- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/7/21 at 10:29 am to mmcgrath
quote:
Every party has their conspiracy theorists. Republican are the only ones to censure members who don't buy in.
When has this happened?
Posted on 2/7/21 at 10:30 am to mmcgrath
quote:
Every party has their conspiracy theorists. Republican are the only ones to censure members who don't buy in.
The darling of the democrat party is spreading a conspiracy theory as we speak that she was under attack at the Capitol and republicans tried to have her murdered.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 10:59 am to DamnGood86
quote:
A "conspiracy theorist" is an individual, not an idea. They are now using that term similarly to "racist", to knockdown or silence an individual.
A 'conspiracy' is an idea. The charge: '2020 election fraud is a conspiracy' is an idea, not an individual.
One who subscribes to an idea is an individual. Both charges by the left...
a. 'Election fraud is a conspiracy'
b. 'People who believe it are conspiracy theorists'
...are both designed to sluff (old debate term for ignoring the essential charge).
This may help you. 'Racist' is not used to refute a right wing argument. IE, the press doesn't say 'Mike Lindell is a racist.' Because they are not trying to shame him. They call him a C.T. because they are trying to discredit his argument. They use the same with 'Mike Lindell has been 'debunked'.
'Debunked is not meant to shut him up. It's designed to refute his positions.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 11:15 am to Flats
quote:Part of the censure letter for Cheney said that Trump could not have incited the riot because "ANTIFA and BLM led the riots".
When has this happened?
Heck, Arizona in part censured Cindy McCain because she defended her late husband against Trump's attacks.
This post was edited on 2/7/21 at 11:31 am
Posted on 2/7/21 at 11:29 am to mmcgrath
quote:
sicko. Part of the censure letter for Cheney said that Trump could not have incited the riot because "ANTIFA and BLM led the riots".
Liar. It says video evidence exists that they instigated it; it gives multiple reasons for her censure. Nobody was censured because they failed to believe something about the riots.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 11:31 am to mmcgrath
Conspiracy: An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or to accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
Sounds like what we have witnessed in this election. Don't need to add the theorist to it.
Sounds like what we have witnessed in this election. Don't need to add the theorist to it.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 12:37 pm to texridder
quote:You linked an article which critiques others' assumptions by making its own assumptions, yet asserting its own assumptions are somehow real while at least equally valid assumptions are somehow false. That's quite a piece of work.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/no-there-were-not-95000-biden-only-ballots-in-georgia/
The FACT is we don't know the actual ballot numbers, breakdown, or derivation. Why? Because Raffensperger&Co refused to check. Just as Raffensperger refused to correlate VBM ballot counts with signature envelope counts. Just as the worthless POS refused to investigate and audit the Fulton Co Test Center aka counterfeit vote printing house.
So we are left to educated extrapolations.
Is it possible that Biden might have received as few as 47,520 Biden-only votes (still a non-believable total given the race)? Yes, it is possible he received as few as a still completely implausible 47,520 Biden-only ballots in that race.
If that is your argument, perhaps you should have thought it through. 47K is four-fold the Biden margin of victory.
The FACT is, we do know the Georgia vote, including the POTUS-Senate gap is inexplicable. The FACT is, we do know those inexplicable components have never been investigated.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 12:40 pm to Toomer Deplorable
quote:Why don't you list the "numerous statistical anomalies" that you are referring to (that have not already been disproven).
What is imbecilic is to unquestionably accept the MSM pronouncement that there is nothing peculiar about the fact that the numerous statistical anomalies uncovered in this stolen election only break one way — in favor of the dementia ward escapee.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 12:41 pm to mmcgrath
quote:Negative!
Trump could not have incited the riot because
It said he did not.
quote:You are surely aware of their involvement.
"ANTIFA and BLM led the riots"
Posted on 2/7/21 at 12:52 pm to texridder
quote:They were in part listed in the post above.
Why don't you list the "numerous statistical anomalies" that you are referring to (that have not already been disproven).
Statistical anomalies are just that though, anomalies. They are not proof. Though in the instance of this election, they are collectively so unlikely that they'd serve as proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case.
But again, the way to address statistical anomalies is to transparently INVESTIGATE THEM. Not to respond with "Nuh-ah! There weren't no fraud at all. Nuh-ah! Nuh-ah!" The way to address statistical anomalies is not to viciously deter investigatory efforts, but rather encourage them.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 12:59 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Statistical anomalies are just that though, anomalies. They are not proof. Though in the instance of this election, they are collectively so unlikely that they'd serve as proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case.
But again, the way to address statistical anomalies is to transparently INVESTIGATE THEM. Not to respond with "Nuh-ah! There weren't no fraud at all. Nuh-ah! Nuh-ah!" The way to address statistical anomalies is not to viciously deter investigatory efforts, but rather encourage them.
Formulating a hypothesis and the using a mathematical methodology to test this hypothesis is simply too much to ask from the “party of science”. Much easier to call it a “conspiracy theory” and declare election dispute “settled”.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 1:07 pm to Strannix
Posted on 2/7/21 at 1:16 pm to Strannix
"Domestic terrorist" is the new "racist".
Posted on 2/7/21 at 1:25 pm to mmcgrath
Mmmcgrath:
Also mmcgrath:
Hypocritical piece of shite
quote:
So you're saying anyone who questions the validity of the election is a conspiracy theorist? At this point, yes
Also mmcgrath:
quote:
How did you feel about people that said Russia influenced our election in 2016? They did. How much influence is debatable
Hypocritical piece of shite
Posted on 2/7/21 at 1:47 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:Perhaps yes. Perhaps no. You're assuming all Senate Ballots included votes for POTUS.
The libertarian candidate accounts for over half this total
Yet if we are to believe in widespread mystical disgust of Trump in Georgia (I'm not a buyer) while his opponent basically never left protection of his basement, it would seem likely that a contingent of voters could vote down-ballot issues while not casting a top-of-the-ticket vote.
Meanwhile, comparing runaway Senate special-elections like that of 2000 with a highly-competitive, heavily-financed two-Senate-race ballot in 2020 is like comparing apples and aardvarks.
Posted on 2/7/21 at 1:53 pm to Nguyener
quote:Not necessarily hypocritical. But definitely less well informed than he assumes. That is his footprint here ... he's an individual who doesn't know what he doesn't know.
Hypocritical piece of shite
Posted on 2/7/21 at 9:49 pm to Strannix
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News