Now that they rigged Pratt out who wins?

Well, they have spent decades coming up with the "republicans vote on the day in person, all mail in ballots are democrats" excuse so that they can count the votes from that day, know how many they need, and just "find" more ballots in cars, etc. until they meet that "need". They'll keep doing this until they cross a barrier that the unaffiliated voter cries foul on... When it becomes too obvious there will be objections, they'll be caught.... the problem is they do this everywhere, they get in power, make sure that "mail in ballots" happen, then push that same narrative so that they can just "count until they win"...

Then they ensure there is no way to check by allowing people to vote on same day registration with "ID" that literally can be a simple copy of a bill, and the only check is the "yes" box next to "are you a citizen"?
What you are saying is just lies though. Rationalizations and lies you tell yourself so you can align with Trump, while denying you do.

It is FACT that mail in voting, prior to Trump, was almost a 50/50 thing that tended more Republican (aged).

The reason Trump attacked Mail in Voting, is NOT because he did not believe in it (he does it and why would he subject his vote to fraud if he did not) and is because Trump knows if he can take control of the Mail in Voting process, while gaining the Voter rolls, which he is actively doing, then he can do what he has always said and that is 'control who votes gets counted'.

It is like his selective State by State immigration enforcement focusing on Blue States while giving Red States a fraction of the scrutiny. Trump wants to kick mass amounts of Dems off the voter rolls and deny them the ability to Mail in Vote, while not taking any similar actions in Red States.
 
And I noted that the history will show you where I come up with that pattern, as well as the "lie" nonsense that the Democrats constantly portray. It doesn't take much to predict that some idiot will say that it is a "lie" but it also doesn't take much to simply look at the pattern.
ahhh so you just have intuition that to proves something no prosecutor, no court, no Congressional investigation or other can prove.

And you want us to take you seriously as someone who does not get duped and buy every Trump lie and push his narratives with no proof. :rofl2:
 
Ok? Raman identifies as a Democratic socialist. So does Mamdani. So does Bernie Sanders.

Democratic socialists are rarely confused with Republicans. So if the claim is a Republican isn't going to win the Mayor's race when the two candidates are Bass and Raman, you can take that to the bank. (And although Caruso ran as a Democrat, Bass can't call Raman a Republican like she did Caruso)
You still didn't explain what the word socialist mean.
 
That is exactly the problem with you alt lefties who vote.
It is why we have a new NYC, Seattle, Minneapolis, Portland, LA, SF, Chicago, Boston, and the list goes on.
Here we go again, lot of meaningless tripe and no definition.
 
What exactly is a socialist????
Socialist (noun): A devout adherent of the one true faith known as Socialism, a secular religion whose central sacrament is the belief that human nature can be perfected through enough government coercion, wealth redistribution, and the ritual denunciation of "greed" (defined as anyone producing more than they consume under the new rules).


Core tenets include (this list is not all encompassing):

- Eschatological Promise: Heaven on Earth (equality, justice, free everything) is always just one more Five-Year Plan, election, or purge away. Past failures, USSR, Venezuela, Cuba, etc., were never "real" Socialism, much like how every apocalyptic cult reinterprets the failed Rapture.

- Evangelism Through Deception: Public messaging must always emphasize compassionate "democratic" or "progressive" goals like "helping the poor" and "fairness" or even "social justice". Actual objectives (centralized power, elimination of private property incentives, and the administrative state's permanent expansion) are to be obscured with euphemisms, academic jargon, and claims that "this time the right people will be in charge." almost always performed by stating how "democratic" it is, adding Democratic to Socialism ensures that "this time" the "right people" are in charge. Honesty about necessary trade-offs is heresy.

- Infallible Tribal Apologetics: Any policy, statement, or behavior originating from the Sanctified Left is to be defended with messianic fervor, no matter how economically illiterate, culturally deranged, or practically catastrophic. Examples include celebrating inflation as "equity," defending open borders while ignoring wage suppression and crime data, or insisting biological males in women's sports/locker rooms represent "progress" rather than observable absurdity. Criticism of these positions is not evidence-based disagreement, it's "hate," "fascism," or "punching down."

Like any zealous religion, Socialism features saints (Che, modern academics who never met a payroll), martyrs (those "betrayed" by insufficient radicalism), and inquisitors (cancel culture enforcers rooting out deviationism). Its followers exhibit remarkable cognitive immunity to empirical results: mountains of data on incentives, calculation problems (Mises/Hayek), and body counts are met with the theological retort, "But capitalism kills too!" (usually via creative accounting that counts car accidents and poverty under market systems but not gulags or famines under the alternatives).

In practice, the Socialist is less an economist than a moral theologian who has mistaken envy for virtue and state compulsion for charity. They will lecture you about "late-stage capitalism" from their iPhone while defending every excess of their co-religionists, because admitting trade-offs or failures would collapse the faith. The rest of us just live in the results.
 
I'm almost hoping that Steve Hilton loses the governorship race come November so that the rigged Communist run state of blue kalifornicator remains the same Hammer & Sickle rat hole that sinks into the Pacific ocean at the behest of their commie leadership. Either that or the other option would be for Kalifornicator to secede from the union and perhaps take up partnership with Mexico.
He will lose, California is two to one Democrat, and with Trump’s endorsements, his loss is a deposit bet

What is telling is that Hilton, who won, is saying there was nothing irregular about the election, and MAGA ain’t bloviating his election was fixed, so it just proves Trump and MAGA only bitch elections tney lose were fixed, sore losers, big babies, their going to take their ball and go home
 
Socialist (noun): A devout adherent of the one true faith known as Socialism, a secular religion whose central sacrament is the belief that human nature can be perfected through enough government coercion, wealth redistribution, and the ritual denunciation of "greed" (defined as anyone producing more than they consume under the new rules).


Core tenets include (this list is not all encompassing):

- Eschatological Promise: Heaven on Earth (equality, justice, free everything) is always just one more Five-Year Plan, election, or purge away. Past failures, USSR, Venezuela, Cuba, etc., were never "real" Socialism, much like how every apocalyptic cult reinterprets the failed Rapture.

- Evangelism Through Deception: Public messaging must always emphasize compassionate "democratic" or "progressive" goals like "helping the poor" and "fairness" or even "social justice" Actual objectives (centralized power, elimination of private property incentives, and the administrative state's permanent expansion) are to be obscured with euphemisms, academic jargon, and claims that "this time the right people will be in charge." Honesty about trade-offs is heresy.

- Infallible Tribal Apologetics: Any policy, statement, or behavior originating from the Sanctified Left is to be defended with messianic fervor, no matter how economically illiterate, culturally deranged, or practically catastrophic. Examples include celebrating inflation as "equity," defending open borders while ignoring wage suppression and crime data, or insisting biological males in women's sports/locker rooms represent "progress" rather than observable absurdity. Criticism of these positions is not evidence-based disagreement, it's "hate," "fascism," or "punching down."

Like any zealous religion, Socialism features saints (Che, modern academics who never met a payroll), martyrs (those "betrayed" by insufficient radicalism), and inquisitors (cancel culture enforcers rooting out deviationism). Its followers exhibit remarkable cognitive immunity to empirical results: mountains of data on incentives, calculation problems (Mises/Hayek), and body counts are met with the theological retort, "But capitalism kills too!" (usually via creative accounting that counts car accidents and poverty under market systems but not gulags or famines under the alternatives).

In practice, the Socialist is less an economist than a moral theologian who has mistaken envy for virtue and state compulsion for charity. They will lecture you about "late-stage capitalism" from their iPhone while defending every excess of their co-religionists, because admitting trade-offs or failures would collapse the faith. The rest of us just live in the results.
This is right wing ideology and not a definition. So apparently, you don't know either, you've been programed to hate a word, that you don't know the meaning of.
 
Socialist (noun): A devout adherent of the one true faith known as Socialism, a secular religion whose central sacrament is the belief that human nature can be perfected through enough government coercion, wealth redistribution, and the ritual denunciation of "greed" (defined as anyone producing more than they consume under the new rules).


Core tenets include (this list is not all encompassing):

- Eschatological Promise: Heaven on Earth (equality, justice, free everything) is always just one more Five-Year Plan, election, or purge away. Past failures, USSR, Venezuela, Cuba, etc., were never "real" Socialism, much like how every apocalyptic cult reinterprets the failed Rapture.

- Evangelism Through Deception: Public messaging must always emphasize compassionate "democratic" or "progressive" goals like "helping the poor" and "fairness" or even "social justice" Actual objectives (centralized power, elimination of private property incentives, and the administrative state's permanent expansion) are to be obscured with euphemisms, academic jargon, and claims that "this time the right people will be in charge." Honesty about trade-offs is heresy.

- Infallible Tribal Apologetics: Any policy, statement, or behavior originating from the Sanctified Left is to be defended with messianic fervor, no matter how economically illiterate, culturally deranged, or practically catastrophic. Examples include celebrating inflation as "equity," defending open borders while ignoring wage suppression and crime data, or insisting biological males in women's sports/locker rooms represent "progress" rather than observable absurdity. Criticism of these positions is not evidence-based disagreement, it's "hate," "fascism," or "punching down."

Like any zealous religion, Socialism features saints (Che, modern academics who never met a payroll), martyrs (those "betrayed" by insufficient radicalism), and inquisitors (cancel culture enforcers rooting out deviationism). Its followers exhibit remarkable cognitive immunity to empirical results: mountains of data on incentives, calculation problems (Mises/Hayek), and body counts are met with the theological retort, "But capitalism kills too!" (usually via creative accounting that counts car accidents and poverty under market systems but not gulags or famines under the alternatives).

In practice, the Socialist is less an economist than a moral theologian who has mistaken envy for virtue and state compulsion for charity. They will lecture you about "late-stage capitalism" from their iPhone while defending every excess of their co-religionists, because admitting trade-offs or failures would collapse the faith. The rest of us just live in the results.
Would be interesting to see the source of that definition
 
This is right wing ideology and not a definition. So apparently, you don't know either, you've been programed to hate a word, that you don't know the meaning of.
Apparently, as described in my witty but true definition, you simply pretend that nobody "understands" your religion and try to push through with the already well defined Evangelism through Deception and Infallible Tribal Apologetics.

Thank you for proving that my definition is valid, even with the fact it was soaked in sarcastic witticism.
 
Apparently, as described in my witty but true definition, you simply pretend that nobody "understands" your religion and try to push through with the already well defined Evangelism through Deception and Infallible Tribal Apologetics.

Thank you for proving that my definition is valid, even with the fact it was soaked in sarcastic witticism.
This reply is laughable.
 
Well, regardless, at this point the outcome of LA's election is that LA gets fucked. Things will NOT get better there. They will remain just as shitty as they are now, or they'll get worse. Raman in particular will make things worse.
 
Nobody rigged anything. LA County is only 18% registered Republican. Nobody should be surprised, including the conspiracy theorist, that too dems won.
That is not the question. Agreed, Pratt never would have been elected. The question is: how did the math work out for his Democrat opponent to outpace both Bass and Pratt? A mathematician would tell you the uncounted ballots would be in proportion to the previously counted. Whenever democrats are in an election they HAVE to win, that math logic shit goes out the window, and "magic" happens.
I will refresh you again,

View: https://x.com/ForAmerica/status/2062534042126344550/video/1
 
@Damocles You write,

"so that they can count the votes from that day, know how many they need, and just "find" more ballots in cars, etc. until they meet that "need". They'll keep doing this until they cross a barrier that the unaffiliated voter cries foul on... When it becomes too obvious there will be objections, they'll be caught.... the problem is they do this everywhere, they get in power, make sure that "mail in ballots" happen, then push that same narrative so that they can just "count until they win"..."

I am asking if you have evidence for that destructive lie?
Do not be so stupid.

1781109952993.png
 
Back
Top