ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags election conspiracies

Reply
Old Yesterday, 10:29 PM   #881
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 23,823
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
From the article they are requesting the Braynard data, ie the survey of Republican registered voters for whom ballots have been requested, but were not counted.

I believe the allegation is that many of these ballots were not requested by the voter in question and therefore requested by someone not the voter.

I will be interested to see what they turn up there.
Well that's pretty darned easy to check up on, isn't it?

Did you request a ballot?
Did you turn it in?
Can you sign this?

Be aware that submitting false information to the FBI is a crime. Do you want to revise any of your previous statements?
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:32 PM   #882
GraculusTheGreenBird
Critical Thinker
 
GraculusTheGreenBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 312
My god, is Bubba still banging on about Dominion, despite the manual recounts matching voter machine tallies?

Surely, nobody could be actually STUPID enough to believe fraud claims after that definitive proof?

Could they?
GraculusTheGreenBird is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:50 PM   #883
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11,815
0
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
Sounds like you'd say its really over, and there will be no fraud dramas unfolding in and out of courtrooms this week and next week.


What if it turns out differently??
Inductive reasoning. Out of 33 suits, 31 were dismissed (numbers somewhat dated) because Trump's legal team doesn't know or doesn't seem to know that claims must be supported with evidence that directly relates to that specific assertion. Not reports of something that happened or could have happened in a foreign country years ago. It just doesn't work that way.

Judge: What is your evidence of widespread fraud?
Powell: Something happened years ago in the Philippines. Hugo Chavez may have used Dominion software to cheat. Down-ticked Republicans got more votes than Trump. Etc., etc., etc.

Judge: What is your evidence of widespread fraud? (ETA: in the 2020 U.S. presidential election?)

Last edited by Minoosh; Yesterday at 11:07 PM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:55 PM   #884
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,433
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
So, is it safe to assume you are certain that all claims of fraud will be proven to be bogus??
Nope. I'm pretty sure the Trump Organisation will be indicted for tax fraud and/or securities fraud.

I'm moderately expecting the Trump Organisation will be indicted for donation fraud for unconscionable and misleading conduct like Steve Bannon.

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:02 PM   #885
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,433
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
Would they be they the same sources censoring stories about Hunter's laptop, and Tara Reid?
No news source is censoring "Hunter Biden's laptop" Bubba.

What happened was that the Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell comedy show pushed all other comedy stories out of newspapers.


What is Stormfront telling you about "Hunter Biden's laptop"?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:02 PM   #886
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11,815
To Bubba, again:
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Now, where is it reported that the FBI is looking for evidence?
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:05 PM   #887
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,433
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
What else have you missed??
Did Trump finish the wall? Did Mexico pay for it? Did Trump replace Obamacare? Did Covid-19 "turn the corner" during the election?

Tell us Bubba....using all your extremist right wing "news" sources.

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:27 PM   #888
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 8,023
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
0Inductive reasoning. Out of 33 suits, 31 were dismissed (numbers somewhat dated) because Trump's legal team doesn't know or doesn't seem to know that claims must be supported with evidence that directly relates to that specific assertion. Not reports of something that happened or could have happened in a foreign country years ago. It just doesn't work that way.

Judge: What is your evidence of widespread fraud?
Powell: Something happened years ago in the Philippines. Hugo Chavez may have used Dominion software to cheat. Down-ticked Republicans got more votes than Trump. Etc., etc., etc.

Judge: What is your evidence of widespread fraud? (ETA: in the 2020 U.S. presidential election?)
It would appear they are wanting these all to fail. Every single one. It's so they can eventually take their appeal to the US Supreme Court, argue that nobody and their dog is giving poor widdle president Trump-wumpy an even break, and thus get themselves an amazing automatic win because they stacked the SCOTUS so hard.

It's a great strategy, certain to succeed.

__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015

Last edited by Norman Alexander; Yesterday at 11:28 PM.
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:37 PM   #889
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Well that's pretty darned easy to check up on, isn't it?

Did you request a ballot?
Did you turn it in?
Can you sign this?

Be aware that submitting false information to the FBI is a crime. Do you want to revise any of your previous statements?
I think Braynard is reporting some interesting data. What you are asking for is what Braynard did. They got the publicly available state data for voters that shows whether they requested an absentee ballot and whether they voted. They called some of those voters that were marked as being sent an absentee ballot but who were not marked as voted. A large number said that they had not requested an absentee ballot. Of those who said they did get a ballot, many said that they had returned it, even though their vote had not been counted according to state records. He says he has recordings of the calls.

Something isn't right. But I don't know what it is. My guess would be that it is an error on the part of Braynard. I don't think it said what state. That could make a big difference.

There is also something weird about the claim. If a high percentage of people who were recorded as being sent a ballot but not voting reported that they never received a ballot...then, what? They didn't ask for a ballot, they didn't get a ballot, they didn't vote, and they didn't have a vote counted. So, no affect on the election results. But a curiosity that could be looked into.

Also, voters who say they did request a ballot and got one and sent it in but no vote counted. Now we have narrowed down the group largely to voters who had absentee ballots rejected due to signatures, missing envelopes, and so on that Republicans have asked to disqualify ballots. So the number may not be surprising. But, if there is any error that it shows, it would be that many people mailed in valid ballots that were not counted, and we know that the mail-in ballots typically largely favored Biden. So, maybe, possibly, Biden won by more than we think, if this claim is true.

He also says he has data of people voting in different states. This comes up almost every election. It is almost always similar names to data entry errors that connect two voters who are not actually the same.

He also reports on voter registrations for addresses that are USPS, UPS, and FexEx postal centers where they list what would be that box number as an "Apt" or "Unit". He says a post office box is not allowed as an address for voter registration (which I know is typically true, because it does not establish residency). But I'm not sure about using something like a UPS store. I know homeless people will sometimes use a UPS box because they don't have a permanent residence but still need to be able to get mail. HE gives some examples, but not any numbers. The big question would be how many instances of this there are. A lot: possible mass fraud of indelible voters. A few: probably homeless people and others who use these type of services for various reasons as their address.

I am curious about the jurisdiction of the FBI in this case. Elections are run by states. Federal law for elections is mostly campaign finance and some issues of interference with elections and threatening candidates and similar stuff. This all seems like accusations of violations of state law. Also, he says he analyzed the data for swing states, but the request for his data is coming from an FBI office in....Los Angeles. Curious.
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:52 PM   #890
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 8,023
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I think Braynard is reporting some interesting data. What you are asking for is what Braynard did. They got the publicly available state data for voters that shows whether they requested an absentee ballot and whether they voted. They called some of those voters that were marked as being sent an absentee ballot but who were not marked as voted. A large number said that they had not requested an absentee ballot. Of those who said they did get a ballot, many said that they had returned it, even though their vote had not been counted according to state records. He says he has recordings of the calls.

Something isn't right. But I don't know what it is. My guess would be that it is an error on the part of Braynard. I don't think it said what state. That could make a big difference.

There is also something weird about the claim. If a high percentage of people who were recorded as being sent a ballot but not voting reported that they never received a ballot...then, what? They didn't ask for a ballot, they didn't get a ballot, they didn't vote, and they didn't have a vote counted. So, no affect on the election results. But a curiosity that could be looked into.

Also, voters who say they did request a ballot and got one and sent it in but no vote counted. Now we have narrowed down the group largely to voters who had absentee ballots rejected due to signatures, missing envelopes, and so on that Republicans have asked to disqualify ballots. So the number may not be surprising. But, if there is any error that it shows, it would be that many people mailed in valid ballots that were not counted, and we know that the mail-in ballots typically largely favored Biden. So, maybe, possibly, Biden won by more than we think, if this claim is true.

He also says he has data of people voting in different states. This comes up almost every election. It is almost always similar names to data entry errors that connect two voters who are not actually the same.

He also reports on voter registrations for addresses that are USPS, UPS, and FexEx postal centers where they list what would be that box number as an "Apt" or "Unit". He says a post office box is not allowed as an address for voter registration (which I know is typically true, because it does not establish residency). But I'm not sure about using something like a UPS store. I know homeless people will sometimes use a UPS box because they don't have a permanent residence but still need to be able to get mail. HE gives some examples, but not any numbers. The big question would be how many instances of this there are. A lot: possible mass fraud of indelible voters. A few: probably homeless people and others who use these type of services for various reasons as their address.

I am curious about the jurisdiction of the FBI in this case. Elections are run by states. Federal law for elections is mostly campaign finance and some issues of interference with elections and threatening candidates and similar stuff. This all seems like accusations of violations of state law. Also, he says he analyzed the data for swing states, but the request for his data is coming from an FBI office in....Los Angeles. Curious.
There's other categories of respondents: People who lied to Braynard, and people who remembered wrong.

Q: Did you ask for a mail-in ballot?
A: Sure!
Q: Did you get it sent to you?
A: Sure!
Q: Did you complete it properly and send it in on time?
A: Sure!
Q: And you checked it was not registered as a vote?
A: Sure!

Four opportunities to lie. Or "misremember".


There are plenty of disgruntled Trump supporters who are not above shooting people in the streets to support their Trumpy convictions. So lying to a phone survey would be small fry. Nobody would know for sure if they did or did not submit a valid ballot. But it sure helps the Trump storyline if they say they didn't.

Then there are people who simply misremember. Often they are befuddled and bewildered about the whole voting thing in the first place. Perhaps they have confused the 2020 vote for the one in 2018, or even 2016. Or the last local council elections, or whatever. Maybe someone told them they must have done it wrong, even if they did it right. Honestly, some of the stories coming out by people cross-eyedly convinced the socialists are coming to steal their gunz and precious bodily fluids if they so much as whisper Obama's name or say the word "Democrat" without sneering...misremembering is the least of their problems.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:11 AM   #891
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
There's other categories of respondents: People who lied to Braynard, and people who remembered wrong.

<snip>

Then there are people who simply misremember.
Maybe. The numbers he reports are pretty high to account for those explanations. But it is hard to tell without a lot more information.

We don't even know if he was calling the right people. Before the election I was getting a ton of texts from political organizations. Referring to me by name. Except, the wrong name. Three different wrong names.

I looked up data on my phone number. I have had the same number for about 13 years. The first names they were using in the text were the names of people who had my phone number 15-25 years ago.

There are all kinds of errors Braynard may have made. Or that the state may have made. But the information provided is not easily explained by...anything. So something somewhere is wrong for some reason that we don't have enough data to determine. We will see how this goes.
__________________
I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 03:13 AM   #892
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 8,023
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
Maybe. The numbers he reports are pretty high to account for those explanations. But it is hard to tell without a lot more information.

We don't even know if he was calling the right people. Before the election I was getting a ton of texts from political organizations. Referring to me by name. Except, the wrong name. Three different wrong names.

I looked up data on my phone number. I have had the same number for about 13 years. The first names they were using in the text were the names of people who had my phone number 15-25 years ago.

There are all kinds of errors Braynard may have made. Or that the state may have made. But the information provided is not easily explained by...anything. So something somewhere is wrong for some reason that we don't have enough data to determine. We will see how this goes.
Or, like Donny, they could have just made **** up.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 03:16 AM   #893
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,850
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzBJJ1sxtEA

Chris Krebs, a lifelong Republican, was put in charge of the agency handling election security by President Trump two years ago. When Krebs said the 2020 election was the country's most secure ever, Mr. Trump fired him.

Now, Krebs speaks to Scott Pelley.
__________________
"Silence is Donald Trump's concession speech" - Lawrence O'Donnell.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:10 AM   #894
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,801
I always make it a point to lie to pest callers like that because I don't want to be party to building up data about me, I wonder how many others have that policy.

If people are going to pester me with cold calls then the least I can do for them is muck up their data.

"Can I confirm your age?"

"87"
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:34 AM   #895
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,801
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
Maybe. The numbers he reports are pretty high to account for those explanations. But it is hard to tell without a lot more information.

We don't even know if he was calling the right people. Before the election I was getting a ton of texts from political organizations. Referring to me by name. Except, the wrong name. Three different wrong names.

I looked up data on my phone number. I have had the same number for about 13 years. The first names they were using in the text were the names of people who had my phone number 15-25 years ago.

There are all kinds of errors Braynard may have made. Or that the state may have made. But the information provided is not easily explained by...anything. So something somewhere is wrong for some reason that we don't have enough data to determine. We will see how this goes.
If the FBI have the data now then I expect we will find out in due course. Not sure how quickly the FBI move on anything.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:23 AM   #896
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 21,876
The FBI has an election fraud online tip-line for election fraud. Some piece of Trumptrash must have called it, lied and then reported to a pro-Trump, anti-American "news" outlet that the FBI was investigating election fraud.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:06 AM   #897
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: ON Canada
Posts: 3,059
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
So, is it safe to assume you are certain that all claims of fraud will be proven to be bogus??
The expert to trust on this subject is Chris Krebs, who ran CISA. That's my source. Who is yours?

Krebs says it was a secure election.

It's easy to conclude Trump is a lying jackass who is trying to steal the election. Fortunately the smart people who matter, including judges and most government officials, aren't buying it.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde

Last edited by eerok; Today at 07:08 AM.
eerok is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:19 AM   #898
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 31,706
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
So, is it safe to assume you are certain that all claims of fraud will be proven to be bogus??
So far, all claims that have been advanced have failed to meet the burden of proof, which quite rightly requires with the people making the claim to substantiate it rather than anyone not making the claim to disprove it. Given the total absence of evidence for these claims, together with the well documented lies of all those advancing them that they have ample evidence to offer when in fact they have negligible evidence in both quality and quantity, it's perfectly reasonable to form a provisional conclusion that the election result was in fact a reasonable reflection of the intentions of the voters. It's also reasonable to work on the assumption that no further proof will be forthcoming for claims that have already been brought to court and dismissed for lack of evidence.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:26 AM   #899
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 21,876
Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
So, is it safe to assume you are certain that all claims of fraud will be proven to be bogus??
Claims of fraud don't have to be proven to be bogus. The person claiming fraud has to prove the fraud. The votes were certified. Biden will be president on January 20th at noon.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:29 AM   #900
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 23,823
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I think Braynard is reporting some interesting data. What you are asking for is what Braynard did. They got the publicly available state data for voters that shows whether they requested an absentee ballot and whether they voted. They called some of those voters that were marked as being sent an absentee ballot but who were not marked as voted. A large number said that they had not requested an absentee ballot. Of those who said they did get a ballot, many said that they had returned it, even though their vote had not been counted according to state records. He says he has recordings of the calls.
Very good, then. Someone should look into that, because if what he is saying is true, something's fishy.

My guess is that what's fishy is his data, but that's only a guess.

Even if you don't want to spend resources of the government on this, surely this is the thing an investigative journalist could have a peek at and share their results, assuming investigative journalists are still a thing.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:40 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.