Continuation 2020 Presidential Election part 3

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

So you don't hate Trump for being a racist, xenophobic, nationalist, fear-monger, you just hate that he's not effective at it.

Pretty much.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by shemp

Cheeto McFrito is incapable of understanding that actions have consequences.

Because honestly up until now they really haven't.

Which is why he's not in "fight" mode so much as "reality denial mode." He has no concept of fixing something that doesn't go his way, so his only option is to squint and strain until reality reforms itself so that he did win.

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by TangyPoindexter

Apologies for my absolutely brilliant first post. It was indeed a pocket post. I read that and wondered who that dumbass was and then realized it was me.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Even better! Welcome!

[Skeptic Tank]

Originally Posted by Aridas

Interesting.

Are you or are you not aware that Carlson was sued earlier this year for stating nasty and harmfully false claims about a person and that Fox's defense was, quite simply, that no rational and well informed viewer would believe the things that Carlson says - and proceeded to prove that claim so well that they won the case. In other words, Fox News is calling you an ignorant, gullible fool.

I don't know that I would qualify as a "Fox news viewer" - I don't watch television.

I periodically will find clips or uploads of full episodes of Tucker Carlson on YouTube and listen to them on my phone while I'm doing chores and other things around the house, and I have found 90% of what I hear him saying to be well articulated, accurate, and good.

I still listen to people I was a big fan of when I was a leftist, by the way. I routinely listen to long segments of The Young Turks, Rachel Maddow, NPR, New York Times "The Daily", "Trumpcast", MSNBC / Joe Scarborough, CNN stuff, etc. ----- As I like to keep myself aware of what the other side is saying / thinking. I used to listen to Air America (Franken, Seder, Maddow, Garofalo - religiously, when it was on air about 15 years ago.)

I do not ever listen to Hannity or Limbaugh other than a very, very rare snippet. Tucker Carlson is the only Fox personality I listen to with any sort of regularity or duration.

With regard to the court case? I would strongly suspect they were basically using clever legal maneuvering to get out of a judgment against them. Good for them.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

Michigan

• A city worker in Detroit claims he and fellow employees were told to back date ballots that came in too late. (Solomon)

• Antrim county was initially reported as going to Biden. This was so implausible that votes were recounted, and the county went to Trump. The initial miscount was due to "human error."

• Democrat absentee votes in Oakland county were counted twice. Once corrected, the result of the local election flipped for the Republican.

• Over 14,000 dead people registered / voted

Pennsylvania

• Election observers were kept 30 feet from the actual vote counting, meaning they could not see the ballots

• Statistically impossible voter turnout, and record number of people over 90 years old registering to vote

• Illegally backdated votes that came in too late

Wisconsin

• Voter turnout higher than number of registered voters in some areas

• Election officials tracked down witness addresses for absentee ballots to validate votes, a policy that may be illegal.

• After the pause in reporting, vote shares shifted in favor of democrats within city wards, meaning this was not due to more democratic areas reporting later, and this was truer the more behind the democrats were in each ward, contrary to what an explanation based on late mail-in voters would predict.

• Only the state legislature can change election procedures, but election officials allowed potentially over 100,000 voters to bypass ID requirements by claiming that COVID prevented them from leaving home.

Arizona

• Based on sworn testimony, it is alleged that ballots in Maricopa county featuring "over-voting" were invalidated rather than fixed. (Singman)

Georgia

• Illegal ballot harvesting

And then there are things like this:

https://i.imgur.com/oDfWFqc.png

And other things I'm seeing allegations about which I haven't included here.

So when I say I've seen evidence that leads me to believe careful recounts and audits are in order, I'm not literally saying like "oh a whistleblower showed up at my house and we sat down and looked at a couple hundred thousand ballots together and they looked fishy to me" - obviously. I'm saying I am seeing allegations (and not seeing convincing refutations of most of them) that, if proven true, are quite serious and these issues to me seem to obviously necessitate an investigation. I don't think that's a huge claim to make.

All that yet not one iota of evidence to support your lie.

Do you want to try again - here is a hint - you saying something doesn’t provide any evidence beyond evidence that you said something...

[Skeptic Tank]

Originally Posted by Darat

All that yet not one iota of evidence to support your lie.

Do you want to try again - here is a hint - you saying something doesn’t provide any evidence beyond evidence that you said something...

My claim was / is that I am seeing "evidence" - and by that here I mean "seemingly credible claims by people who are in a position to make such allegations" which at least rise to the level of justifying a careful recount / audit and a proper investigation as to their veracity.

If people don't like that I used the term "evidence" for that, or don't like the fact that I didn't wait until all of these claims had been investigated and proven true before I indicated I found them interesting or worthy of consideration? Dunno what to tell you, add it to my tab.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Because honestly up until now they really haven't.

Which is why he's not in "fight" mode so much as "reality denial mode." He has no concept of fixing something that doesn't go his way, so his only option is to squint and strain until reality reforms itself so that he did win.

Even his “bankruptcies” didn’t have the dire consequences it would have meant for the non-elite. Even at the time when his lenders directly controlled his finances and he had to get a monthly allowance it didn’t effect his actual day to day living.

The privileged like Trump live in a world utterly unlike the world the vast majority of us have to live in.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

My claim was / is that I am seeing "evidence" - and by that here I mean "seemingly credible claims by people who are in a position to make such allegations" which at least rise to the level of justifying a careful recount / audit and a proper investigation as to their veracity.

If people don't like that I used the term "evidence" for that, or don't like the fact that I didn't wait until all of these claims had been investigated and proven true before I indicated I found them interesting or worthy of consideration? Dunno what to tell you, add it to my tab.

Your lie was indeed that you are seeing evidence. The way to show it wasn’t a lie is to provide that evidence.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

Michigan

• A city worker in Detroit claims he and fellow employees were told to back date ballots that came in too late. (Solomon)

• Antrim county was initially reported as going to Biden. This was so implausible that votes were recounted, and the county went to Trump. The initial miscount was due to "human error."

• Democrat absentee votes in Oakland county were counted twice. Once corrected, the result of the local election flipped for the Republican.

• Over 14,000 dead people registered / voted

Pennsylvania

• Election observers were kept 30 feet from the actual vote counting, meaning they could not see the ballots

• Statistically impossible voter turnout, and record number of people over 90 years old registering to vote

• Illegally backdated votes that came in too late

Wisconsin

• Voter turnout higher than number of registered voters in some areas

• Election officials tracked down witness addresses for absentee ballots to validate votes, a policy that may be illegal.

• After the pause in reporting, vote shares shifted in favor of democrats within city wards, meaning this was not due to more democratic areas reporting later, and this was truer the more behind the democrats were in each ward, contrary to what an explanation based on late mail-in voters would predict.

• Only the state legislature can change election procedures, but election officials allowed potentially over 100,000 voters to bypass ID requirements by claiming that COVID prevented them from leaving home.

Arizona

• Based on sworn testimony, it is alleged that ballots in Maricopa county featuring "over-voting" were invalidated rather than fixed. (Singman)

Georgia

• Illegal ballot harvesting

And then there are things like this:

https://i.imgur.com/oDfWFqc.png

And other things I'm seeing allegations about which I haven't included here.

So when I say I've seen evidence that leads me to believe careful recounts and audits are in order, I'm not literally saying like "oh a whistleblower showed up at my house and we sat down and looked at a couple hundred thousand ballots together and they looked fishy to me" - obviously. I'm saying I am seeing allegations (and not seeing convincing refutations of most of them) that, if proven true, are quite serious and these issues to me seem to obviously necessitate an investigation. I don't think that's a huge claim to make.

Funny how ST says he sees evidence but won't share it. That TOTALLY lends to his credibility on this claim.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Darat

Your lie was indeed that you are seeing evidence. The way to show it wasn’t a lie is to provide that evidence.

Maybe he's looking at Hunter Biden's laptop.

[thaiboxerken]

Credible claims.... one Trump supporting lady claimed to have not voted and that the elections office wrongly recorded that she did. She did this on a video that was widely shared by Trumpanzees. The state found her ballot, with her signature on it. They showed it to her and asked if it was her signature and ballot. She retracted her claim.

I'm sure these "credible" claims of election fraud are much of the same.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

My claim was / is that I am seeing "evidence" - and by that here I mean "seemingly credible claims by people who are in a position to make such allegations" which at least rise to the level of justifying a careful recount / audit and a proper investigation as to their veracity.

If people don't like that I used the term "evidence" for that, or don't like the fact that I didn't wait until all of these claims had been investigated and proven true before I indicated I found them interesting or worthy of consideration? Dunno what to tell you, add it to my tab.

This is a skeptics forum. There might be a speculators forum looking for your commentary.

[eerok]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

My claim was / is that I am seeing "evidence"

That's funny, I'm just seeing claims.

[slyjoe]

Originally Posted by eerok

That's funny, I'm just seeing claims.

I think there is a reason Skeptic Tank uses scare quotes around "evidence".

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

Michigan

• A city worker in Detroit claims he and fellow employees were told to back date ballots that came in too late. (Solomon)

• Antrim county was initially reported as going to Biden. This was so implausible that votes were recounted, and the county went to Trump. The initial miscount was due to "human error."

• Democrat absentee votes in Oakland county were counted twice. Once corrected, the result of the local election flipped for the Republican.

• Over 14,000 dead people registered / voted

Pennsylvania

• Election observers were kept 30 feet from the actual vote counting, meaning they could not see the ballots

• Statistically impossible voter turnout, and record number of people over 90 years old registering to vote

• Illegally backdated votes that came in too late

Wisconsin

• Voter turnout higher than number of registered voters in some areas

• Election officials tracked down witness addresses for absentee ballots to validate votes, a policy that may be illegal.

• After the pause in reporting, vote shares shifted in favor of democrats within city wards, meaning this was not due to more democratic areas reporting later, and this was truer the more behind the democrats were in each ward, contrary to what an explanation based on late mail-in voters would predict.

• Only the state legislature can change election procedures, but election officials allowed potentially over 100,000 voters to bypass ID requirements by claiming that COVID prevented them from leaving home.

Arizona

• Based on sworn testimony, it is alleged that ballots in Maricopa county featuring "over-voting" were invalidated rather than fixed. (Singman)

Georgia

• Illegal ballot harvesting

And then there are things like this:

https://i.imgur.com/oDfWFqc.png

And other things I'm seeing allegations about which I haven't included here.

So when I say I've seen evidence that leads me to believe careful recounts and audits are in order, I'm not literally saying like "oh a whistleblower showed up at my house and we sat down and looked at a couple hundred thousand ballots together and they looked fishy to me" - obviously. I'm saying I am seeing allegations (and not seeing convincing refutations of most of them) that, if proven true, are quite serious and these issues to me seem to obviously necessitate an investigation. I don't think that's a huge claim to make.

This is a list of unsubstantiated claims and expressions of personal incredulity.

You said you had actual evidence. Please present this evidence.

[Skeptic Tank]

What did you guys think I was saying when I said I was seeing evidence? Did you think I had some boxes of contested ballots sitting in my living room or?

I think it's a fair use of the term at this juncture to mean "claims / allegations from people who are in a position to make them credibly, which I think warrant investigation"

If people want to retroactively pretend that's what I said, go for it.

I guess we'll just all have to hope that in the next month or so, proper investigations are conducted and we get answers. In you guys' case you can hope that it all amounts to nothing, and maybe makes Trump and his supporters look even more stupid and decisively defeated, and in my case I can hope that it blocks Biden / Harris from coming to power.

[Firestone]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

Wisconsin

• Voter turnout higher than number of registered voters in some areas

One for the fun of it.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-chec...ent:9672223878

tl;dr ?

The people making that claim were comparing the number of registered voters for the 2018 midterms (3,129,000) with the votes cast this year (close to 3,300,000).
There were 3,684,726 registered voters in Wisconsin on Nov 1. (And in Wisconsin, you can even register to vote on election day.)

But, hey, that's just one item.

[azazal]

Originally Posted by Armitage72

Lindsay Graham is promising to investigate an affidavit from a postal worker in Pennsylvania alleging that his boss discussed backdating ineligible ballots so they could be counted.
The whole thing was started by ... wait for it ... Project Veritas.

If you can't trust them, who can you trust?

Really? They made the exact same claim about the Post Office in Traverse City, MI -
https://www.9and10news.com/2020/11/0...office-branch/

It would be hilarious if they used the same video for both locations.

[thaiboxerken]

They let people of color vote. That's the "evidence" of voter fraud, I'm sure.

[varwoche]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Maybe he's looking at Hunter Biden's laptop.

Which one?

[Mader Levap]

All of them.

[SuburbanTurkey]

The Wisconsin claim that more votes came in than registered voters has already been debunked. The original meme came from someone comparing 2020 voter turnout to 2018 voter registration numbers. All of you may not be shocked that more people voted in 2020 than 2018.

It's nice of ST to post a roundup of most of the unfounded claims from the right wing dumpsterfire in one place.

Turnout in WI was pretty high, as it was across the country, but did not even set the record setting in recent memory. 2004 had higher vote turnout in the state.

https://apnews.com/article/election-...454e57df022a91

[varwoche]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

What did you guys think I was saying when I said I was seeing evidence? Did you think I had some boxes of contested ballots sitting in my living room or?

I think it's a fair use of the term at this juncture to mean "claims / allegations from people who are in a position to make them credibly, which I think warrant investigation"

If people want to retroactively pretend that's what I said, go for it.

I guess we'll just all have to hope that in the next month or so, proper investigations are conducted and we get answers. In you guys' case you can hope that it all amounts to nothing, and maybe makes Trump and his supporters look even more stupid and decisively defeated, and in my case I can hope that it blocks Biden / Harris from coming to power.

And yet you don't even identify these credible people.

You can save yourself a lot of typing: "People are saying"

[eerok]

Originally Posted by slyjoe

I think there is a reason Skeptic Tank uses scare quotes around "evidence".

That's what makes him so "convincing".

[shemp]

Originally Posted by TangyPoindexter

Apologies for my absolutely brilliant first post. It was indeed a pocket post. I read that and wondered who that dumbass was and then realized it was me.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

It made more sense than many other posts in Politics forum. Congratulations!

[Meadmaker]

I think the topic of fraud claims is worthy of its own thread, so I have started one.

As I said in the OP of that thread, I think this thread is very broad and can get diverted around. Also, I think a thread dedicated specifically to fraud claims can concentrate information on that specific topic so that it can be used for debunking purposes by people searching for info.

At least, I hope it serves such a purpose. I've already started the thread.

[thaiboxerken]

Why does it seem that Trump supporter posts should be in the C&CT forum?

[varwoche]

Fixed it for me:

Originally Posted by varwoche

And yet you don't even identify these credible people.

You can save yourself a lot of typing: "People standing in front of a dildo store are saying"

[eerok]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

Why does it seem that Trump supporter posts should be in the C&CT forum?

I reflexively read "C&CT" as Crass & Crazy Trump, so maybe they should.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

My claim was / is that I am seeing "evidence" - and by that here I mean "seemingly credible claims by people who are in a position to make such allegations" which at least rise to the level of justifying a careful recount / audit and a proper investigation as to their veracity.

You saw an assortment of random, unsupported claims made by Trump's propaganda gang that couldn't shoot straight (perhaps the most dishonest collection of scumbags in the history of the republic), and that was enough to constitute "evidence". Interesting.

But let's be honest here. You've already made clear you couldn't care less if any of this drivel is true. You simply want Trump reinstalled by any means necessary, right?

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

What did you guys think I was saying when I said I was seeing evidence?

That there was actual, verifiable evidence you would be able to present.

[Skeptic Tank]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

You saw an assortment of random, unsupported claims made by Trump's propaganda gang that couldn't shoot straight (perhaps the most dishonest collection of scumbags in the history of the republic), and that was enough to constitute "evidence". Interesting.

But let's be honest here. You've already made clear you couldn't care less if any of this drivel is true. You simply want Trump reinstalled by any means necessary, right?

Right, but some means are realistic and others are not, and so I am hopeful that these things turn out to be true and viable as means.

I also find them believable because I think the democrats are corrupt and shady (not that the republicans are free of such characteristics, but I think they manifest differently in the two parties) in ways which are consistent with this, and they have decades of documented behavior of this type.

[JoeMorgue]

Literally the only actual convincing evidence for anything Trump is saying is to look back at the last 4+ years and go "Seriously it has to be true who could make something like this up?"

Reality for the last few years has been very badly written for something that isn't even written.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

What did you guys think I was saying when I said I was seeing evidence? ...snip...

Thought I made it quite clear but in case it wasn’t:

I think you were and are lying.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

What did you guys think I was saying when I said I was seeing evidence? Did you think I had some boxes of contested ballots sitting in my living room or?

We thought you didn't have it. Seems we were right.

Quote:

I think it's a fair use of the term at this juncture to mean "claims / allegations from people who are in a position to make them credibly, which I think warrant investigation"

Ah. Well no, it's not a fair use of the term.

Hans

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

Right, but some means are realistic and others are not, and so I am hopeful that these things turn out to be true and viable as means.

I also find them believable because I think the democrats are corrupt and shady (not that the republicans are free of such characteristics, but I think they manifest differently in the two parties) in ways which are consistent with this, and they have decades of documented behavior of this type.

Your conspiracy theory - like all conspiracy theories - has a fundamental logical flaw. Democrats aren’t in control of the election or its oversight. This fantasy that they would be able to pull off mass voter fraud to the tune of millions of ballots under the noses of all the Republicans also involved in the process is devoid of any connection to reality.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

They let people of color vote. That's the "evidence" of voter fraud, I'm sure.

Hang on a moment I doubt that is the only evidence, I am sure there will have been some “race traitors” votes that need to be disregarded!

[eerok]

I think it'd be delicious if, following a careful investigation of voter fraud in key states, it was found that only a few Republican voters had intentionally cheated. Based on past history, this is somewhat likely to happen.

[The Great Zaganza]

Georgia the State and the Election are run by Republicans.
Why, exactly, would they cheat for Biden?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Your conspiracy theory - like all conspiracy theories - has a fundamental logical flaw. Democrats aren’t in control of the election or its oversight. This fantasy that they would be able to pull off mass voter fraud to the tune of millions of ballots under the noses of all the Republicans also involved in the process is devoid of any connection to reality.

You also need to hold that they are incredibly competent at election fraud as to tilt the numbers to Biden, except in all the areas that voted for Trump. I for one don’t find it at all coincidental that the only places they didn’t commit fraud was in places that voted Trump!

(Never mind they seem to have forgotten that senators were also being voted on in many places.)