08 Nov 23
@no1marauder saidDo you know of any reporters who have reviewed the election process and told us which parts could be audited after the fact and which could not? Why aren't journalists asking questions that actually increase our understanding? Why do they act like "lack of standing" demonstrates no fraud?
Actually, Biden was well ahead in the early counting which caused Fox News to call the State for him more quickly than other networks:
"Just before midnight on the East Coast on election night, Fox News called Arizona for Democrat Joe Biden.
It was a bold call. It opened up a wider path for Biden to win the presidency after a night that began with a lot of bad news ...[text shortened]... "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Arizona#cite_note-207
Or, is it your contention, that an inspection that occurred in 2021 would have found any possible fraud? If I swap 100 real fake ballots for real ballots on election night, what audit is going to find that? And I've never worked a polling station nor been in politics. Have you? Are you confident that a knowledgeable person couldn't game the system in ways you wouldn't think of and wouldn't be able to detect after the fact?
And why did you pick Arizona? Would demonstrating that there was no fraud in Arizona prove all other places were secure?
I'm not claiming I have any proof of election fraud. I just find the confidence that our elections are secure in spite of fraud in every other system that is complex to be laughable.
08 Nov 23
@techsouth saidAside from the on-the-ground evidence (or lack thereof), there are two compelling pieces of circumstantial evidence that indicate that the election outcome was correct:
Well, you've heard of insurance fraud, bank fraud, real estate fraud, Medicaid fraud, tax fraud, welfare fraud and investment fraud. Also, there's identity theft, people have scammed the College Board to boost their SAT scores, people have gamed the immigration system, people create counterfeit money, and I could go on and on. In most of these cases the villains come up w ...[text shortened]... c logic.
If all that isn't proof that nothing bad happened in the election, I don't know what is.
1. The results were basically consistent with pre-election polls
2. The results in the swing states were basically consistent with what you'd expect given the over-all national popular vote results and the results in the non-swing states
08 Nov 23
@no1marauder saidAlso, don't you find it funny that the IRS spent maybe a year reviewing Trump's tax returns and found no fraud, but Democrats were not convinced so they demanded to review them for themselves?
Being a sore loser doesn't make you any less of a loser.
I'm not convinced all 50 states ran fair elections, but I will never be able to see most raw data that might actually convince me.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147482
08 Nov 23
@no1marauder saidwikipedia LMFAO
Actually, Biden was well ahead in the early counting which caused Fox News to call the State for him more quickly than other networks:
"Just before midnight on the East Coast on election night, Fox News called Arizona for Democrat Joe Biden.
It was a bold call. It opened up a wider path for Biden to win the presidency after a night that began with a lot of bad news ...[text shortened]... "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_Arizona#cite_note-207
08 Nov 23
@sh76 saidPolls are conducted by people who are cheering for one of the candidates. To take one example, Biden was predicted to win Wisconsin with as much as 58% of the votes, but the final outcome was around 0.6% difference.
Aside from the on-the-ground evidence (or lack thereof), there are two compelling pieces of circumstantial evidence that indicate that the election outcome was correct:
1. The results were basically consistent with pre-election polls
2. The results in the swing states were basically consistent with what you'd expect given the over-all national popular vote results and the results in the non-swing states
And in spite of the outcome, strategically reversing around 22,000 votes would have would have changed the election outcome (if my memory is correct), all of which were the result of come from behind wins for Biden.
I'm not claiming Trump would have won. I just find it absurd how confident people have chosen to be as if the people running our government institutions are amazingly trustworthy and our elections are the only complicated system that cannot be corrupted. Are there any other systems that are both high stakes and complicated that are not rife with fraud? Would you be willing to cheat if you were convinced that the next Hitler were on the ballot?
08 Nov 23
@techsouth said"come from behind" is a news network illusion. To build drama and attract eyeballs. They are just tallying votes as they are reported from counties to media.
Polls are conducted by people who are cheering for one of the candidates. To take one example, Biden was predicted to win Wisconsin with as much as 58% of the votes, but the final outcome was around 0.6% difference.
And in spite of the outcome, strategically reversing around 22,000 votes would have would have changed the election outcome (if my memory is correct), all o ...[text shortened]... fraud? Would you be willing to cheat if you were convinced that the next Hitler were on the ballot?
@no1marauder saidOh, here is Marauder.
Being a sore loser doesn't make you any less of a loser.
Could you help these guys, I asked them alll to provide legal evidence of an insurrection. Thay have even been saying that people were put in jail for insurrection. I find nothing like that on the Internet.
We need to put this to bed. Many thanks.
@techsouth said
Do you know of any reporters who have reviewed the election process and told us which parts could be audited after the fact and which could not? Why aren't journalists asking questions that actually increase our understanding? Why do they act like "lack of standing" demonstrates no fraud?
Or, is it your contention, that an inspection that occurred in 2021 would have fo ...[text shortened]... at our elections are secure in spite of fraud in every other system that is complex to be laughable.
I'm not claiming I have any proof of election fraud. I just find the confidence that our elections are secure in spite of fraud in every other system that is complex to be laughable.
Good news for all you serious about voter fraud. Evidence of a fraudulent conspiracy in the last presidential election exists and a trial is happening in January. Trump is the defendant.
@wildgrass saidWell, technically, come from behing could also be real, as in the projections based on the incoming vote measured by prior assumptions, could change the real time odds of someone winning the state.
"come from behind" is a news network illusion. To build drama and attract eyeballs. They are just tallying votes as they are reported from counties to media.
Trump clearly "came back" in Arizona, making what looked like it would be a 3 or 4 point loss into almost a dead heat.
On the other hand, Biden came back in Georgia. the NY Times needle thingy gave Trump a >65% chance to win GA at one point and Biden won it.
08 Nov 23
@jj-adams saidYou were hypnotized, time to snap out of it.
It's funny, here in Arizona I'm still wearing my TRUMP 2020 hat, people of all ages come up to me and give me a thumbs up. I've talked to hundreds of people that voted for Trump, only met two that voted for Biden (and they aren't happy that they did). Biden couldn't draw more than 50 people in Az while Trump filled football stadiums.
Yet Biden took the state after the polls ...[text shortened]... e happened in a lot of other states.
No one will ever convince me the 2020 election was legitimate.
Sean hannity on TV: Trump won the 2020 election. It was stolen from him
Same guy, in court, under oath: "I never believed for a second that trump actually won the 2020 election."
It doesn't get much clearer that you were lied to.
08 Nov 23
@sh76 saidIt's still all based on slick news org graphics. After polls close the "race" is finished.
Well, technically, come from behing could also be real, as in the projections based on the incoming vote measured by prior assumptions, could change the real time odds of someone winning the state.
Trump clearly "came back" in Arizona, making what looked like it would be a 3 or 4 point loss into almost a dead heat.
On the other hand, Biden came back in Georgia. the NY Times needle thingy gave Trump a >65% chance to win GA at one point and Biden won it.
08 Nov 23
@wildgrass saidIrrelevant.
"come from behind" is a news network illusion. To build drama and attract eyeballs. They are just tallying votes as they are reported from counties to media.
08 Nov 23
@techsouth saidI didn't "pick" Arizona; the post I was replying to did.
Do you know of any reporters who have reviewed the election process and told us which parts could be audited after the fact and which could not? Why aren't journalists asking questions that actually increase our understanding? Why do they act like "lack of standing" demonstrates no fraud?
Or, is it your contention, that an inspection that occurred in 2021 would have fo ...[text shortened]... at our elections are secure in spite of fraud in every other system that is complex to be laughable.
Right wingers don't like elections much, do you?
08 Nov 23
@no1marauder saidRight Wingers DO like people who justify their claims, though, who close their posts.
I didn't "pick" Arizona; the post I was replying to did.
Right wingers don't like elections much, do you?
Many here keep mentioning, or opining, that people were convicted of insurrection on Jan 6.
So I have my grandkids googling like crazy and they find nothing about that.
Can you help us out?