please show the cases involved where relevant (ie related to Trump's side's legal actions) then. Evasion will be noted, again.

reply

Your other sources are regurgitating Wokepedia.

And yes, I'm well aware of your constant "noting" of others while not noting your insistence of using propaganda and fake news sources.

reply

Evasion noted. I guess you can't back up your rebuttal then. And Reuters.. fake news? Really?

reply

Yes, evasion about your fake or biased sources is noted, as usual.

reply

No sources of your own then. still? Shame.

And especially given that, you also haven't answered why are my sources are necessarily fake and or biased ... apart from the fact you disagree with them?

reply

"why are my sources are necessarily fake and or biased?"

It’s futile trying to explain it to establishment shills or the willfully ignorant. Which one are you?

reply

Never the less, go on and please try and explain it. Don't you know? Why, say, is Reuters a "fake or biased source"?

establishment shills or the willfully ignorant. Which one are you?

A plurimum interrogationum consists in demanding a single answer to a question when this answer could be refused altogether, because a mistaken presupposition is involved. Glad to help. Also, an insult is not an argument.

And... still waiting for those sources of yours. Is there a problem?

reply

>They didn’t mention the other 31 cases because they didn't want to include the 24 cases that he actually won.

What 24 cases did they win, precisely? Clearly these victories were pyrrhic and changed absolutely nothing. Biden still wins the election.

>Yes, from the ones they stole using duplicate and triplicate ballot scans, dead people votes and non-existent voters.

This is a claim from you backed up by zero evidence.

reply

Biden didn't win the election, he stole it. Even his inauguration was fake.

reply

>Biden didn't win the election, he stole it.

This is what you believe. You've provided no evidence for this. Even if Trump did win some cases (you've presented no evidence for this), it wasn't enough to stop Biden winning those swing states and thus winning the election.

>Even his inauguration was fake.

What do you mean his inauguration was fake?

reply

His inauguration was different than all other inaugurations ... it was actually a military funeral service.

reply

What the fuck are you babbling about? Funeral for who?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-qYgs_yOXA

reply

What was the gun salute that they used for Biden?

Don't use internet scriptures, wokepedia or fact checkers as your dumbass lying sources. Watch and listen.

reply

....The gun salute was different? Meaning what? What makes that a military funeral? Who died?

reply

Whatever you say Abed.

reply

[deleted]