Yesterday we had a big thread explaining that when Romney wins the Libs will scream fraud. Now we have a thread claiming fraud because Romney lost.
I hated both candidates, so it does not matter to me, but this seems pretty hypocritical.
Does actual evidence make any difference as to whether a person should claim fraud? For instance, if there are precincts with more people voting than actually exist, would it be hypocritical to say there was fraud there?
We have GOT to get back to an evidence-based system, rather than just not wanting to appear this or that way.
We're not accusing the Marxists of fraud because we lost. We're accusing them of fraud because they carried out a coup in broad daylight in PA by kicking out GOP poll watchers.
We already know they stuffed the ballot boxes in those PA wards. Why else would they kick out all those poll watchers at the same time?
Now we're looking to see how they cheated in the other swing states. Are FReepers interested in finding out the truth, or are they going to lazily blame RR - or the electorate?