This question resolves YES if Donald Trump wins the 2024 US presidential election, or resolves NO if he loses the election.
If Trump is no longer a candidate for president for any reason, this question resolves YES if any candidate of the Republican Party wins the election, or NO otherwise.
Resolution will be based on the Associated Press and Fox News decision desks. If both the AP and Fox declare a winner, this question will be resolved 48 hours later if those calls are not retracted.
If the AP/Fox do not declare a winner, such as if there is a tie in the electoral college, this question will resolve YES if any candidate of the Republican Party is designated as the next president by the United States Congress before the end of January 31st, 2025 (ET), or will resolve NO otherwise.
1,000
3.00Removed because I figured out how to properly embed a question in a comment above.
"If both the AP and Fox declare a winner, this question will be resolved 48 hours later if those calls are not retracted."
Women, back to the kitchen
Tyrannical misogyny
Abortions, illegal
Even for child incest-rape victims?
Gays, back in the closet
Tyrannical homophobia
Interracial marriage, banned
Even for JD Vance? His wife is of Indian ethnicity
Illegals, pack your bags
I don't fully agree but relatively sane compared to the rest
Trannies, back to the asylums
Tyrannical transphobia
Jesus, back in our schools
I don't fully agree but relatively sane compared to the rest
We are so back
Back to the 1800s? I'm pretty sure even Trump doesn't want half of these things
God is great. ๐ Sinners repent.
Why are you praising this?
@LukeShadwell What makes this tricky to pull off is that, like the placebo effect, it continues to work on you even if youโre aware of it.
@lxgr agreed it definitely has an effect on me too but Iโm British so the effect should be lesser on average
@TheAllMemeingEye No, we can't. It was unquestionably rigged in the sense that procedures were changed shortly before election without proper legislative process in a way that disadvantaged Republicans. There was also funny stuff concerning ballots, voting machines and bursting pipes.
@skibidist Could you summarise the procedural changes and their disadvantage to republicans in simple terms for me please?
@TheAllMemeingEye
I would accept: unlikely it was rigged against him by the party in power.
However 1. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
2. Why do you think rigged against him means it could only be by elites of party in power? Why not by some rogue group of democrats either when not in power or in all 3 of those elections just not by enough on the times Trump won?
Actually I suspect election frauds are relatively small. Perhaps not as rare as democrats claim but probably still small enough not to matter. But can this be claimed if little evidence is retrained to be able to do enough checking?
@ChristopherRandles Doesn't 'rigged' kinda imply it's done by the people running it (the government), rather than outsiders?
@TheAllMemeingEye
rigged
manage or conduct (something) fraudulently so as to gain an advantage.
"charges of vote-rigging"
"manage or conduct (something)" might offer some support to your position that it is only the government that can do so.
However could there be campaigns created managed and conducted by grass roots "democrats", without involvement of party elites, to get illegal aliens registered to vote? Is being in power necessary for this?
Maybe you think of that as something other than election rigging, but even if so, does this just show we cannot agree elections unlikely to be rigged against trump unless we have careful definitions.
@TheAllMemeingEye It's just about allowing mail voting which was expanded in all swing states by executive action a few months before election. Of course according to liberals this, as well as immuring a 90 years old grandma in a dark room alone for months at a time, was justified by covid.
@ChristopherRandles Small scale grassroots voter fraud does seem like a much more plausible claim than literally being rigged, given the election outcomes, so yeah this sounds like a disagreement of language
@skibidist What's wrong with mail-in voting? Doesn't it allow people to vote who would otherwise be stuck in work on election day? And a few months sounds like plenty of time
@TheAllMemeingEye Democrat voters are much more likely to vote by mail, so such change favored Biden. Few months was not going to be enough for the Trump campaign to work around this.
@TheAllMemeingEye it's a lot less secure than in-person voting - for example, because other people can see your "private ballot" and pressure you to vote a certain way. if you want a backup for if you can't make it to the polls on election day, then the solution is in-person early voting, not mail-in.
@ZaneMiller In principle someone could maintain multiple identities and voter registrations and vote in multiple states, and this is easier if they can vote over several days. Time consuming, expensive, risky.
In practice the US election frauds I've read about have been small scale mail-in frauds for local offices, nothing to do with early voting. So I agree with you.
The US should stain voters' fingers purple like in more modern democracies and anyone who opposes this is trying to steal the election and possibly bring back the King of England.