I consider anything below 0.0001% to be for all intents and purposes insignificant. It sure is a lot lower than the COVID mortality rate his supporters love to pretend is so low.
You think the shorthand is innocuous. I think the shorthand is often a purposeful attempt at using anchoring bias.
In any case, what is large-scale? Shifting the results by only 1% in only six out of 50 states doesn't seem like much proportionally, but it's all the Democrats had to do to steal the 2020 election.
Even the most generous numbers would still have it in the hundreds, which wouldn't even be 1% of the number of votes it takes to flip a single state, let alone the entire election.
So yes, a small handful of cases within 150M+ votes (0.0001% or less as I said) is indeed insignificant, as it couldn't flip a single state.
20,000 here, 40,000 there, and enough EC votes flip.
Right, but again the actual numbers are in the dozens, nowhere near tens of thousands. So what you're saying is completely irrelevant.
...a suitcase hidden under a table surely contains more than "dozens".
...a (D) electoral judge missing his (R) counterpart can surely "adjudicate" more than "dozens" in the course of a night.
...far more than "dozens" of mail-in ballots were received from "voters" who are either dead, registered elsewhere, or otherwise ineligible.
These same claims were presented by Trump most recently on a phone call in which he tries to shake down, with threats like a mobster, the same votes plus 1 that he is down by in Georgia. Trump is shaking down the Georgia Secretary of State. There is your fraud.
But the Georgia Secretary of state goes through the claims anyway, and sums it up with: Well, Mr. President, the challenge that you have is the data you have is wrong.
And specifically the ridiculous and unfounded claim of 5000 dead people voting he says: The actual number were two. Two. Two people that were dead that voted. And so that’s wrong.
I do not understand what possesses sore losers to insist that their fragile emotional state must be coddled this much for this long, and to tell lies so prolifically. But it is not the responsibility of everyone else to provide emotional support for them.
If you looked anywhere else I'm positive you'll find similar problems but they don't matter as much because the buffer for correctness is so large.
They did get to present cases where they had standing, and lost them. Guiliani couldn't even tell a judge whether he was alleging fraud or not. That doesn't mean they get to go to another court to present the same thing.
What? They could present it to the media. They could leak it. Trump could make a nationally televised speech to the American people.
How about you acknowledge that there is zero hard evidence of any of the lies coming out of the Trump administration.
Very true.
You can consider that the republicans in California set up fake drop off centers so they could throw out votes, and that voter laws are made with the intention of suppressing voters. Things like managers not letting their employees leave work to go vote is voter fraud
This is true but to people who care about election integrity it shouldn't matter.
The fact that a standing presidents twitter account was banned is also very unamerican, no matter what he's saying.
Twitter has permanently banned people for far less. Showing that the President is an equal seems like a fairly American concept from over here.
Dismissing it as "conspiracy fueled guff" is dishonest.
It is perfectly fine to find irregularities and question them, it crosses into bad faith when those irregularities are explained[1] and they continue to be repeated as if they were not.
What we are seeing is people repeating points that appear compelling at first glance, but only when wilfully ignoring any context that comes with those points. Some extremely egregious examples of this have come from last night's Capitol incident where the same people claiming or incensed by "mountains of election fraud" were falsely claiming that the protestors were "communist Antifa"[2].
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-gwinnett-domini...
[2] https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-protester-capito...
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/las-vegas-mailman-agrees...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVP_60Hm4P8
https://nypost.com/2020/11/02/dead-people-caught-voting-in-n...
https://100percentfedup.com/video-yes-dead-people-did-vote-i...
2. You've literally proved my point about ignoring any kind of context with this one. The title intentionally misrepresents what is happening from the outset by misqualifying the containers ballots are regularly stored in as suitcases. It's not attempting to raise a concern about the election process, it's attempting to incense people with a particular ideology. This is further reinforced when you entirely ignore the testimony of anyone with any knowledge of how the ballot counting process is carried out, including ignoring the fact that any of the independent observers that the officials alleged to have left of their own volition could easily challenge that claim at any point.
3/4. All you've done here is prove that the methods already in place are effective at catching people who try to cast a dead person's vote.
Throughout this you've entirely ignored the fact that these discrepancies have been brought to people's attention and that they are either pure conjecture or on the level of individual misconduct. Any actions required to have /any/ effect whatsoever would be much more obvious and would have been put.
> I'll have presented evidence, and you won't have.
You've provided absolutely no evidence of the kind of mass fraud you're asserting has happened, once again isolated incidents will happen and in general they will be caught. Fraud mountain is a fiction of Trump's fucked up ego, and is evidenced by the fact that the absolutely overwhelming majority of votes have been agreed as legitimate by both independent and partisan observers.
We may never know the exact amount of fraud that occurred because the left, mass media, and establishment Republicans are intent on forging ahead with the so-called President-elect without conducting a robust investigation of the claims. At this point, it looks like the theft could be successful.
If a cashier is caught stealing you don't then assume the whole shop was stealing.
At this point you appear to be out to run an inquisition. You've decided there is a widespread heretic problem and now any deviance found are an excuse to overstate the problem further, even if they can be rationally explained.
I urge you to do some self reflection as to why you think the election was stolen because the arguments you're currently tangled up in are exactly what lead to the mess in the Capitol, an event which only made it more untenable for more moderate republicans to continue supporting you.
Once again if fraud had taken place there has been enough scrutiny to turn up more than a single dodgy mail man and a counting station in georgia where no one who knows how the counting process works has challenged the explanation given.
Trump lost, he didn't like it and immediately denied he lost with zero evidence to the contrary. It was only afterwards that he went searching for any evidence that fit his narrative, fabricating it where there was none and catastrophising the cases where illegitimate votes were cast.
This is false. Republicans were routinely denied the right to watch vote counts. In some cases, they were forced to stand more than six feet away "because of COVID", and in other cases, they were sent away entirely.
> Once again if fraud had taken place there has been enough scrutiny to turn up more than a single dodgy mail man and a counting station in georgia where no one who knows how the counting process works has challenged the explanation given.
I gave you examples. There are more examples at the "Here is the Evidence" web page. I'll post it, but I predict that you'll either ignore it or, instead, google for other web pages that "debunk" it.
https://hereistheevidence.com/
> Trump lost, he didn't like it and immediately denied he lost with zero evidence to the contrary.
Now you're making up a narrative that doesn't fit the facts.
You have attempted to effect an air of condescension multiple times in this conversation. If you truly believe that half the country is living under Trump's spell and needs to be freed, and you also believe that condescension is going to help win them over, then it is not your opponent who is in need of introspection.
The point I was making was that the assertion of "Winning the election" was made first, only when it became apparent that in fact he had not won the election did people start looking for evidence of fraud. Evidence was only gathered with the intention of supporting that fact and was then presented as proof of something much more widespread than it suggested. This has lead to things that are absolutely not evidence of fraud being conflated with acts of fraud.
The website you posted was torn apart elsewhere in this thread. From the outside it looks like a desperate grasping at straws.
> You have attempted to effect an air of condescension multiple times in this conversation. If you truly believe that half the country is living under Trump's spell and needs to be freed, and you also believe that condescension is going to help win them over, then it is not your opponent who is in need of introspection.
You've repeatedly refused to accept any criticism of your arguments throughout the conversation. Your evidence has been evidence of a few isolated incidents and fraud that has been detected by the safeguards already put in place. It is not evidence at all of any kind of widespread fraud.
The Capitol building was raided by Trump supporters directed there by the man himself. Inspired by this "stop the steal" rhetoric and calling for Mike Pence of all people to be hanged, they are being lead into a very dangerous situation that is not designed for their benefit. They are very much in need of some introspection before more of them die from this.