Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election - Page 11

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 03:26 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

I suppose those elections could be invalid as well. I don't think though that there is any rule that if you claim one election is fraudulent you have to claim all are. Many of the fraud claims seem to be isolated to particular counties, so I'm not sure that they would apply to every county.

I think there's a bit of the excluded middle argument here. It's probably reasonable to claim that there is no such thing as a perfectly clean election, because there are always people prepared to do illegal things and some of them will sometimes get away with it. I would be very surprised if a complete investigation of every aspect of the 2020 election didn't uncover any voter fraud whatsoever. The question is, to what extent did that fraud influence the outcome of the election? If there are isolated cases of a few dozen votes being falsified in places that were won by several tens of thousands, the answer would be "none at all". Fraud claims isolated to particular counties would therefore have to pass an incredibly stringent test before being even considered for the sort of remedies Trump is calling for.

Dave

Squeegee Beckenheim · 10th November 2020, 03:28 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

I suppose those elections could be invalid as well.

They're all voted for on the same piece of paper. Why would invalidating the vote for president not also invalidate the other votes on that piece of paper?

Quote:

I'm only aware of one claim of fraud that is restricted to the president, the supposedly abnormal number of ballots that are blank down ballot. To say more one would need to know more about the specifics.

That doesn't even vaguely begin to answer the question. In fact, it just emphasises the question - if Democrats were rigging the election, why would they only rig the presidential election and leave themselves in a minority in the Senate?

Firestone · 10th November 2020, 03:30 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

They're all voted for on the same piece of paper. Why would invalidating the vote for president not also invalidate the other votes on that piece of paper?

That doesn't even vaguely begin to answer the question. In fact, it just emphasises the question - if Democrats were rigging the election, why would they only rig the presidential election and leave themselves in a minority in the Senate?

Let alone that there was nothing abnormal with "the supposedly abnormal number of ballots that are blank down ballot".

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 03:32 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

I'm only aware of one claim of fraud that is restricted to the president, the supposedly abnormal number of ballots that are blank down ballot.

That's one that's amenable to a perfectly innocent explanation, of course; it simply requires that an unusually large number of otherwise apolitical people utterly despise President Trump and care about nothing but voting him out of office. I suppose someone who's been living in a cave in Mongolia for the last four years might consider that implausible, but other than that there's really only Trump himself.

Dave

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 03:32 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

I think there's a bit of the excluded middle argument here. It's probably reasonable to claim that there is no such thing as a perfectly clean election, because there are always people prepared to do illegal things and some of them will sometimes get away with it. I would be very surprised if a complete investigation of every aspect of the 2020 election didn't uncover any voter fraud whatsoever.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

The question is, to what extent did that fraud influence the outcome of the election? If there are isolated cases of a few dozen votes being falsified in places that were won by several tens of thousands, the answer would be "none at all". Fraud claims isolated to particular counties would therefore have to pass an incredibly stringent test before being even considered for the sort of remedies Trump is calling for.

Agreed.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 10th November 2020, 03:33 AM

Fox News cut away from a White House press briefing Kayleigh McEnany was giving when she started talking about voter fraud

When Trump has lost Fox News, then there is no question that Trump has lost.

Olmstead · 10th November 2020, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

You don't remember recounts? What are recounts except a blind search for irregularities? Also, I vaguely remember some kind of enquiry claiming Trump colluded with some foreign country to steal the election.

Every candidate has the right to a recount, as does Trump, and if that were all that was happening, no one would have any objections. Baseless allegations of fraud are completely different and shouldn't be allowed.

Did the enquiry about the collusion happen because of the election result or because someone had found an irregularity?

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 03:36 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

That's one that's amenable to a perfectly innocent explanation, of course; it simply requires that an unusually large number of otherwise apolitical people utterly despise President Trump and care about nothing but voting him out of office. I suppose someone who's been living in a cave in Mongolia for the last four years might consider that implausible, but other than that there's really only Trump himself.

Dave

Sure, this is another thing that indicates a line of investigation that I assume Trump will attempt to follow. The fact that one can construct an innocent explanation for it is terrific, but that doesn't mean it is in fact innocent. We just have to wait and see what turns up. Beyond that, I don't know what to say.

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

That doesn't even vaguely begin to answer the question. In fact, it just emphasises the question - if Democrats were rigging the election, why would they only rig the presidential election and leave themselves in a minority in the Senate?

It depends how they are rigging them and who is rigging them if indeed anybody is rigging them. If I were dumb enough to start speculating I'll be shot down for speculating. I've danced that pointless dance on this forum too many times before.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 10th November 2020, 03:45 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

It depends how they are rigging them and who is rigging them if indeed anybody is rigging them.

The latter is probably where you should focus.

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 03:48 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

The latter is probably where you should focus.

That's what an investigation, if it happens, would presumably find out. Kennedy was able to prevent a full investigation in 1960, I fully expect the same thing to happen this time.

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 03:55 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

The fact that one can construct an innocent explanation for it is terrific, but that doesn't mean it is in fact innocent.

Again, this is reversing the burden of proof. If the only evidence presented of fraud is something that has, not just an innocent explanation, but an innocent explanation that accords perfectly with everything we know about the US electorate's attitude to President Trump, then it isn't even evidence of fraud. It certainly doesn't justify the expenditure of a huge amount of public money on, and the erasure of public confidence by, a massive fishing expedition. In effect, it's merely Trump claiming that he could not conceivably have lost a fair election therefore any election he loses must be unfair. Giving in to that sort of logic endangers democracy.

Dave

Childlike Empress · 10th November 2020, 03:57 AM

I've heard a podcast where Kevin Barrett interviewed a guy called Jonathan Simon who claims that the whole voting system is rigged for the Republicans and up to 10 millions votes were stolen for them. Yes, that Kevin Barrett, hardcore 9/11 truther that everybody who ever heard his name on this forum likely hates. I happen to like him a lot, but I was against the premise when I clicked that link. If any voting fraud, I think it happened against Trump this time.

But what I found out is what I knew since 2000, that the voting mechanisms in the US are just a joke. And that Lawrence Lessig, who ran for president in 2016 or 2012, can't remember right now, was right with his "We will first fix the system, and then vote again" message. This just can't be taken serious anymore.

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 03:59 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

You don't remember recounts? What are recounts except a blind search for irregularities?

Your fallacy is: Equivocation. We're talking about allegations of fraud, which is a subset of "irregularities". Recounts are a very coarse simple check against irregularities, primarily errors in the count. What they are not is a post hoc revision of the rules of the election to exclude votes that were properly counted in accordance with the ab initio rules, which is effectively what Trump is demanding. A simple recount will simply yield the result, "We counted these votes about right," not "We verified that all these votes were placed in accordance with applicable law," and certainly not "We adjusted the count to make sure the candidate who threw the loudest tantrum won."

Dave

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 04:01 AM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

I've heard a podcast where Kevin Barrett interviewed a guy called Jonathan Simon who claims that the whole voting system is rigged for the Republicans and up to 10 millions votes were stolen for them. Yes, that Kevin Barrett, hardcore 9/11 truther that everybody who ever heard his name on this forum likely hates. I happen to like him a lot, but I was against the premise when I clicked that link.

Which is no less of a "some guy said this" than any of the Trump campaign's claims.

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

If any voting fraud, I think it happened against Trump this time.

Yes, dear.

Dave

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 04:04 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Again, this is reversing the burden of proof. If the only evidence presented of fraud is something that has, not just an innocent explanation, but an innocent explanation that accords perfectly with everything we know about the US electorate's attitude to President Trump, then it isn't even evidence of fraud.

One can frequently come up with innocent explanations for things that are none the less evidence of crimes. You then investigate and maybe find out if the situation can be clarified. There is no burden of proof here, since I don't think anybody here is arguing that fraud of a sufficient scale to matter definitely did happen. Trump would obviously have a burden of proof if this makes it anywhere near a court.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

It certainly doesn't justify the expenditure of a huge amount of public money on, and the erasure of public confidence by, a massive fishing expedition.

If there isn't an investigation, it will be seen as a cover up. The way to restore confidence is to have an investigation. The cost of it will be trivial in the grand scheme of things.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

In effect, it's merely Trump claiming that he could not conceivably have lost a fair election therefore any election he loses must be unfair. Giving in to that sort of logic endangers democracy.

Trump says a lot of bombastic stuff. If there isn't an investigation, it will be seen as a cover up.

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 04:09 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Your fallacy is: Equivocation. We're talking about allegations of fraud, which is a subset of "irregularities". Recounts are a very coarse simple check against irregularities, primarily errors in the count. What they are not is a post hoc revision of the rules of the election to exclude votes that were properly counted in accordance with the ab initio rules, which is effectively what Trump is demanding.

If the votes were proper, then they won't be discarded. No? Or at least it would be something we could argue over. Hypothetically if a bunch of dead people voted (presumably not enough to make a difference), then they should be discarded, no?

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

A simple recount will simply yield the result, "We counted these votes about right," not "We verified that all these votes were placed in accordance with applicable law," and certainly not "We adjusted the count to make sure the candidate who threw the loudest tantrum won."

If that is the case, then he will not be successful. If the count changes bigly, then maybe this goes somewhere. It's hard to know without a count.

Vixen · 10th November 2020, 04:10 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

The head of the DoJ's election crimes department has resigned after Barr issued a memo directing the department to investigate allegations of fraud

Donald Trump Junior has been pounding away on his kiddie plastic toy 'lap top' and making all sorts of playground noises at Pilger (the guy who resigned shortly afer Barr put out his memo).

Quote:

Richard Pilger resigned after Attorney General William Barr authorized federal prosecutors across the U.S. to pursue 'substantial allegations' of voting irregularities before the 2020 presidential election is certified, despite little evidence of fraud.

Pilger, director of the Election Crimes Branch of the Department of Justice since 2010, stepped down within hours of Barr's announcement, in an email he sent to colleagues that was obtained by The New York Times.

And President Donald Trump's son, Don Jr, was quick to criticize Pilger.

He wrote: 'Wait. Seriously? Isn’t this the guy who was involved with the IRS and Lois Lerner in targeting conservatives and the Tea Party? Maybe that’s why he hasn’t done s**t at DOJ. #deepstate' https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-fraud.html

Quite. 'And your daddy smells of poo,' would be Pilger Jnr's response.

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

If there isn't an investigation, it will be seen as a cover up.

That's a classic conspiracy theorist wedge argument. If there's an investigation that finds no significant wrongdoing, that also will be seen as a cover up.

Dave

Childlike Empress · 10th November 2020, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Which is no less of a "some guy said this" than any of the Trump campaign's claims.

The message is "Fix the system, we can't even figure out which way the rigging is done anymore", Dave.

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

That's a classic conspiracy theorist wedge argument. If there's an investigation that finds no significant wrongdoing, that also will be seen as a cover up.

Dave

By some people, sure but that isn't any reason to help them by implementing a coverup of what might be nothing.

Childlike Empress · 10th November 2020, 04:24 AM

Here in Germany we have a completely trustworthy election system. I just have to go across the street (I live in the center of a large city, but even in some village the voting booth will not be far and you won't have to wait). Voting means pen and paper. They asked us to bring our own pen in the local elections last month because of "corona". I frequently meet the people that count my vote on the street. It is a solid system you don't seem to have.

Problem is that the choice we have is among vassals. But that is for another thread.

Childlike Empress · 10th November 2020, 04:37 AM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

But what I found out is what I knew since 2000, that the voting mechanisms in the US are just a joke. And that Lawrence Lessig, who ran for president in 2016 or 2012, can't remember right now, was right with his "We will first fix the system, and then vote again" message. This just can't be taken serious anymore.

It was in 2016.

Nessie · 10th November 2020, 04:44 AM

I say investigate, but include states where Trump won and investigate the overall state of fraud and if it could have affected not just this but other elections. Use it as base to check if the entire Presidential voting system is secure and fair.

Include observers in the investigation, this from Sky News UK;

https://news.sky.com/story/us-electi...ation-12128927

"Election officials from both political parties have publicly stated that voting went well. International observers also confirmed there were no serious irregularities.

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 04:44 AM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Here in Germany we have a completely trustworthy election system.

Which, nevertheless, manages to violate Benford's Law, as we saw upthread.

Dave

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 04:47 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

By some people, sure but that isn't any reason to help them by implementing a coverup of what might be nothing.

There are good reasons why there's a burden of proof before any investigation is mandated; again, some of these are illustrated by the experience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. When a conspiracy theorist says "What's the harm in starting an investigation, even if there isn't any compelling evidence," they're generally preparing the way for the next step which is "The fact that you agreed to an investigation means there must have been some compelling evidence, so why aren't you publishing it?" I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Trump would resort to such tactics.

Dave

Dave Rogers · 10th November 2020, 04:48 AM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

The message is "Fix the system, we can't even figure out which way the rigging is done anymore", Dave.

Or, to quote a leading 9/11 conspiracy theorist, "It is because we know nothing that we demand answers."

Dave

Nessie · 10th November 2020, 04:58 AM

The vote count as of what I can find for now is

Biden - 76,343,332
Trump - 71,444,567

The difference being 4,898,765, or the same population as Alabama, or 3.3% of the entire vote. For fraud to have made a genuine difference, it would need to be on an astronomical scale.

Childlike Empress · 10th November 2020, 04:58 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

There are good reasons why there's a burden of proof before any investigation is mandated; again, some of these are illustrated by the experience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. When a conspiracy theorist says "What's the harm in starting an investigation, even if there isn't any compelling evidence," they're generally preparing the way for the next step which is "The fact that you agreed to an investigation means there must have been some compelling evidence, so why aren't you publishing it?" I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Trump would resort to such tactics.

Dave

Which means you put yourself in a position to define what a "conspiracy theorist" is, a position you are not in even by basic logic, Dave.

Archie Gemmill Goal · 10th November 2020, 05:00 AM

Are we supposed to believe that widescale fraud is relatively straightforward to carry out in the US elections and yet known fraudster and criminal Donald Trump didn't engage in it but Biden did?

Childlike Empress · 10th November 2020, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal

Are we supposed to believe that widescale fraud is relatively straightforward to carry out in the US elections and yet known fraudster and criminal Donald Trump didn't engage in it but Biden did?

You (the "we" you imply doesn't exist) aren't supposed to believe anything.

The Don · 10th November 2020, 05:06 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

The vote count as of what I can find for now is

Biden - 76,343,332
Trump - 71,444,567

The difference being 4,898,765, or the same population as Alabama, or 3.3% of the entire vote. For fraud to have made a genuine difference, it would need to be on an astronomical scale.

That's the overall popular vote. In swing states the difference is a few thousand or tens of thousands of votes.

Then again, in 2016 President Trump claimed that millions of votes were cast illegally. He provided no supporting evidence for it, and the government's own investigation found no evidence but he still insists that once illegally cast votes were stripped out, he won the popular vote handsomely.

Yes, there will be isolated cases of voter fraud and/or voter error but they will be individual cases. There will be nothing within orders of magnitude of the thousands of votes required to swing the closest swing state much less the millions it would take to change the popular vote.

That doesn't stop the GOP promoting it as a credible problem. Whether they genuinely believe that the Democrats are engaging in voter fraud on a vast scale or they are cynically promoting it is a good question - but 40%+ of the US population currently believe that voter fraud stole the election and literally no evidence will convince them otherwise (which is handy because literally no evidence convinced them in the first place

)

Archie Gemmill Goal · 10th November 2020, 05:06 AM

The Benford's Law stuff is quite fun but I can't for the life of me see why it would apply to election results.

Let's say you have elections between 2 candidates in 1000 counties of 10,000 in population (I don't know what the US divisions are based on but I presume there is some attempt to make them uniform in size?) then surely the most common results are going to be in the 3, 4, 5 and 6 thousands? it's going to be a bell curve around the mean which is going to be somewhere around 5000 if the two candidates are close.

It seems for Benfords to apply you would need huge variation in voting population size and vote splits and I don't see how that occurs in many elections.

shuttlt · 10th November 2020, 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

There are good reasons why there's a burden of proof before any investigation is mandated; again, some of these are illustrated by the experience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. When a conspiracy theorist says "What's the harm in starting an investigation, even if there isn't any compelling evidence," they're generally preparing the way for the next step which is "The fact that you agreed to an investigation means there must have been some compelling evidence, so why aren't you publishing it?" I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Trump would resort to such tactics.

Dave

Two answers here:
1. A "conspiracy theory" that only a handful of insignificant loons believe may not be worth investigate, where an identically false idea believed by half the country might be worth investigating.

2. As I keep saying, I believe a similar situation applied in 1960. Nixon had to conduct his own investigation first before an official one was begun, unfortunately for him he ran out of time and it had to be handed over to the new administration to complete and disappeared into the weeds. The "irregularity" there was of the sort of scale Trump would need to find here. An investigation was allowed in 1960 on less evidence than we have now, I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed today.

wareyin · 10th November 2020, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by johnny karate

One of our resident conspiracy theorists hilariously thought it would be a good idea to mention “evidence” gathered by Project Veritas.

Well, this is how that’s going.

"This content is not available to you"

SuburbanTurkey · 10th November 2020, 05:44 AM

Interesting to point out that the same allegedly fraudulent election that secured a Biden win also saw minor gains for Republicans in the House and, more importantly, put them on track to maintain majority power in the Senate.

The "stop the steal" narrative would make much more sense if the Democrats were on track for a total sweep as predicted by the pollsters, but seems a bit muddy when you consider that the election was a mixed result that included some significant victories for Republicans.

bonzombiekitty · 10th November 2020, 05:46 AM

Originally Posted by wareyin

"This content is not available to you"

Just reload the page. Twitter does that a lot.

wareyin · 10th November 2020, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Who is claiming this? Massive voter fraud was proved in 1960 with 1960s technology.

It was proved? I thought you claimed that Kennedy was able to suppress the investigation?

Oh, right, mere accusations against your political enemy are taken as proof, if you are a skeptic.

No Other · 10th November 2020, 05:52 AM

Originally Posted by xjx388

Suitability for the task.

It has a magnitude of numbers; the universe is defined, it is a natural data set (not human assigned), a large spread of numbers. What else would you like?

SuburbanTurkey · 10th November 2020, 05:53 AM

Re: Rod Blagojevich's "expertise" on the matter of vote rigging.

Blago was never convicted, nor even accused, of any voting rigging or other illegal electioneering. He has no first hand experience with such schemes.

He was convicted of corruption surrounding his attempts to solicit bribes in exchange for him using his executive power as Governor, which has nothing to do with the election process itself. Given how ineptly run and easily detected this scheme was, there's strong evidence that Blago is not a good authority on the matter of running successful clandestine plots.

He has no special insight into such matters beyond the what any other elected official might.

10th November 2020, 03:26 AM	#401
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by shuttlt I suppose those elections could be invalid as well. I don't think though that there is any rule that if you claim one election is fraudulent you have to claim all are. Many of the fraud claims seem to be isolated to particular counties, so I'm not sure that they would apply to every county. I think there's a bit of the excluded middle argument here. It's probably reasonable to claim that there is no such thing as a perfectly clean election, because there are always people prepared to do illegal things and some of them will sometimes get away with it. I would be very surprised if a complete investigation of every aspect of the 2020 election didn't uncover any voter fraud whatsoever. The question is, to what extent did that fraud influence the outcome of the election? If there are isolated cases of a few dozen votes being falsified in places that were won by several tens of thousands, the answer would be "none at all". Fraud claims isolated to particular counties would therefore have to pass an incredibly stringent test before being even considered for the sort of remedies Trump is calling for. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 03:28 AM	#402
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,009	Originally Posted by shuttlt I suppose those elections could be invalid as well. They're all voted for on the same piece of paper. Why would invalidating the vote for president not also invalidate the other votes on that piece of paper? Quote: I'm only aware of one claim of fraud that is restricted to the president, the supposedly abnormal number of ballots that are blank down ballot. To say more one would need to know more about the specifics. That doesn't even vaguely begin to answer the question. In fact, it just emphasises the question - if Democrats were rigging the election, why would they only rig the presidential election and leave themselves in a minority in the Senate?
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

10th November 2020, 03:30 AM	#403
Firestone Proud Award Award recipient Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,955	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim They're all voted for on the same piece of paper. Why would invalidating the vote for president not also invalidate the other votes on that piece of paper? That doesn't even vaguely begin to answer the question. In fact, it just emphasises the question - if Democrats were rigging the election, why would they only rig the presidential election and leave themselves in a minority in the Senate? Let alone that there was nothing abnormal with "the supposedly abnormal number of ballots that are blank down ballot".
	__________________ The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan

10th November 2020, 03:32 AM	#404
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by shuttlt I'm only aware of one claim of fraud that is restricted to the president, the supposedly abnormal number of ballots that are blank down ballot. That's one that's amenable to a perfectly innocent explanation, of course; it simply requires that an unusually large number of otherwise apolitical people utterly despise President Trump and care about nothing but voting him out of office. I suppose someone who's been living in a cave in Mongolia for the last four years might consider that implausible, but other than that there's really only Trump himself. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 03:32 AM	#405
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers I think there's a bit of the excluded middle argument here. It's probably reasonable to claim that there is no such thing as a perfectly clean election, because there are always people prepared to do illegal things and some of them will sometimes get away with it. I would be very surprised if a complete investigation of every aspect of the 2020 election didn't uncover any voter fraud whatsoever. Agreed. Originally Posted by Dave Rogers The question is, to what extent did that fraud influence the outcome of the election? If there are isolated cases of a few dozen votes being falsified in places that were won by several tens of thousands, the answer would be "none at all". Fraud claims isolated to particular counties would therefore have to pass an incredibly stringent test before being even considered for the sort of remedies Trump is calling for. Agreed.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 03:33 AM	#406
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,009	Fox News cut away from a White House press briefing Kayleigh McEnany was giving when she started talking about voter fraud When Trump has lost Fox News, then there is no question that Trump has lost.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

10th November 2020, 03:35 AM	#407
Olmstead Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 345	Originally Posted by shuttlt You don't remember recounts? What are recounts except a blind search for irregularities? Also, I vaguely remember some kind of enquiry claiming Trump colluded with some foreign country to steal the election. Every candidate has the right to a recount, as does Trump, and if that were all that was happening, no one would have any objections. Baseless allegations of fraud are completely different and shouldn't be allowed. Did the enquiry about the collusion happen because of the election result or because someone had found an irregularity?
Olmstead Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 345

10th November 2020, 03:36 AM	#408
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers That's one that's amenable to a perfectly innocent explanation, of course; it simply requires that an unusually large number of otherwise apolitical people utterly despise President Trump and care about nothing but voting him out of office. I suppose someone who's been living in a cave in Mongolia for the last four years might consider that implausible, but other than that there's really only Trump himself. Dave Sure, this is another thing that indicates a line of investigation that I assume Trump will attempt to follow. The fact that one can construct an innocent explanation for it is terrific, but that doesn't mean it is in fact innocent. We just have to wait and see what turns up. Beyond that, I don't know what to say.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 03:42 AM	#409
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim That doesn't even vaguely begin to answer the question. In fact, it just emphasises the question - if Democrats were rigging the election, why would they only rig the presidential election and leave themselves in a minority in the Senate? It depends how they are rigging them and who is rigging them if indeed anybody is rigging them. If I were dumb enough to start speculating I'll be shot down for speculating. I've danced that pointless dance on this forum too many times before.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 03:45 AM	#410
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,009	Originally Posted by shuttlt It depends how they are rigging them and who is rigging them if indeed anybody is rigging them. The latter is probably where you should focus.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

10th November 2020, 03:48 AM	#411
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim The latter is probably where you should focus. That's what an investigation, if it happens, would presumably find out. Kennedy was able to prevent a full investigation in 1960, I fully expect the same thing to happen this time.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 03:55 AM	#412
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by shuttlt The fact that one can construct an innocent explanation for it is terrific, but that doesn't mean it is in fact innocent. Again, this is reversing the burden of proof. If the only evidence presented of fraud is something that has, not just an innocent explanation, but an innocent explanation that accords perfectly with everything we know about the US electorate's attitude to President Trump, then it isn't even evidence of fraud. It certainly doesn't justify the expenditure of a huge amount of public money on, and the erasure of public confidence by, a massive fishing expedition. In effect, it's merely Trump claiming that he could not conceivably have lost a fair election therefore any election he loses must be unfair. Giving in to that sort of logic endangers democracy. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 03:57 AM	#413
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 18,859	I've heard a podcast where Kevin Barrett interviewed a guy called Jonathan Simon who claims that the whole voting system is rigged for the Republicans and up to 10 millions votes were stolen for them. Yes, that Kevin Barrett, hardcore 9/11 truther that everybody who ever heard his name on this forum likely hates. I happen to like him a lot, but I was against the premise when I clicked that link. If any voting fraud, I think it happened against Trump this time. But what I found out is what I knew since 2000, that the voting mechanisms in the US are just a joke. And that Lawrence Lessig, who ran for president in 2016 or 2012, can't remember right now, was right with his "We will first fix the system, and then vote again" message. This just can't be taken serious anymore.
	__________________ I studied matter for all of my life just to find that there is no such thing - Hans-Peter Dürr Last edited by Childlike Empress; 10th November 2020 at 04:01 AM.

10th November 2020, 03:59 AM	#414
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by shuttlt You don't remember recounts? What are recounts except a blind search for irregularities? Your fallacy is: Equivocation. We're talking about allegations of fraud, which is a subset of "irregularities". Recounts are a very coarse simple check against irregularities, primarily errors in the count. What they are not is a post hoc revision of the rules of the election to exclude votes that were properly counted in accordance with the ab initio rules, which is effectively what Trump is demanding. A simple recount will simply yield the result, "We counted these votes about right," not "We verified that all these votes were placed in accordance with applicable law," and certainly not "We adjusted the count to make sure the candidate who threw the loudest tantrum won." Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 04:01 AM	#415
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress I've heard a podcast where Kevin Barrett interviewed a guy called Jonathan Simon who claims that the whole voting system is rigged for the Republicans and up to 10 millions votes were stolen for them. Yes, that Kevin Barrett, hardcore 9/11 truther that everybody who ever heard his name on this forum likely hates. I happen to like him a lot, but I was against the premise when I clicked that link. Which is no less of a "some guy said this" than any of the Trump campaign's claims. Originally Posted by Childlike Empress If any voting fraud, I think it happened against Trump this time. Yes, dear. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 04:04 AM	#416
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers Again, this is reversing the burden of proof. If the only evidence presented of fraud is something that has, not just an innocent explanation, but an innocent explanation that accords perfectly with everything we know about the US electorate's attitude to President Trump, then it isn't even evidence of fraud. One can frequently come up with innocent explanations for things that are none the less evidence of crimes. You then investigate and maybe find out if the situation can be clarified. There is no burden of proof here, since I don't think anybody here is arguing that fraud of a sufficient scale to matter definitely did happen. Trump would obviously have a burden of proof if this makes it anywhere near a court. Originally Posted by Dave Rogers It certainly doesn't justify the expenditure of a huge amount of public money on, and the erasure of public confidence by, a massive fishing expedition. If there isn't an investigation, it will be seen as a cover up. The way to restore confidence is to have an investigation. The cost of it will be trivial in the grand scheme of things. Originally Posted by Dave Rogers In effect, it's merely Trump claiming that he could not conceivably have lost a fair election therefore any election he loses must be unfair. Giving in to that sort of logic endangers democracy. Trump says a lot of bombastic stuff. If there isn't an investigation, it will be seen as a cover up.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 04:09 AM	#417
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers Your fallacy is: Equivocation. We're talking about allegations of fraud, which is a subset of "irregularities". Recounts are a very coarse simple check against irregularities, primarily errors in the count. What they are not is a post hoc revision of the rules of the election to exclude votes that were properly counted in accordance with the ab initio rules, which is effectively what Trump is demanding. If the votes were proper, then they won't be discarded. No? Or at least it would be something we could argue over. Hypothetically if a bunch of dead people voted (presumably not enough to make a difference), then they should be discarded, no? Originally Posted by Dave Rogers A simple recount will simply yield the result, "We counted these votes about right," not "We verified that all these votes were placed in accordance with applicable law," and certainly not "We adjusted the count to make sure the candidate who threw the loudest tantrum won." If that is the case, then he will not be successful. If the count changes bigly, then maybe this goes somewhere. It's hard to know without a count.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 04:10 AM	#418
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Suomi Posts: 20,268	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim The head of the DoJ's election crimes department has resigned after Barr issued a memo directing the department to investigate allegations of fraud Donald Trump Junior has been pounding away on his kiddie plastic toy 'lap top' and making all sorts of playground noises at Pilger (the guy who resigned shortly afer Barr put out his memo). Quote: Richard Pilger resigned after Attorney General William Barr authorized federal prosecutors across the U.S. to pursue 'substantial allegations' of voting irregularities before the 2020 presidential election is certified, despite little evidence of fraud. Pilger, director of the Election Crimes Branch of the Department of Justice since 2010, stepped down within hours of Barr's announcement, in an email he sent to colleagues that was obtained by The New York Times. And President Donald Trump's son, Don Jr, was quick to criticize Pilger. He wrote: 'Wait. Seriously? Isn’t this the guy who was involved with the IRS and Lois Lerner in targeting conservatives and the Tea Party? Maybe that’s why he hasn’t done s**t at DOJ. #deepstate' https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-fraud.html Quite. 'And your daddy smells of poo,' would be Pilger Jnr's response.
	__________________ Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder, vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

10th November 2020, 04:12 AM	#419
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by shuttlt If there isn't an investigation, it will be seen as a cover up. That's a classic conspiracy theorist wedge argument. If there's an investigation that finds no significant wrongdoing, that also will be seen as a cover up. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 04:15 AM	#420
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 18,859	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers Which is no less of a "some guy said this" than any of the Trump campaign's claims. The message is "Fix the system, we can't even figure out which way the rigging is done anymore", Dave.
	__________________ I studied matter for all of my life just to find that there is no such thing - Hans-Peter Dürr

10th November 2020, 04:21 AM	#421
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers That's a classic conspiracy theorist wedge argument. If there's an investigation that finds no significant wrongdoing, that also will be seen as a cover up. Dave By some people, sure but that isn't any reason to help them by implementing a coverup of what might be nothing.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 04:24 AM	#422
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 18,859	Here in Germany we have a completely trustworthy election system. I just have to go across the street (I live in the center of a large city, but even in some village the voting booth will not be far and you won't have to wait). Voting means pen and paper. They asked us to bring our own pen in the local elections last month because of "corona". I frequently meet the people that count my vote on the street. It is a solid system you don't seem to have. Problem is that the choice we have is among vassals. But that is for another thread.
	__________________ I studied matter for all of my life just to find that there is no such thing - Hans-Peter Dürr

10th November 2020, 04:37 AM	#423
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 18,859	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress But what I found out is what I knew since 2000, that the voting mechanisms in the US are just a joke. And that Lawrence Lessig, who ran for president in 2016 or 2012, can't remember right now, was right with his "We will first fix the system, and then vote again" message. This just can't be taken serious anymore. It was in 2016.
	__________________ I studied matter for all of my life just to find that there is no such thing - Hans-Peter Dürr

10th November 2020, 04:44 AM	#424
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 12,917	I say investigate, but include states where Trump won and investigate the overall state of fraud and if it could have affected not just this but other elections. Use it as base to check if the entire Presidential voting system is secure and fair. Include observers in the investigation, this from Sky News UK; https://news.sky.com/story/us-electi...ation-12128927 "Election officials from both political parties have publicly stated that voting went well. International observers also confirmed there were no serious irregularities.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

10th November 2020, 04:44 AM	#425
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress Here in Germany we have a completely trustworthy election system. Which, nevertheless, manages to violate Benford's Law, as we saw upthread. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 04:47 AM	#426
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by shuttlt By some people, sure but that isn't any reason to help them by implementing a coverup of what might be nothing. There are good reasons why there's a burden of proof before any investigation is mandated; again, some of these are illustrated by the experience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. When a conspiracy theorist says "What's the harm in starting an investigation, even if there isn't any compelling evidence," they're generally preparing the way for the next step which is "The fact that you agreed to an investigation means there must have been some compelling evidence, so why aren't you publishing it?" I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Trump would resort to such tactics. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 04:48 AM	#427
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,254	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress The message is "Fix the system, we can't even figure out which way the rigging is done anymore", Dave. Or, to quote a leading 9/11 conspiracy theorist, "It is because we know nothing that we demand answers." Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

10th November 2020, 04:58 AM	#428
Nessie Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 12,917	The vote count as of what I can find for now is Biden - 76,343,332 Trump - 71,444,567 The difference being 4,898,765, or the same population as Alabama, or 3.3% of the entire vote. For fraud to have made a genuine difference, it would need to be on an astronomical scale.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

10th November 2020, 04:58 AM	#429
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 18,859	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers There are good reasons why there's a burden of proof before any investigation is mandated; again, some of these are illustrated by the experience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. When a conspiracy theorist says "What's the harm in starting an investigation, even if there isn't any compelling evidence," they're generally preparing the way for the next step which is "The fact that you agreed to an investigation means there must have been some compelling evidence, so why aren't you publishing it?" I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Trump would resort to such tactics. Dave Which means you put yourself in a position to define what a "conspiracy theorist" is, a position you are not in even by basic logic, Dave.
	__________________ I studied matter for all of my life just to find that there is no such thing - Hans-Peter Dürr

10th November 2020, 05:00 AM	#430
Archie Gemmill Goal Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 7,673	Are we supposed to believe that widescale fraud is relatively straightforward to carry out in the US elections and yet known fraudster and criminal Donald Trump didn't engage in it but Biden did?
	__________________ "I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"

10th November 2020, 05:05 AM	#431
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 18,859	Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal Are we supposed to believe that widescale fraud is relatively straightforward to carry out in the US elections and yet known fraudster and criminal Donald Trump didn't engage in it but Biden did? You (the "we" you imply doesn't exist) aren't supposed to believe anything.
	__________________ I studied matter for all of my life just to find that there is no such thing - Hans-Peter Dürr

10th November 2020, 05:06 AM	#432
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,076	Originally Posted by Nessie The vote count as of what I can find for now is Biden - 76,343,332 Trump - 71,444,567 The difference being 4,898,765, or the same population as Alabama, or 3.3% of the entire vote. For fraud to have made a genuine difference, it would need to be on an astronomical scale. That's the overall popular vote. In swing states the difference is a few thousand or tens of thousands of votes. Then again, in 2016 President Trump claimed that millions of votes were cast illegally. He provided no supporting evidence for it, and the government's own investigation found no evidence but he still insists that once illegally cast votes were stripped out, he won the popular vote handsomely. Yes, there will be isolated cases of voter fraud and/or voter error but they will be individual cases. There will be nothing within orders of magnitude of the thousands of votes required to swing the closest swing state much less the millions it would take to change the popular vote. That doesn't stop the GOP promoting it as a credible problem. Whether they genuinely believe that the Democrats are engaging in voter fraud on a vast scale or they are cynically promoting it is a good question - but 40%+ of the US population currently believe that voter fraud stole the election and literally no evidence will convince them otherwise (which is handy because literally no evidence convinced them in the first place )

10th November 2020, 05:06 AM	#433
Archie Gemmill Goal Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 7,673	The Benford's Law stuff is quite fun but I can't for the life of me see why it would apply to election results. Let's say you have elections between 2 candidates in 1000 counties of 10,000 in population (I don't know what the US divisions are based on but I presume there is some attempt to make them uniform in size?) then surely the most common results are going to be in the 3, 4, 5 and 6 thousands? it's going to be a bell curve around the mean which is going to be somewhere around 5000 if the two candidates are close. It seems for Benfords to apply you would need huge variation in voting population size and vote splits and I don't see how that occurs in many elections.
	__________________ "I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"

10th November 2020, 05:31 AM	#434
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers There are good reasons why there's a burden of proof before any investigation is mandated; again, some of these are illustrated by the experience with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. When a conspiracy theorist says "What's the harm in starting an investigation, even if there isn't any compelling evidence," they're generally preparing the way for the next step which is "The fact that you agreed to an investigation means there must have been some compelling evidence, so why aren't you publishing it?" I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Trump would resort to such tactics. Dave Two answers here: 1. A "conspiracy theory" that only a handful of insignificant loons believe may not be worth investigate, where an identically false idea believed by half the country might be worth investigating. 2. As I keep saying, I believe a similar situation applied in 1960. Nixon had to conduct his own investigation first before an official one was begun, unfortunately for him he ran out of time and it had to be handed over to the new administration to complete and disappeared into the weeds. The "irregularity" there was of the sort of scale Trump would need to find here. An investigation was allowed in 1960 on less evidence than we have now, I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed today.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

10th November 2020, 05:43 AM	#435
wareyin Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 8,177	Originally Posted by johnny karate One of our resident conspiracy theorists hilariously thought it would be a good idea to mention “evidence” gathered by Project Veritas. Well, this is how that’s going. "This content is not available to you"