LoAmmo
Member
Well, haha, of COURSE they didn't do that, because to do that would insinuate they had even a shred of honesty.
But the GOP's gubernatorial win in Virginia leaves some unanswered questions:
1) If elections are inherently flawed/rigged/fake/fraudulent, per Trump, is there any reason to treat Youngkin as the legitimate Governor of Virginia? Didn't he pretty much by definition "steal the election?"
2) If a mob of flag-bearing lefties battered their way into the State Capitol to force a halt to Youngkin's certification, they'd be hailed as patriots on Fox News...right?
And if they happened to kill a few police officers in the process, that'd be quickly forgiven...right? Righties on this board would also whine about continued threads on the assault on Virginia's capitol as "an obsession about ONE day"...right? It would be dismissed as blown out of proportion by the media...right? Efforts by the left to paint the attackers as false-flag plants from the Right would be expected to resonate...right?
3) Bucking a trend in Red states like Texas, Arizona, and Georgia, the outgoing Democratic majority in Virginia spent most of last year making it EASIER for their state's residents to vote, not harder. They ditched the voter-ID law, broadened absentee voting, made Election Day a holiday, and allowed automatic voter registration--all things held up as "the worst thing ever" in state after state rushing to enact voter suppression legislation in the wake of Trump's loss and fever-dream "Big Lie."
So...how did Youngkin win, in a state that made voting EASIER for Virginians?
4) IF voting being made easier didn't lead to a Democratic win in Virginia, how can Texas, Georgia, Arizona, et al continue to say with a straight face that voter integrity initiatives are desperately needed to correct a system rife with fraud?
5) How did the vast, cunning, super-sneaky Democratic vote-stealers not ensure a win in Virginia, if they were so adept at stealing elections ( without leaving a trace of incriminating evidence, for extra style points) that they were able to steal a Presidential election away from The Master Himself, Donald J. Trump? Remember, the Dems were (wink, wink) able to do this across multiple states, to hear the Right tell it. So...why not Virginia? Did they just suddenly "concede," and let this one play out honestly, for some unfathomable reason?
6) OR...and this might be crazy talk, but let's just say for discussion's sake that elections in this country are NOT "rigged." Let's say hypothetically that Dems are NOT committing massive widespread voting fraud at the levels needed to steal elections. Let's posit that draconian, nakedly partisan voter suppression laws are NOT needed to ensure democracy rules the day. Let's go out on a limb and say an endless series of "audits" are NOT needed in Virginia--that the results were very close, yet also clearly definitive. IF these premises are true...
can we expect Republicans to admit they were peddling hysterical lies about election integrity...all along?
(Don't worry; I know the answer to that.)
But the GOP's gubernatorial win in Virginia leaves some unanswered questions:
1) If elections are inherently flawed/rigged/fake/fraudulent, per Trump, is there any reason to treat Youngkin as the legitimate Governor of Virginia? Didn't he pretty much by definition "steal the election?"
2) If a mob of flag-bearing lefties battered their way into the State Capitol to force a halt to Youngkin's certification, they'd be hailed as patriots on Fox News...right?
And if they happened to kill a few police officers in the process, that'd be quickly forgiven...right? Righties on this board would also whine about continued threads on the assault on Virginia's capitol as "an obsession about ONE day"...right? It would be dismissed as blown out of proportion by the media...right? Efforts by the left to paint the attackers as false-flag plants from the Right would be expected to resonate...right?
3) Bucking a trend in Red states like Texas, Arizona, and Georgia, the outgoing Democratic majority in Virginia spent most of last year making it EASIER for their state's residents to vote, not harder. They ditched the voter-ID law, broadened absentee voting, made Election Day a holiday, and allowed automatic voter registration--all things held up as "the worst thing ever" in state after state rushing to enact voter suppression legislation in the wake of Trump's loss and fever-dream "Big Lie."
So...how did Youngkin win, in a state that made voting EASIER for Virginians?
4) IF voting being made easier didn't lead to a Democratic win in Virginia, how can Texas, Georgia, Arizona, et al continue to say with a straight face that voter integrity initiatives are desperately needed to correct a system rife with fraud?
5) How did the vast, cunning, super-sneaky Democratic vote-stealers not ensure a win in Virginia, if they were so adept at stealing elections ( without leaving a trace of incriminating evidence, for extra style points) that they were able to steal a Presidential election away from The Master Himself, Donald J. Trump? Remember, the Dems were (wink, wink) able to do this across multiple states, to hear the Right tell it. So...why not Virginia? Did they just suddenly "concede," and let this one play out honestly, for some unfathomable reason?
6) OR...and this might be crazy talk, but let's just say for discussion's sake that elections in this country are NOT "rigged." Let's say hypothetically that Dems are NOT committing massive widespread voting fraud at the levels needed to steal elections. Let's posit that draconian, nakedly partisan voter suppression laws are NOT needed to ensure democracy rules the day. Let's go out on a limb and say an endless series of "audits" are NOT needed in Virginia--that the results were very close, yet also clearly definitive. IF these premises are true...
can we expect Republicans to admit they were peddling hysterical lies about election integrity...all along?
(Don't worry; I know the answer to that.)
