Serious thread about election fraud

krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:

Voter fraud occurred - without doubt. When you have mail-in ballots, the level of voter fraud is multiplied - hundreds of votes in 2000 = thousands of votes in 2020.

Wide-spread voter fraud is not required. Surgical voter fraud, in a handful of Democrat-run cities in a few swing states is all that was needed to flip a state.

Without a doubt? You mean the republican head of Federal Elections Commission who said there has been zero fraud is lying?

Mail-in balloting gets far more scrutiny and eyes than day-of voting and has a distinct paper trail that is superior. The only doubt of mail in voting was Trump pushing it to mindless sheep.

krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:

just the facts, ma'am wrote:

This is how you want our country to work? This is your preferred version of a democracy? A fever dream of a petty man, seeking vengeance for having something unkind said about him, reversing the will of the people?

We're talking hundreds of votes in FL compared to tens of thousands of votes in multiple states. This is not "just like in 2000."

You can't claim the will of the people.

Voter fraud occurred - without doubt. When you have mail-in ballots, the level of voter fraud is multiplied - hundreds of votes in 2000 = thousands of votes in 2020.

Wide-spread voter fraud is not required. Surgical voter fraud, in a handful of Democrat-run cities in a few swing states is all that was needed to flip a state.

you and your buddies have done nothing to prove this other than make the allegations. we're still talking about tens of thousands of votes here. I think you're having trouble understanding how much Trump is losing and in how many states.

He's down 146,123 votes in Michigan and Detroit only has a population of 672,000. Someone falsified the equivalent of over 20% of a state'ss largest city and left no trace? Do you have any idea how ballots are counted, verified, etc?

Just because your mind imagines it doesn't mean it deserves a valid seat at the table. You lost. Your frat bro on the bench isn't going to get any say on this matter.

Harambe wrote:

Agingrunner wrote:

So you agree that both sides have been involved in voter fraud and suppression?

This isn't a gotcha.

There are usually a handful of voter fraud cases prosecuted every year. They are usually targeted for small local elections -- not big national ones where it is hard to affect the count. They don't seem to trend for one party more than another except that small communities tend to be more conservative.

None of this has an appreciable effect on the outcomes of national elections.

I didn't say it did. I've said Biden has won. The voter fraud that has occurred, to no matter what degree, needs to be uncovered and prosecuted. If you are sure that your team and your guy won fairly, then I'm sure you have no problem investigating all allegations (which more and more keep surfacing).

I know a lot of dumb "advanced" degree holders. I know plenty of people with a "Masters in Social Worker" and while they are incredibly opinionated, they aren't particularly bright (ask a MSW to do high school level math).

Many years ago I brought a girl pursuing a Ph.D in Biology on a mini golfing date. When we were done, we sat down to add up the score - this girl struggled to do simple addition - it was actually kind of embarrassing. The entire date she was able to speak passionately about her beliefs and feelings and science classes and she could communicate very well but was abysmal at rudimentary math. Granted sample size, n = 1 in this example but the lesson is, don't assume people with "advanced" degrees are by default smart.

Agingrunner wrote:

Harambe wrote:

This isn't a gotcha.

There are usually a handful of voter fraud cases prosecuted every year. They are usually targeted for small local elections -- not big national ones where it is hard to affect the count. They don't seem to trend for one party more than another except that small communities tend to be more conservative.

None of this has an appreciable effect on the outcomes of national elections.

I didn't say it did. I've said Biden has won. The voter fraud that has occurred, to no matter what degree, needs to be uncovered and prosecuted. If you are sure that your team and your guy won fairly, then I'm sure you have no problem investigating all allegations (which more and more keep surfacing).

Two things Agingrunner

1) You said "the voter fraud that has occurred". How are you so sure it has occurred? You and your ilk have acknowledged you don't actually have any proven cases of fraud.

2) Please respond to you hilarious statement around education and party affiliation. How would you respond to the empirical evidence that literally contradicts your worldview?

Not surprisingly as college faculty are overwhelmingly liberal and prey on young minds to convert. Also not surprising that POCs vote Democrat as the party has long given them empty promises while exploited them for their vote. It's sad that only 1/3 of voters have a degree. I wonder what percent understand the implications of advanced dementia?

Of course there are a lot of dumb advanced degree holders. I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

Would you like to limit this to PhDs from top 100 global universities in technical disciplines? Not sure how to get at that data but I suspect it will skew even more liberal.

Can you guys just admit you are wrong here. By no measure are more educated individuals, scientists, however you want to frame it skewed towards republicans. This is just a freaking lie.

Agingrunner wrote:

Not surprisingly as college faculty are overwhelmingly liberal and prey on young minds to convert. Also not surprising that POCs vote Democrat as the party has long given them empty promises while exploited them for their vote. It's sad that only 1/3 of voters have a degree. I wonder what percent understand the implications of advanced dementia?

Are young minds preyed upon?

Or, are young minds open, listen to facts, hypothesize, and come to an ardent conclusion?

I am not pushing the latter, just trying to look at all angles.

So now you are changing your argument away from what you originally said to the fact that the reason there is a skew is because academia is inherently liberal?

Have you ever wondered why academia is liberal?

Or maybe its because mail in ballots are linked to the most cases of fraud with elections? I don't believe for a second that you hate both parties. I've seen this script read out a few hundred times.

You've got zero case. Right now, Biden's winning by about 15,000 votes in Arizona, 36,000 in Nevada, 150,000 in Michigan, 20,000 in Wisconsin, 47,000 in Pennsylvania, and 12,000 in Georgia. All but Arizona have been trending toward Biden as the count has neared its end. Mail ballots were predicted in advance to go for Biden by a lot, because Trump, who himself voted by mail, as did other Republican leaders, criticized mail-in ballots. Trump won by a lot in the in person voting. Where Republicans won, Trump claims no fraud. Only where he lost. Hmm ... Is it possible that he has no evidence whatsoever? Indeed.

george c wrote:

krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:

Voter fraud occurred - without doubt. When you have mail-in ballots, the level of voter fraud is multiplied - hundreds of votes in 2000 = thousands of votes in 2020.

Wide-spread voter fraud is not required. Surgical voter fraud, in a handful of Democrat-run cities in a few swing states is all that was needed to flip a state.

Without a doubt? You mean the republican head of Federal Elections Commission who said there has been zero fraud is lying?

Mail-in balloting gets far more scrutiny and eyes than day-of voting and has a distinct paper trail that is superior. The only doubt of mail in voting was Trump pushing it to mindless sheep.

Go back and look at the piece that you posted. The FEC officer per your article is Ellen Weintraub, Democeat, not Republican. Next

Agingrunner wrote:

Or maybe its because mail in ballots are linked to the most cases of fraud with elections? I don't believe for a second that you hate both parties. I've seen this script read out a few hundred times.

Then you'd be wrong. I am being quite honest as I have tried to be throughout this thread. I have posted almost primarily FACTS unlike many on both sides of the issue. When I post facts, they seem to be ignored and people get back to name-calling and vile. Not that it matters but I am socially liberal and fairly conservative when it comes to what I see as self-responsibility. However, I am currently very pro dem because I feel I can think for myself and see an attention seeking low IQ fish being led by some very scary people gaining $ all along the way. Think "2017 tax cut for the top 1%" to make sense of the previous sentence.

Mail in ballots have greater security. Each and every one is checked and rechecked, signatures verified, and checked again by bipartisan officials while others watch. GA was streamed live. Google did an experiment with the 2016 day-of voting and an 11 year old girl changed votes in 10 minutes. Mail in has worked wonderfully for several years in some states. It has only been since Trump asked followers to avoid it so he could cry foul "only if" he lost that it has been questioned. It is being questioned by those who cannot think for themselves or get past the R after their name, IMHO.

For anyone interested in actually learning about the arguments of those claiming fraud, this blog post lays out brilliantly, in an extremely systematic fashion all the allegations (and there a lot of them) with the proper citations. For those who refuse to believe that voter fraud could have occurred, don't say nobody has provided any evidence.

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2020/11/10/evidence-of-voter-fraud-in-the-2020-us-presidential-election/

Mail-in ballots were tough to rely on for Democrats because they are rejected more often for issues of signature matching, a total joke of a science, signatures over envelope seals, envelopes within envelopes, etc. By relying on the mail in ballots, Democrats actually reduced their advantages. Each mail-in ballot is scrutinized by a group of people, including observers, before it is counted, which is why this is taking so long (Pennsylvania Republicans prevented the state from counting mail-in ballots until election day). Voter names are checked against state records to insure no double voting. Although the states really need to go ahead and finalize their vote tallies, rather than dragging out the counting with days between updates (what is North Carolina doing? I've seen barely any updates in a week, and some moved the proportion number without changing the vote tallies), this was a legitimate election. I've seen zero evidence of shenanigans in vote counting. I did see evidence of Republicans placing fake ballot drop boxes in many places in California, but nothing in the counting.

Agingrunner wrote:

Go back and look at the piece that you posted. The FEC officer per your article is Ellen Weintraub, Democeat, not Republican. Next

The commission of 6, 4 appointed by Trump, made the claim. Weintraub communicated the finding.

highhoppingworm wrote:

Agingrunner wrote:

I didn't say it did. I've said Biden has won. The voter fraud that has occurred, to no matter what degree, needs to be uncovered and prosecuted. If you are sure that your team and your guy won fairly, then I'm sure you have no problem investigating all allegations (which more and more keep surfacing).

Two things Agingrunner

1) You said "the voter fraud that has occurred". How are you so sure it has occurred? You and your ilk have acknowledged you don't actually have any proven cases of fraud.

2) Please respond to you hilarious statement around education and party affiliation. How would you respond to the empirical evidence that literally contradicts your worldview?

1. There is evidence of voter fraud. You do know how to Google.

2. The whole degree statement I made was not to brag, but is in response to you and your ilk constantly calling people on the Right stupid, dumb, ignorant, etc. Another all knowing lib(you think you know what my world views are). Asinine.

highhoppingworm wrote:

Of course there are a lot of dumb advanced degree holders. I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

Would you like to limit this to PhDs from top 100 global universities in technical disciplines? Not sure how to get at that data but I suspect it will skew even more liberal.

Can you guys just admit you are wrong here. By no measure are more educated individuals, scientists, however you want to frame it skewed towards republicans. This is just a freaking lie.

You are great at re-framing arguments and strawmaning your opponents.

An advanced degrees doesn't signify that someone is smarter than someone without an advanced degree. The interpretation that is made by people that use the statistics that you are using is that they are.

Plenty of advanced degrees are granted to people that aren't particularly bright (MSW being the clearest example).

Plenty of non-college educated people are very bright but for whatever reason, didn't pursue a degree (reasons include: different generation when degrees weren't as widespread as today, financial reasons, job didn't require degree, smart enough to do something without degree).

Millennials are awash in degrees and don't understand that a generation ago, degrees were not nearly as ubiquitous.

Younger people skew more progressive/liberal -> younger people are awash in advanced degrees thus a majority of people with advanced degrees will skew more progressive/liberal/Democrat.

These younger people aren't inherently smart or wiser than the lesser-degreed generation before them.