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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


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.
Closed Thread
Old 10th November 2020, 12:42 PM   #641
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12,911
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
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 )
Got this from twitter, posted a few minutes ago;

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/st...45845671481351

"Biden leads

Arizona: 14,746
Georgia: 12,567
Nevada: 36,274
Pennsylvania: 47,483"

Again, for that to be down to voter fraud would require a fraudulent scheme on a scale previously unknown.

The exceptional claim that is down to voter fraud will, of course, require exceptional evidence.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 12:44 PM   #642
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 12,333
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
That's the mentality that's in charge in the White House.

To pull this off, they'd have to have this mentality in multiple State Legislatures, and a majority of the US Congress.
.....
I agree (and hope) it's unlikely. But I note that it wouldn't require a majority of the Congress, just a majority of the states in the House, and that would be Repub; if it comes to a House decision, each state gets one vote. And is there any doubt that the Repub Senate would elect Trump if it could?
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 12:51 PM   #643
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 17,358
Originally Posted by Olmstead View Post
I don't remember Hillary shouting fraud after the election and the Democrats launching a blind search for irregularities.
Neither do I because it didn't happen. HRC called Trump to concede the election on Nov. 9, 2016. What she did do...because it happened...was claim that there was Russian interference in the election. That is not voter fraud.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:11 PM   #644
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: 32,200
Originally Posted by No Other View Post
Benford's Law does not determine anything; it is a tool to be used as a comparison.
If it doesn't determine anything, there's nothing to compare. And, of course, it can't be used, as you've been claiming, to determine that a set of election results warrant further investigation.

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 offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:14 PM   #645
MinnesotaBrant
Illuminator
 
MinnesotaBrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Starting?
I try to prefilter articles based on where they are coming from and the titles. NBC news makes it easy by highlighting the conservative links in red. I wish that there was a filtering system whereby you could wear glasses that would filter out the conservative posts so that you don't have to see them. But yes, I generally trust that what my prefiltered feed is telling me is true. It seems that when I go googling certain words I sometimes get into trouble with conflicting experts
__________________
Formerly known as MNBrant.

Last edited by MinnesotaBrant; 10th November 2020 at 01:16 PM.
MinnesotaBrant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:15 PM   #646
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,809
When Bayesian Statistics meets Benford's Law

__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:28 PM   #647
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
They don't have to actually exist. They just have to be used as excuses/rationalizations for action. It doesn't appear that there is anything in law or the Constitution that would prevent it.

Mike Pompeo just said he doesn't expect any problems with a transition because the transition will be to Trump's second term. That's the mentality that's in charge.
So what the Constitution says is that electors (quoting from memory) "shall be appointed in the manner prescribed by the state legislature". I don't know if that's the exact wording, but it's close, and the key phrase is "in the manner".

Right wing commentators, the people I was calling crazy, want that to mean that the legislature can just decide to appoint electors however they wish, including now, after the election. That will never fly. The various legislatures have already prescribed the manner in which the electors will be selected and, having so prescribed, they aren't going to be allowed to change the prescription because they don't like the results.

Mike Pompeo yapping is all well and good, and Donald Trump as well, but in reality, they don't have a prayer, at least going that route.

The one exception I noted with the "too close to call" situation would be a case where the legislature prescribed a method (i.e., an election), but if fraud or other issues were encountered that made it genuinely impossible to determine which set of electors ought to have been seated, then the legislature would have some sort of justification for saying that the previously prescribed method had failed, and there is a deadline, therefore we have to prescribe something new. That would have some prayer of passing.

Not that we should just ignore this sort of posturing. It has to be condemned and/or ridiculed, and they have to understand that such a blatant attempt to steal an election could result in some very, very, bad things, along the lines of armed revolution, but it's just a theoretical concept, really. It won't happen.

So, let them yap, and let them try to present evidence that Biden has stolen the election, or people stole it for him. If they could actually produce such evidence, I'm confident the American people would turn on him, but that isn't going to happen either. In the end, there will be a peaceful transition of power, just with more whining than usual. And if Trump doesn't accept that, then there will be even more drama, but Trump won't have significant support outside of talk radio listeners.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:35 PM   #648
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,369
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
So what the Constitution says is that electors (quoting from memory) "shall be appointed in the manner prescribed by the state legislature". I don't know if that's the exact wording, but it's close, and the key phrase is "in the manner".

Right wing commentators, the people I was calling crazy, want that to mean that the legislature can just decide to appoint electors however they wish, including now, after the election. That will never fly. The various legislatures have already prescribed the manner in which the electors will be selected and, having so prescribed, they aren't going to be allowed to change the prescription because they don't like the results.
Meh. One word: SCOTUS.

My observation as a Canadian is that the US Constitution gets interpreted once in awhile by a Sooper Secret (TM) Magic Decoder Ring.


Y'know, like how it says corporations are people but for a century, negroes, women and Jews weren't.


Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Mike Pompeo yapping is all well and good, and Donald Trump as well, but in reality, they don't have a prayer, at least going that route.

The one exception I noted with the "too close to call" situation would be a case where the legislature prescribed a method (i.e., an election), but if fraud or other issues were encountered that made it genuinely impossible to determine which set of electors ought to have been seated, then the legislature would have some sort of justification for saying that the previously prescribed method had failed, and there is a deadline, therefore we have to prescribe something new. That would have some prayer of passing.

Not that we should just ignore this sort of posturing. It has to be condemned and/or ridiculed, and they have to understand that such a blatant attempt to steal an election could result in some very, very, bad things, along the lines of armed revolution, but it's just a theoretical concept, really. It won't happen.

So, let them yap, and let them try to present evidence that Biden has stolen the election, or people stole it for him. If they could actually produce such evidence, I'm confident the American people would turn on him, but that isn't going to happen either. In the end, there will be a peaceful transition of power, just with more whining than usual. And if Trump doesn't accept that, then there will be even more drama, but Trump won't have significant support outside of talk radio listeners.
I'm worried about support in SCOTUS.

I'm worried about support on an Ohio.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by blutoski; 10th November 2020 at 01:38 PM.
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:36 PM   #649
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
We'll have to see what evidence turns up. Again, political realities will probably mean that Trump loses
There's a pony in there somewhere, so keep digging.

In my opinion, reality realities is what will mean Trump loses.


I do think that people should always be looking for ways to improve the election process so that there is as little room for doubt as possible. I think this year, because of Covid, things were thrown for a loop as states scrambled on how to do things, and it's unfortunate that it happened at a time when the election was so close. I would hope that some serious people get together to review how elections are done in the United States and how they could be done better, but that faces the same problems that all electoral reform movements face. The people who would have to approve the reforms are the people that won the last election. No need to reform when you are winning.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:38 PM   #650
No Other
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 626
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
If it doesn't determine anything, there's nothing to compare. And, of course, it can't be used, as you've been claiming, to determine that a set of election results warrant further investigation.

Dave
There you go again... attributing thoughts/words/actions to me... that I never said.

You sound like a Trump fan claiming victory when victory is not in sight. If you continue to take the stance that this process cannot work with elections... then you are firmly in the minority.

State mathematically why this will not work with elections.
No Other is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:50 PM   #651
ServiceSoon
Graduate Poster
 
ServiceSoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
I already did. Would you like me to explain it more simply?

Dave
Your response, which I've included below:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Your fallacy is: equivocation. An official investigation cannot be mandated unless sufficient evidence is offered, which may have been uncovered by a private organisation investigating on its own behalf.

Dave
Is a matter of law, it has nothing to do with an equivocation fallacy. So yes, please explain how my quote:

Originally Posted by ServiceSoon View Post
What a quandary you have constructed there! You cannot investigate unless you have evidence, but you cannot get evidence unless you investigate
is an equivocation. Here is the definition for your quick reference:

Originally Posted by Definition of equivocation
In logic, a fallacy depending upon the double signification of some one word: distinguished from amphibology, which depends upon the doubtful interpretation of a whole sentence.
ServiceSoon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:51 PM   #652
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
There's a new lawsuit filed in Wayne County, Michigan, today. (Wayne County is home of Detroit.) Various allegations by at least one employee and a few poll watchers. I heard about in on Hannity, so of course I don't trust him to report it accurately.

I found myself in the car, so I decided to listen to his monologue. Thirty minutes of word salad. Throw everything in the mix just in case something sticks. What I especially liked was his quite self righteous tone about how it was so very important to have trust in elections, while he was trying to tear down trust in elections.


Oh, well. I agree with Mitch McConnell on one thing. Donald Trump and everyone else has a 100% right to file lawsuits and contest the results, within the law. And judges have a 100% right to dismiss them without trial if there's no case presented worth listening to.

I'll try to examine the Wayne County suit. Hannity quoted the Detroit Free Press, so it should be pretty easy to find info.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 01:54 PM   #653
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,314
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
There's a pony in there somewhere, so keep digging.

In my opinion, reality realities is what will mean Trump loses.


I do think that people should always be looking for ways to improve the election process so that there is as little room for doubt as possible. I think this year, because of Covid, things were thrown for a loop as states scrambled on how to do things, and it's unfortunate that it happened at a time when the election was so close. I would hope that some serious people get together to review how elections are done in the United States and how they could be done better, but that faces the same problems that all electoral reform movements face. The people who would have to approve the reforms are the people that won the last election. No need to reform when you are winning.
Somehow Florida seems to have improved. Maybe creating a huge embarrassing stink is a route to fixing them?
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:00 PM   #654
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: 32,200
Originally Posted by No Other View Post
There you go again... attributing thoughts/words/actions to me... that I never said.
Scroll up, everybody.

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 offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:04 PM   #655
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: 32,200
Originally Posted by ServiceSoon View Post
So yes, please explain how my quote:



is an equivocation.
You cannot investigate [mandate an official investigation]...

... Unless you investigate [carry out your own unofficial investigation]

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 offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:05 PM   #656
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,445
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Right wing commentators, the people I was calling crazy, want that to mean that the legislature can just decide to appoint electors however they wish, including now, after the election. That will never fly. The various legislatures have already prescribed the manner in which the electors will be selected and, having so prescribed, they aren't going to be allowed to change the prescription because they don't like the results.
A former SCOTUS ruled that they have to pass a law to change how electors will be appointed, and that law needs to be signed by the governor (which won't happen in PA), and perhaps that it has to happen before the election to which the law would apply.

But that's a former SCOTUS. I'm still sleeping with one eye open. We've been burned so often during the last four years thinking that a commitment to democracy will save us. (Admittedly, we've won some of those, too.)
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:06 PM   #657
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
Here's an article on the Wayne County lawsuit:

https://www.freep.com/story/news/pol...ns/6218612002/


Summary: Lots of allegations. Not a lot of meat, but there are one or two things that ought to be looked into, and they will be. How a judge handles it might be interesting to see. It looks like lots of variations on, "I think I saw this happen and it didn't seem right to me, so don't certify the election." I don't think there's much of a chance the lawsuit will succeed.

The lawyer for the plaintiffs was also the lawyer for Michigan's most famous barber from this spring. After the lockdown order closed barbershops, this barber reopened, in violation of the executive order lockdown. He became a cause celebre among the right wing, complete with armed militia types standing guard outside his barbershop. (I honestly don't remember what came of the lawsuit, or the barber.)
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:07 PM   #658
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
A former SCOTUS ruled that they have to pass a law to change how electors will be appointed, and that law needs to be signed by the governor (which won't happen in PA), and perhaps that it has to happen before the election to which the law would apply.

But that's a former SCOTUS. I'm still sleeping with one eye open. We've been burned so often during the last four years thinking that a commitment to democracy will save us. (Admittedly, we've won some of those, too.)
I would be lying if I said I was 100% confident SCOTUS of today would not pull some shenanigans. I don't expect it, and they shouldn't, but I'll sleep easier if the suits never get to them.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:15 PM   #659
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,445
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I would be lying if I said I was 100% confident SCOTUS of today would not pull some shenanigans. I don't expect it, and they shouldn't, but I'll sleep easier if the suits never get to them.
Right. If it does get to them, I'm pinning my hopes on Roberts and Gorsuch not being hyper-partisan and bringing rationality to the issue.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:21 PM   #660
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,427
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Got this from twitter, posted a few minutes ago;

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/st...45845671481351

"Biden leads

Arizona: 14,746
Georgia: 12,567
Nevada: 36,274
Pennsylvania: 47,483"

Again, for that to be down to voter fraud would require a fraudulent scheme on a scale previously unknown.

The exceptional claim that is down to voter fraud will, of course, require exceptional evidence.
Agree. They would still have to have a nationwide fraud scheme because just committing this kind of fraud in targeted states would be too easy to spot. The vote for Biden nationwide appears to have caught these swing states and taken them along for the ride.
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
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 online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:27 PM   #661
ServiceSoon
Graduate Poster
 
ServiceSoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
Got this from twitter, posted a few minutes ago;

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/st...45845671481351

"Biden leads

Arizona: 14,746
Georgia: 12,567
Nevada: 36,274
Pennsylvania: 47,483"

Again, for that to be down to voter fraud would require a fraudulent scheme on a scale previously unknown.

The exceptional claim that is down to voter fraud will, of course, require exceptional evidence.
The Chicago election in 1982 (city in Illinois) was verified as having at least 100,000 fraudulent votes by the FBI. The amount of votes you have presented is close to this figure and would be spread out in multiple states; it is doable. I would be surprised to learn of such a monumental conspiracy occurring.
ServiceSoon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:28 PM   #662
Armitage72
Philosopher
 
Armitage72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,175
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Agree. They would still have to have a nationwide fraud scheme because just committing this kind of fraud in targeted states would be too easy to spot. The vote for Biden nationwide appears to have caught these swing states and taken them along for the ride.

It really feels like they want to try for an electoral version of "fruit of the poisonous tree", as if there were such a thing.
"Ha! These 15 votes are invalid due to a technicality. You have to negate every vote cast for Joe Biden in the entire state now! We win!"
Armitage72 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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:35 PM   #663
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 7,647
Originally Posted by No Other View Post

State mathematically why this will not work with elections.
Maybe rather than changing the burden of proof you would like to state mathematically why it will?
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 02:37 PM   #664
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,314
Originally Posted by ServiceSoon View Post
The Chicago election in 1982 (city in Illinois) was verified as having at least 100,000 fraudulent votes by the FBI. The amount of votes you have presented is close to this figure and would be spread out in multiple states; it is doable. I would be surprised to learn of such a monumental conspiracy occurring.
Not unheard of though. If you were ever going to cheat, you'd cheat to remove orange Hitler, wouldn't you?
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:03 PM   #665
No Other
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 626
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Maybe rather than changing the burden of proof you would like to state mathematically why it will?
I want to see how Dave will demonstrate the fallibility of Benford's Law regarding this election... If he is successful, then I have learned something.
No Other is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:13 PM   #666
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,152
Originally Posted by No Other View Post
I want to see how Dave will demonstrate the fallibility of Benford's Law regarding this election... If he is successful, then I have learned something.
#1 it has been explained several times in this thread already. That you cannot understand or remember the explanation doesn't give anyone a good reason to explain it for the...4th time I think?

#2 why not ask your father or your son, as you claim they're good at the number stuff? Apparently it skips a generation?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:17 PM   #667
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,152
Originally Posted by ServiceSoon View Post
The Chicago election in 1982 (city in Illinois) was verified as having at least 100,000 fraudulent votes by the FBI. The amount of votes you have presented is close to this figure and would be spread out in multiple states; it is doable. I would be surprised to learn of such a monumental conspiracy occurring.
I've seen that fraud was alleged, but not "verified" by the FBI. In any case, the candidate who was favored to win still won.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:22 PM   #668
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 85,746
Probably posted already, too many really long threads to read through, but I couldn't resist this one:

Trump has his own MDC sponsored contest:

Daily Beast #5: Texas Lt. Gov. Offers $1 Million in Campaign Funds for Voter Fraud Evidence

__________________
Trump lost and he knows it.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 10th November 2020 at 03:23 PM. Reason: Drowning in typos.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:24 PM   #669
ServiceSoon
Graduate Poster
 
ServiceSoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
You cannot investigate [mandate an official investigation]...

... Unless you investigate [carry out your own unofficial investigation]

Dave
Your contention with me previously saying, “You cannot investigate unless you have evidence, but you cannot get evidence unless you investigate” is that an investigation can be conducted in an official or unofficial capacity? Therefore the word I used ‘investigate’ has a different meaning before the comma than after the comma?
ServiceSoon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:26 PM   #670
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 4,530
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I've seen that fraud was alleged, but not "verified" by the FBI. In any case, the candidate who was favored to win still won.
And even if verified, there's still a pretty long step from showing how a fraud was carried out almost 40 years ago to showing that it happened that way this time. I could show a method for breaking into a house in the early 1980's; that says nothing at all as evidence for how someone may have done it today. At this point, it's completely irrelevant.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:32 PM   #671
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 49,882
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I think the scenario of state legislatures interfering is probably the one to be most worried about right now. Biden's win was large enough with on-time votes on election day that the feared avenues of legal challenge seem like long-shots.

Ginning up propaganda that the vote was rigged might not sway the courts, but it could certainly give political cover to state reps who want to nullify the losing vote.
THe GOP Is olyaing with fire. If they try what amounts to a coup it would set off a second civil war.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb 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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:35 PM   #672
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 49,882
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
Yes, that's technically a possibility. But using the excuse of a minor violation of election laws that produced no discernible effect on the outcome of the election to go straight to the nuclear option of invalidating the entire election and reversing the outcome of the election would be the death knell for democracy in the United States.

And it wouldn't even change who will be President come January 20th, because even nuking this one state's election results wouldn't be enough.

The legislators would all have be be literally insane to take this stance in reality. I'm sure there are a few who are that insane, but I'm pretty sure there aren't enough.
Have you considered that is what the GOP wants?
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb 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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:37 PM   #673
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
Originally Posted by No Other View Post
I want to see how Dave will demonstrate the fallibility of Benford's Law regarding this election... If he is successful, then I have learned something.
You've studied more math than I have.

What probability distribution would you expect from precinct vote totals?

Would you expect it to be a sum, or a product, or a Gaussian?

You have all the knowledge you need to solve this problem.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:38 PM   #674
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24,741
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Have you considered that is what the GOP wants?
It would seem odd to me that a group of people who came to power by being elected would seek to get rid of elections.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:41 PM   #675
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 17,358
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I've seen that fraud was alleged, but not "verified" by the FBI. In any case, the candidate who was favored to win still won.
Not only verified but convictions:
Quote:
In what is considered the largest documented case of vote fraud in Chicago`s history, a federal grand jury returned 62 indictments that resulted in 58 convictions of election judges, precinct captains and other campaign workers in the 1982 election. The investigation began with FBI agents using a voter check similar to the random precinct canvass employed by the election board.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...815-story.html

But the major difference here is that we're talking about several states now, not a single city. The complexity in pulling off such a fraud in several states is monumental compared to in just Chicago.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:53 PM   #676
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 12,333
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
It would seem odd to me that a group of people who came to power by being elected would seek to get rid of elections.
Really? They climb the ladder and pull it up behind themselves. If getting rid of elections let's them keep power, why wouldn't they do it? The Republicans have adopted a radical extremist philosophy that a majority of Americans reject. If every American voted, Repubs would rarely win anything. They benefit from sabotaging elections.

Last edited by Bob001; 10th November 2020 at 03:55 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 03:53 PM   #677
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 49,882
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
It would seem odd to me that a group of people who came to power by being elected would seek to get rid of elections.
Don't know much history, do you?
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb 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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 04:06 PM   #678
slyjoe
Master Poster
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 2,536
Trump's crack legal team alleges two counties in PA have voter fraud.

They both voted for Trump.


https://news.yahoo.com/trumps-big-el...203155455.html
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe 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 Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 04:16 PM   #679
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 96,053
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
For what claims? That Trump is arguing a different interpretation of the rules to democrats and the issue hasn't been decided?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1196662.html
For the claims you made in the post I quoted.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 10th November 2020, 04:17 PM   #680
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 7,165
Quote:
A Pennsylvania postal worker whose claims have been cited by top Republicans as potential evidence of widespread voting irregularities admitted to U.S. Postal Service investigators that he fabricated the allegations, according to three people briefed on the investigation and a statement from a House congressional committee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...b8e_story.html

Imagine my shock. Telling ******** conspiracy theories to Project Veritas is one thing, but lying under oath to a federal investigator is another.

Quote:
A GoFundMe page created under Hopkins’ name had raised more than $135,000 by Tuesday evening, with donors praising him as a patriot and whistleblower.
Telling facebook boomers what they want to hear remains a profitable endeavor.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 10th November 2020 at 04:23 PM.
SuburbanTurkey 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 Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

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 11:41 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.