No mate not trolling, please dont say Soros because no one on this forum has ever explained how logically any of this Soros conspiracy can function in the real world.
Just mentioning a persons name does not explain how this voter fraud infrastructure works and does not explain how its possible to recruits thousands of people across the country to participate and then coordinate their involvement.
And for this fraud to function you need people willing to cooperate from both sides of the political divide.
Not one shred of real evidence has been produced that indicates voter fraud on such a scale that it influenced the outcome.
A quick internet search will reveal that when fraud does occur and is identified it is swiftly dealt witg. But then this is what is so attractive about conspiracies is thar everything is part of it. Therefore the conspiracy theorist mindset will say these prosecutions of real voter fraud were allowed to proceed or engineered to be discovered to cover up the bigger fraud.
You are the one claiming the upcoming election is rigged, how am I trolling asking for proof?
While the two parties are sharply divided over entitlement spending, the differences in the proportions of Republicans and Democrats who have received entitlements is fairly modest: 60% of Democrats, 52% of Republicans and 53% of independents have benefited from one of these six major classes of federal entitlement programs.
Also:
Rural residents also have disproportionately benefited from these entitlements (62%), compared with urban (54%) or suburban (53%) dwellers.
Those percentages are the percent of the total group.
That number is weird. They won in Crimea. So they should be 2-2. Cause they won WWI but lost in WWII 1940 and then lost in Vietnam and Algeria. So technically it should be 2-3. Actually it’s 2-4 because they lost in Mexico too. Although in WWII they lost and then snatched victory out of defeat because of the Free French and even got their own portion of Germany. So kind of 3-4 in a weird way.
Your point is fair though. Post Napoleonic France has lost a lot of wars. And they lost the second biggest challenge they ever faced. WWII in 1940. Only WWI was arguably more decisive for France. They get to claim great victor status over that one for just holding themselves together. No many countries could lose a generation and still stay on the battlefield. The Russians certainly didn’t. They fell apart in 1917. And Germany completely collapsed in 1918 after the Kaiser Cauldron offensive. That’s why the stab in the back myth was willful ignorance by Germans. The German Army lost fair and square in WWI. The allies were taking entire German field armies as prisoner during their August offensive.
I wonder how many people are on welfare and have never worked a day in their lives? Probably not too many.
I am sure there are those who play the system but that will always happen, the vast majority of people get some form of welfare because they need it.
My dad worked his arse off (multiple jobs) but we still needed help, as a kid I got free school dinners and free school uniforms thanks to government welfare in the UK.
You made a general statement about people who are sustained by the state. You restricted voting only with regards to people on welfare.
If you added the in part later i didn’t notice that’s on me.
But the truth is that republicans win with people who are sustained by the state. Often despite voting against those programs which help sustain people……
What about them?
So it’s not sustaining?
It a specific demographic that relies on welfare as the sole source of income and uses it to replace the need for a breadwinner. Those are the people you believe should not vote? Is there anybody else? Just to make sure we get everyone covered
