Trump Takes Two-Point Lead over Biden in New Hampshire Poll
Former President Donald Trump inched ahead of President Joe Biden in New Hampshire by two points, days after the presidential debate, according to a recent poll.
A Saint Anselm College Survey Center poll found that if the presidential election were held today, 44 percent of voters in New Hampshire would cast their vote for Trump, while 42 percent of voters in the state said they would vote for Biden.
The poll, which was conducted between June 28-29, was “based on online survey of 1,746” registered voters in the state.
The poll also found that Trump’s popularity among voters was higher than Biden’s.
Biden was reported to have a “favorable opinion” with 39 percent of voters, while 59 percent had an unfavorable opinion of him. Trump, on the other hand, was reported to have been “viewed favorably” by 42 percent of voters, while 57 percent viewed him “unfavorably.”
This should be setting off alarm bells at the Biden campaign.
Terrible poll for Biden. New Hampshire hadn’t been polled in ages, but St. Anselm shows Trump leading by 2 points — a 12 point net drop for Biden since December. Meanwhile, Dems are still +3 in the generic Congressional ballot. Biden favorability: 39%, Trump favorability: 42% pic.twitter.com/FdoqEli4Rf
Lynchburg City Council Candidate Challenges Legitimacy of Republican Primary Results, Citing Irregularities and Potential Tampering
July 2, 2024
Peter Alexander (L) and Chris Faraldi (R)
Peter Alexander, a candidate for the City Council of Lynchburg, Virginia, has lodged a formal complaint in the Lynchburg Circuit Court, questioning the legitimacy of the recent Republican primary election results.
The Gateway Pundit previously reported the campaigns of Peter Alexander and Chris Faraldi, both candidates in the June 18th primary for City Council in Ward 4, have reported multiple irregularities, including issues with mail-in ballots and potential breaches in the chain of custody.
There are significant concerns regarding the chain-of-custody of ballots collected from drop boxes. Additionally, absentee ballot processing began before observers were permitted to monitor the process. Records also show that ballot box seals were broken before observers could watch, suggesting potential tampering or mishandling of ballots.
Read the press release from Peter Alexander’s campaign:
Our observer was turned away from absentee ballot processing when it was scheduled to start at noon and asked to return 30 minutes later. Records show that ballot box seals were broken and absentee ballot processing started before our observer was permitted access to watch the process.
My opponent did not have any official observers present until after we raised concerns about the chain of custody of drop box ballots. Election staff confirmed that it had been standard practice to allow the ballot drop box to be stuffed until Friday, which violates Virginia law.
Staff also stated the drop box was emptied Friday morning, but did not produce records documenting access to the drop box until nearly an hour after our observer requested receipts. It is still unclear how many ballots were collected from the drop box, and we may never know how many were stuffed in the drop box after the polls closed.
Shortly after our campaign raised concerns about the chain of custody of drop box ballots, the number of ballots retrieved from the drop box, and the legality of stuffing the ballot box after the polls closed, electoral board member Steve Troxel pulled senior election staff aside for a private conversation concealed from our observation.
It should be noted that after the concealed conversation with staff, the Lynchburg electoral board held an emergency meeting. There was chaos during the emergency meeting, and they attempted to take a public meeting behind closed doors.
After the meeting adjourned, Electoral Board member Steven Troxel asked observers to not discuss the events with the media. Electoral board chair and attorney David Levy told Troxel, “as your chairman-lawyer, I think you’ve said enough.”
It should be noted that Crux Consulting, LLC is listed on Chris Faraldi’s campaign finance report as a vendor, and it is registered to Steven Michael Troxel of Lynchburg, Virginia. Faraldi’s campaign observers showed up within one hour of Troxel’s private conversation with senior registrars’ office staff.
Our opponent has expressed his own concerns about violations of state code and breach of procedures, yet there is no record of disclosure regarding the relationship between political firm Crux Consulting, Lynchburg Electoral Board member Steven Troxel, and candidate Chris Faraldi.
With a razor-thin margin, this election is headed straight for a fully observable recount that must be completed by hand. Democrats have crossed over in historic numbers in this Republican primary to support the tax-and-spend policies of Chris Faraldi.
Faraldi has shown that he craves power, exercises poor judgment, and acts without maturity by reacting impulsively for political manipulation. Now, he has an opportunity to show Lynchburg that he cares about the will of the electorate and join us in demanding a full manual recount and audit of the June 18th Republican primary, including:
Spoiled ballots
Adjudication process of every mail-in ballot
Signature verification
Voter eligibility, including citizenship
Election Day bag security seal and chain of custody records
Let’s stop political insiders with questionable conflicts who may be engaging in pay-to-play schemes to manipulate the outcome of our elections in Lynchburg. Millions from political elites like Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan have flooded our area to influence the outcome of our elections.
We have to stop the DC swamp from influencing our local elections. We must get this right before November. Lynchburg election staff cannot even produce real ballot counts almost one week after the election. The future of our city, and our nation, depends on it. Election integrity is critical, and it’s time for Lynchburg to lead the way.
According to the complaint, there are profound discrepancies involving at least 125 absentee ballots that were marked but not counted, as per the latest records from the Virginia Department of Elections.
In his lawsuit, Alexander points to failures in processing and acknowledging absentee ballots and irregularities in ballot drop box procedures, which he claims were left open unlawfully beyond the election day, allowing for potential tampering.
Martin J. Misjuns, a witness for the Alexander campaign and an elected Councilmember At-large, provided a declaration outlining potential discrepancies in the handling of absentee ballots.
According to Misjuns, a detailed tracking of these ballots through a process known as “Ballot Banking” raised questions about whether all votes were properly recorded.
Adding to the controversy, Misjuns highlighted a conversation with Daniel Pense, the General Registrar for Lynchburg, who allegedly could not confirm the final status of the marked ballots.
This lack of clarity, coupled with the discovery that the ballot drop box at the registrar’s office remained open beyond the election date, has fueled Alexander’s call for a thorough review and recount.
“We filed the election contest late Friday afternoon because that was the deadline and there were still unanswered questions about the handling of absentee ballots. We owe it to the voters to make sure those questions are answered, and that is what we are going to do,” Peter Alexander said in a press release.
House Democrat to File Constitutional Amendment to Reverse Supreme Court Ruling on Presidential Immunity
July 2, 2024
This is pathetic.
A House Democrat who clearly didn’t read the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity said he will file a constitutional amendment to reverse the high court’s decision.
Former presidents are entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts.
The Supreme Court ruled there is no immunity for unofficial acts.
Earlier this year the US Supreme Court agreed to hear Trump’s presidential immunity claim in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6 case in Washington, DC.
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the majority opinion of the Court.
“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office. At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is also entitled to immunity. At the current stage of proceedings in this case, however, we need not and do not decide whether that immunity must be absolute, or instead whether a presumptive immunity is sufficient,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.
Justice Roberts also chastised Judge Tanya Chutkan for not analyzing the conduct alleged in Jack Smith’s indictment.
“Despite the unprecedented nature of this case, and the very significant constitutional questions that it raises, the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis. Because those courts categorically rejected any form of Presidential immunity, they did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial. Neither party has briefed that issue before us (though they discussed it at oral argument in response to questions). And like the underlying immunity question, that categorization raises multiple unprecedented and momentous questions about the powers of the President and the limits of his authority under the Constitution,” Roberts wrote.
Nowhere did the Supreme Court say a president is above the law.
The Supreme Court’s ruling will send Jack Smith’s DC case back to Judge Tanya Chutkan.
Congressman Joe Morelle (D-NY) embarrassed himself by claiming he will introduce a constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“I will introduce a constitutional amendment to reverse SCOTUS’ harmful decision and ensure that no president is above the law. This amendment will do what SCOTUS failed to do—prioritize our democracy,” Democrat Rep. Joe Morelle said on X.
I will introduce a constitutional amendment to reverse SCOTUS’ harmful decision and ensure that no president is above the law. This amendment will do what SCOTUS failed to do—prioritize our democracy.
— unsuspended/still feral (@leDauphin26) July 1, 2024
Fixed that vogue cover for Jill. WHAT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN! ‘And I would have gotten away with it too if it weren’t for you meddling kids!’ pic.twitter.com/hssGjkiHvd
— Artist_Angie: Sensei of Sarcasm (@Artist_Angie) July 1, 2024
— MetaZogi – Creator of Space (@PhysicalMeta) July 1, 2024
Many people have pointed out that Vogue has featured Jill on their cover repeatedly but never once did a profile of Melania Trump, who is an actual former model.
They fully deserve all of the funny mockery they’re getting.
CNN Data Analyst Loses His Mind Over Post-Debate Polls for Biden: ‘Never Seen Numbers This Bad for an Incumbent President’ (VIDEO)
July 2, 2024
CNN data analyst Harry Enten freaked out on the air over poll numbers for Biden after the debate disaster of last Thursday night, noting that he has never seen numbers this bad for an incumbent president.
The data points that Enten seems most panicked about are the ones related to Biden’s mental health and how that relates to the idea of him running for another term.
This is why Democrats are in full meltdown mode with some of them even insisting that he drop out of the race.
HARRY ENTEN, CNN: CBS News and YouGov conducted some polling post-debate. We can compare it to the pre-debate numbers, and the bottom line is, it’s not any good.
Look at this, voters who say that Biden has the mental health to be president. It was just 35% pre-debate. Look where it’s dropped to now, post-debate, 27%.
How about “not that he should be running” for president? It was 37% pre-debate. It’s now 28%.
I have never seen numbers this bad for an incumbent president during my lifetime. I mean, “mental health to be president” at just 27%? You might say, okay, that’s low, but a lot of people thought Biden was too old back in 2020. These numbers looked nothing like this back in 2020. These numbers were bad already, and the truth is, they have gotten just considerably worse, even in just a few days after that first presidential debate.
CNN HOST: Do we have polling yet that suggests voters want a different candidate?
HARRY ENTEN: Yeah, this is the whole question, right? If it’s not President Biden, then who could it be on the Democratic side? And the truth is, there are no easy answers. I went back and looked at the polling versus Donald Trump for a bunch of different Democrats that have been suggested: Gretchen Whitmer, Gavin Newsom, Kamala Harris. Look at this, they all trail Donald Trump.
So the idea here that we’re somehow going to get this magic bullet, that there’s somehow going to be some Democrat who can beat Donald Trump easily, I just don’t see it in the numbers.
Watch the video below:
CNN guest freaking out over post Presidential debate polls: Alisyn Camerota: “Do we have new poll numbers for President Biden post debate?” Harry Enten: “The bottom line: It’s not any good. ‘Voters who say that Biden has the mental health to be president’: 35% to 27% ‘Biden… pic.twitter.com/7iaytVU71m
We use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. We do this to improve browsing experience and to show (non-) personalized ads. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
(@NautPoso) 