- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
Questions for the election fraud deniers?
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:23 am
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:23 am
Let's go with the theory that the 2020 election went down just as the media proclaimed, "cleanest election in history"
1) Do you believe, that if given the power for the Democrats to rig or steal the election, they wouldn't do it?
2) Do you believe election fraud doesn't occur throughout the world?
3) Do you believe election fraud has never occurred in this country ever?
4) Do you believe, if Trump was literally Hitler, that it would be the morally correct thing to do, in the case he might win the election, to still rig the election away from him to prevent "literally Hitler" to have 4 more years? Wouldn't we all do whatever is necessary to prevent Hitler getting to power?
5) Do you believe 0 fraud occurred in the 2020 election? Or just not enough fraud? Do you have a discernable away to show that?
6) Are you aware that only 42,000 votes seperated Trump from Biden. Out of a total of 160,000,000 votes.
7)Do you believe that "if" fraud actually occurred, and was clear, the media would support that narrative and report on it?
8) Do you believe the FBI, DOJ, and intelligence agencies would investigate and prosecute the fraud "if" it actually occurred
9) Do you believe "if" fraud occurred, that there would be judges in this country willing to rule on it, knowing the consequences of such a controversial decision?
10) Do you believe the DNC would accept under any circumstances that Biden was illegitimate even if proven and prosecuted that it was?
1) Do you believe, that if given the power for the Democrats to rig or steal the election, they wouldn't do it?
2) Do you believe election fraud doesn't occur throughout the world?
3) Do you believe election fraud has never occurred in this country ever?
4) Do you believe, if Trump was literally Hitler, that it would be the morally correct thing to do, in the case he might win the election, to still rig the election away from him to prevent "literally Hitler" to have 4 more years? Wouldn't we all do whatever is necessary to prevent Hitler getting to power?
5) Do you believe 0 fraud occurred in the 2020 election? Or just not enough fraud? Do you have a discernable away to show that?
6) Are you aware that only 42,000 votes seperated Trump from Biden. Out of a total of 160,000,000 votes.
7)Do you believe that "if" fraud actually occurred, and was clear, the media would support that narrative and report on it?
8) Do you believe the FBI, DOJ, and intelligence agencies would investigate and prosecute the fraud "if" it actually occurred
9) Do you believe "if" fraud occurred, that there would be judges in this country willing to rule on it, knowing the consequences of such a controversial decision?
10) Do you believe the DNC would accept under any circumstances that Biden was illegitimate even if proven and prosecuted that it was?
This post was edited on 9/23/21 at 10:24 am
17
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:26 am to burger bearcat
Looking forward to okragir's take
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:29 am to burger bearcat
I would answer many of the questions in the manner you likely desire, but you've got the whole thing backward. He who claims something extraordinary has the burden of providing the evidence of it and proving his case. What I know, beyond doubt, is that those claiming election fraud were not able to gain any traction in any court. In our system, that means there either wasn't substantial fraud or the aggrieved side lacks the ability to prove its case. That is dreadful if it is so, but it doesn't change anything.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:32 am to burger bearcat
I’m curious how they can bitch for 2 years+ about 2016 but there cannot be any irregularities in the 2020 election.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:36 am to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
What I know, beyond doubt, is that those claiming election fraud were not able to gain any traction in any court. In our system, that means there either wasn't substantial fraud or the aggrieved side lacks the ability to prove its case.
Kind of hard to prove fraud in court when every case was tossed on technical grounds and judges refused to hear any evidence
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:40 am to burger bearcat
quote:
Are you aware that only 42,000 votes seperated Trump from Biden. Out of a total of 160,000,000 votes.
It’s staggering.
0.002625
Can that be right?
Should mandate a nationwide audit.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:51 am to burger bearcat
1) Individuals may try but most wouldn't.
2) Yes, it occurs in many places. We have generally been above that.
3) Never? Of course not. People go to jail every election cycle for small scale fraud. At a large scale in a national election, I don't know.
4) That is a tough question to answer.
5) 0 - of course not. There were people, many Republicans, who were charged with voter fraud.
As for showing fraud wasn't widespread, that is not how it works. It is virtually impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the people making the fraud claims.
6) What is your point? Only a few hundred votes in Florida swung the 2000 election. And, without looking it up, I am assuming you are counting the vote differential in enough states Biden barely won to have altered the total results. You could also include the vote differential in states Trump barely won.
7) Yes I do believe they would but the mainstream media has a high threshold of proof before they report on things like that. That is what legitimate journalists do.
8) Yes
9) They would probably refer it to criminal court. They would not just dismiss them as completely lacking evidence which is what they did in every single case. However, SCOTUS made it clear in 2000 that you have a very small window after the election to determine the winner.
10) Yes, they would.
Now questions for you:
1) Do you recognize that in both 2016 and 2020, long before the election happened Trump said if he lost it would be because he was cheated?
2) Do you agree that there is no possible way he could have known that months before the election even happened?
3) Do you recognize that Trump could never ever admit defeat? Has he ever admitted defeat or any kind of fault in his life? For goodness sakes, he guy said he didn't have to ask God for forgiveness because he has done nothing to forgive. This is all a sign of very serious psychological disorders.
4) Do you agree that one would do this if he was laying the groundwork for his followers to believe any and all claims of election fraud?
5) Do you agree that the local election officials (such as Secretary of States), often Republicans, have stated there was no fraud?
6) Do you understand that almost all election fraud conspiracies have been debunked?
7) Do you realize this thread actually provides no evidence that there was fraud.
2) Yes, it occurs in many places. We have generally been above that.
3) Never? Of course not. People go to jail every election cycle for small scale fraud. At a large scale in a national election, I don't know.
4) That is a tough question to answer.
5) 0 - of course not. There were people, many Republicans, who were charged with voter fraud.
As for showing fraud wasn't widespread, that is not how it works. It is virtually impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the people making the fraud claims.
6) What is your point? Only a few hundred votes in Florida swung the 2000 election. And, without looking it up, I am assuming you are counting the vote differential in enough states Biden barely won to have altered the total results. You could also include the vote differential in states Trump barely won.
7) Yes I do believe they would but the mainstream media has a high threshold of proof before they report on things like that. That is what legitimate journalists do.
8) Yes
9) They would probably refer it to criminal court. They would not just dismiss them as completely lacking evidence which is what they did in every single case. However, SCOTUS made it clear in 2000 that you have a very small window after the election to determine the winner.
10) Yes, they would.
Now questions for you:
1) Do you recognize that in both 2016 and 2020, long before the election happened Trump said if he lost it would be because he was cheated?
2) Do you agree that there is no possible way he could have known that months before the election even happened?
3) Do you recognize that Trump could never ever admit defeat? Has he ever admitted defeat or any kind of fault in his life? For goodness sakes, he guy said he didn't have to ask God for forgiveness because he has done nothing to forgive. This is all a sign of very serious psychological disorders.
4) Do you agree that one would do this if he was laying the groundwork for his followers to believe any and all claims of election fraud?
5) Do you agree that the local election officials (such as Secretary of States), often Republicans, have stated there was no fraud?
6) Do you understand that almost all election fraud conspiracies have been debunked?
7) Do you realize this thread actually provides no evidence that there was fraud.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:55 am to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
He who claims something extraordinary has the burden of providing the evidence of it and proving his case.
Election fraud isn’t extraordinary.
Detroit, Milwaukee and Philadelphia have a long history of it. If you think it’s “extraordinary,” you’re probably stupid about a lot of things.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 10:57 am to Mr. Misanthrope
quote:
It’s staggering. 0.002625 Can that be right?
Our Presidential elections are often within the margin of error.
2000, 2004, 2016 and 2020 all looked within the margin of error.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:00 am to the808bass
quote:
Election fraud isn’t extraordinary.
Detroit, Milwaukee and Philadelphia have a long history of it. If you think it’s “extraordinary,” you’re probably stupid about a lot of thing
You are a pleasant person. You seem to be incapable of having an honest rational so instead you just throw out insults.
I certainly learned yesterday that your grasp of math and statistics is severely lacking.
Anyway, I'll rephrase that:
The burden of proof is on the person making the accusations. It is a virtual impossibility to prove fraud didn't happen.
This post was edited on 9/23/21 at 11:01 am
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:04 am to ChapelHillSooner
You didn’t prove shite yesterday other than you had no idea what you were arguing.
I don’t attempt to have rational discussion with idiots. Pigs and singing.
I’m not asking anyone to prove fraud didn’t happen.
Just walk through the results of the North Shore communities in Milwaukee and look at their 95% to 115% turnout of eligible voters. The 95% number is laughable. The ~115% in one of the communities was hilarious.
Now write something stupid about “percentage of registered voters.”
I don’t attempt to have rational discussion with idiots. Pigs and singing.
I’m not asking anyone to prove fraud didn’t happen.
Just walk through the results of the North Shore communities in Milwaukee and look at their 95% to 115% turnout of eligible voters. The 95% number is laughable. The ~115% in one of the communities was hilarious.
Now write something stupid about “percentage of registered voters.”
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:08 am to ChapelHillSooner
Nice to see a reasonable response on here.
My concern is exactly what was stated above, that plenty of evidence was found, but the swamp simply did swamp things and turned it's ugly head.
The problem is, when you have enough individuals, even though most wouldn't, they can still potentially succeed.
Here's a good bit of testimoney which may shed some light....I would have rather had C-span for this, but couldn't find it there.
Youtube link to congressional testimony
My concern is exactly what was stated above, that plenty of evidence was found, but the swamp simply did swamp things and turned it's ugly head.
quote:
1) Individuals may try but most wouldn't.
The problem is, when you have enough individuals, even though most wouldn't, they can still potentially succeed.
Here's a good bit of testimoney which may shed some light....I would have rather had C-span for this, but couldn't find it there.
Youtube link to congressional testimony
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:31 am to ChapelHillSooner
quote:
but the mainstream media has a high threshold of proof before they report on things like that
This is where you lost credibility.
quote:
That is what legitimate journalists do
No such thing. Most journalists just write what they are told to write. There are too many examples of 25+ national journalists using the same word to describe an event. There are too many examples of someone reporting something that is almost immediately proven wrong. There are too many examples of reporters setting a scene to fit their reporting.
Just a hunch, are you a journalist?
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:31 am to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:The aggrieved are coming..
In our system, that means there either wasn't substantial fraud or the aggrieved side lacks the ability to prove its case. That is dreadful if it is so, but it doesn't change anything.
turns out it was a devouring of an elephant, one bite at a time - that process is ongoing and nearing completion. Success is looming
In the mean time your insistence on letting the civil rights of 10s of millions of Americans BE STOLEN is duly noted.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:35 am to burger bearcat
quote:I believe any part would do it if actually given the means to do it without being discovered
1) Do you believe, that if given the power for the Democrats to rig or steal the election, they wouldn't do it?
quote:Sure it does. Proof of widespread fraud in the US, though, is essentially non-existent.
2) Do you believe election fraud doesn't occur throughout the world?
quote:I believe Joe Kennedy essentially rigged the election for JFK.
3) Do you believe election fraud has never occurred in this country ever?
quote:I see a lot of references to "literally Hitler" but not sure how widespread that actually is.
4) Do you believe, if Trump was literally Hitler, that it would be the morally correct thing to do, in the case he might win the election, to still rig the election away from him to prevent "literally Hitler" to have 4 more years? Wouldn't we all do whatever is necessary to prevent Hitler getting to power?
quote:I believe the usual smattering of local fraud occurred. And likely some on the republican side also.
5) Do you believe 0 fraud occurred in the 2020 election? Or just not enough fraud? Do you have a discernable away to show that?
quote:No, but similar numbers to Trump in 2016 when he won if true.
6) Are you aware that only 42,000 votes seperated Trump from Biden. Out of a total of 160,000,000 votes.
quote:No
7)Do you believe that "if" fraud actually occurred, and was clear, the media would support that narrative and report on it?
quote:Depends, but I'm not hopeful.
8) Do you believe the FBI, DOJ, and intelligence agencies would investigate and prosecute the fraud "if" it actually occurred
quote:Yes
9) Do you believe "if" fraud occurred, that there would be judges in this country willing to rule on it, knowing the consequences of such a controversial decision?
quote:Yes
10) Do you believe the DNC would accept under any circumstances that Biden was illegitimate even if proven and prosecuted that it was?
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:36 am to N.O. via West-Cal
You know damn well why there is no traction.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 11:42 am to burger bearcat
A basement dwelling dementia patient got more votes and Hillary and Obama.
Ruby Freeman and others know how.
Ruby Freeman and others know how.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 12:00 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
I would answer many of the questions in the manner you likely desire, but you've got the whole thing backward. He who claims something extraordinary has the burden of providing the evidence of it and proving his case.
Kind of like Trump being guilty until proven innocent about Russia, Russia, Russia?
What I know, beyond doubt, is that those claiming election fraud were not able to gain any traction in any court.
It’s called corruption and fear
In our system, that means there either wasn't substantial fraud or the aggrieved side lacks the ability to prove its case.
No, it means corruption and fear.
That is dreadful if it is so, but it doesn't change anything.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 12:10 pm to burger bearcat
I’m not going to answer 11 different questions. But in short:
I do believe there was likely some fraud, as there is in probably every since election of significance. People break election laws. You know what happens to those caught? Nothing. A couple years ago, a well know (at least in that area) vote-getter for Democrats in Acadia Parish was convicted of marking elderly persons’ ballots in a different manner than they indicated. Pretty blatant fraud, right? She got probation. Zero jail time. How in the hell are you going to combat fraud if convictions lead to zilch?
The allowance of stuffing ballots into mailboxes opened the avenue for additional fraud in elections that took place in 2020.
Was it enough to completely swing the 2020 Presidential race? I don’t know. Did Trump “really” win 49 states, including CA, like some claim? Extremely doubtful. That’s looney toons shite.
We need state legislatures to make sure the 2020 exceptions that came into place in the name of Covid never happen. All that did was enable the laziest of the laziest in our country, who should have no say in elections if they won’t put forth effort, to suddenly have their votes count simply by filling out a ballot and putting it back in their own mailbox. That’s dumb and should never happen again. Only people who truly are physically unable to get to a polling booth and actively request a mail in ballot should receive that exception.
There.
I do believe there was likely some fraud, as there is in probably every since election of significance. People break election laws. You know what happens to those caught? Nothing. A couple years ago, a well know (at least in that area) vote-getter for Democrats in Acadia Parish was convicted of marking elderly persons’ ballots in a different manner than they indicated. Pretty blatant fraud, right? She got probation. Zero jail time. How in the hell are you going to combat fraud if convictions lead to zilch?
The allowance of stuffing ballots into mailboxes opened the avenue for additional fraud in elections that took place in 2020.
Was it enough to completely swing the 2020 Presidential race? I don’t know. Did Trump “really” win 49 states, including CA, like some claim? Extremely doubtful. That’s looney toons shite.
We need state legislatures to make sure the 2020 exceptions that came into place in the name of Covid never happen. All that did was enable the laziest of the laziest in our country, who should have no say in elections if they won’t put forth effort, to suddenly have their votes count simply by filling out a ballot and putting it back in their own mailbox. That’s dumb and should never happen again. Only people who truly are physically unable to get to a polling booth and actively request a mail in ballot should receive that exception.
There.
Posted on 9/23/21 at 12:13 pm to the808bass
Just for fun, here's a little chart on some of the Milwaukee north shore communities I put together back after the election.
Registered voters is from the report of registered voters at the time of the election (Wisconsin has since purged 206,000 voters from the rolls statewide and no one bothered to notice what that did to the voter turnout).
% RV is the % of registered voters that voted. Registered voters is a silly number because they rarely purge the rolls (see above). Wisconsin also allows same-day voter registration and thousands of those registrations get returned as undeliverable after the election.
% EV is the % of eligible voters (census population minus those under 18 and non citizens). You could argue that there's some small room for error here. But it could go either way, as well. So a 101% of EV could be really 103% or 98%. Either number is silly.
Eligible voters is simply derived from taking the census of the town and then subtracting out non-citizens and those under 18. Non-citizens comprise anywhere from <2% to 8% of the townships listed.
Biden net is the margin of victory for Biden in each township.
New residents is the percentage of residents in the county that have moved from a different county to that township in the last year (the overall level of mobility was much higher in each area, I restricted this number to people who moved from outside Milwaukee County. Many of the towns had 15%-18% mobility, meaning 15%-18% of the town had moved this year.) That really highlights how nonsensical the % of EVs is as a stat. If you have 93% participation of eligible voters and 5% of the eligible voters just moved to the township, then you've got some hilarious levels of fraud.
Registered voters is from the report of registered voters at the time of the election (Wisconsin has since purged 206,000 voters from the rolls statewide and no one bothered to notice what that did to the voter turnout).
% RV is the % of registered voters that voted. Registered voters is a silly number because they rarely purge the rolls (see above). Wisconsin also allows same-day voter registration and thousands of those registrations get returned as undeliverable after the election.
% EV is the % of eligible voters (census population minus those under 18 and non citizens). You could argue that there's some small room for error here. But it could go either way, as well. So a 101% of EV could be really 103% or 98%. Either number is silly.
Eligible voters is simply derived from taking the census of the town and then subtracting out non-citizens and those under 18. Non-citizens comprise anywhere from <2% to 8% of the townships listed.
Biden net is the margin of victory for Biden in each township.
New residents is the percentage of residents in the county that have moved from a different county to that township in the last year (the overall level of mobility was much higher in each area, I restricted this number to people who moved from outside Milwaukee County. Many of the towns had 15%-18% mobility, meaning 15%-18% of the town had moved this year.) That really highlights how nonsensical the % of EVs is as a stat. If you have 93% participation of eligible voters and 5% of the eligible voters just moved to the township, then you've got some hilarious levels of fraud.
This post was edited on 9/23/21 at 12:15 pm
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News