Serious thread about election fraud

DiscoGary wrote:

Now I'm just curious. After all that can any of you Dems see why people like me think the election was stolen? Even if you don't believe it was, can you see where I'm coming from? Can you put yourself in the other guy's shoes?

I say you can't.

It's hard for a sane person to put themselves in the shoes of delusion and irrationality.

There is not point dealing with your "evidence", because it has all been dealt with long ago and you refuse to recognize it. For example, as has been pointed out before, the idiot who claimed to find fraud with the Atrium County vote count was looking at information from Minnesota, thinking it was Michigan.

An interim vote totals mean nothing. And when mail-in ballots are counted, they tend to be loaded into the system in batches, causing a spike in the totals. This is normal stuff in elections, but fools now think they have discovered a plot.

RuningManJumpSuit wrote:

It's unbelievable this thread is still up. There can be no serious thread about election fraud because election fraud does not exist in the US.

I'll use Rhode Island as an example.

Population: 1,059,361

Counties: 5

Voting Precincts: 419

I'm guessing on average it takes about 10 people to staff a polling location and usually a few cops working in rotation.

That's ~4100 people in Rhode Island who would have the chance of seeing voter fraud happening and blowing the whistle on it.

So either 4100 people are in on the scam and everyone is so trustworthy they can keep the secret under wraps or voting fraud on the massive scale the Trumplicans claim can't ever happen.

If you are so sure of voter fraud on such a wide scale please point me to the case where it was caught and prosecuted.

3 cases of fraud in PA. One guy voted in his dead mother's name for Trump. Another Republican tried to vote for his son (who was a Democrat). A third guy tried to get an absentee ballot for his dead mother.

Don’t forget that one of them also tried to get a ballot for his dead mother-in-law but that one was flagged when he applied for the absentee ballot because she died several years ago instead of the 1 or 2 years that his mother had been dead.

george co wrote:

trashcan wrote:

I can see why someone would decide to vote for Trump. I can see getting committed to his presidency.

I can't so clue me in!

I was a left-leaning republican. Voted for McCain then Obama. When this guy mocked a physically disabled reporter I became an instant democrat until he is gone and the party is restored.

I surmise that if you are very wealthy, own your own business or work for one that benefits by throwing environmental policies out the window, or are so committed to pro-life you might be pro-trump. How your moral compass allows his mocking and degrading minorities, women, and those that need help, I simply can't speak for you.

The very people that support him the most are most hurt by his and the GOP policies.

Please tell me how you can see why someone voted for him.

1) people may look at morality very differently

2) People may say “I am working harder than my dad did at the same job, and I’m doing worse, meanwhile I see people different from me advancing, both economically and in societal influence. This trend has to change. Trump seems the most likely person to do it.”

3) not everyone incorporates morals into their political choices

4) certainly some people did benefit from trump over the first 3 years, at least in the short term.

If we want to avoid further Trump influence, it is important to try to understand what needs people thought he would meet, and see to what extent those needs can be met in ways more in line with our values

Thank you for proving my point.

I am not sure if you didn't specify your answer or if I am just inept at understanding it.

The morals stuff was a major impetus to "my" leaning democratic, not an idictment of trumpers.

Your #4= How? What did Trump do for those who support him. Was it the trillion dollar tax cut that they think will trickle to them. The fact that starting in 2021 their (middle and lower tax brackets) taxes will increase yearly through 2027 to offset the tax cut to the rich? The fact he tried to destroy social security and promised he would if he had a second term? The fact that he tried and in some cases did drop health care coverage to millions during a pandemic? I know people think he helped them, but specifically, how? What do they think he did for them.

#2: I agree. What did Trump do or promise that his followers cling to?

Your final paragraph: What needs did people think Trump would meet? What would a multiple time failed businessman known for bankruptcies & stiffing contractors & a reality TV figure project about helping the common man? What do these people cling to?

Thanks for any insight because I honestly can't figure out the thinking of anyone who would follow him beyond having an R at the end of their name and working backward to justify anything R's do so that they "win" over the D's.

spade detector wrote:

He’s going to say that you are just not seeing things from his side, when the reality is that he is just posting stories that have already been debunked on this very thread.

Called it. Asking with debunked info if now you can see why people believe (in debunked info).

DiscoGary wrote:

Now I'm just curious. After all that can any of you Dems see why people like me think the election was stolen? Even if you don't believe it was, can you see where I'm coming from? Can you put yourself in the other guy's shoes?

I say you can't.

I can see where you're coming from. If I was gullible and conspiratorial, and only trusted dubious sources because I liked what they said, and believed rally crowd size during a pandemic was indictive of the opinion of the rest of the country, and continued to believe a man who has never admitted to losing to anything and has been proven to be a liar many times over above all else. Then I can see where you are coming from.

I'd like to reverse this for you. Even if you believe today that the election was stolen, is there anything that would convince you otherwise? Because there was a time when the Trumpers in this thread said just wait and see till the courts have their say, but Trump has been unsuccessful in 50+ court cases and Giuliani and his buddies are just straight up unwilling to claim fraud when anything is actually on the line in court.

Then it was pushed back to 'just wait till the states have to certify' and you'll see the truth. That came and went, because state officials (including Republican ones like in Georgia) found no evidence of fraud to stop certification.

Then it was: just wait till December 14. The faithless electors have seen the truth and will set this all straight. But no, again there was no proof...only allegations.

Then it was: just wait till January 6. No way Pence will let this slide. Everyone knows it's fraud and Trump made him VP so he owes him. And here we are on January 8... with Pence saying the will of the people has been heard.

So now: even if the Cruz and Hawley's stall worked and you had a 10 day investigation period...what could have possibly come out in 10 days that hasn't come out in the last 2 months? In 50+ court cases? So 10 more days would have passed. And if nothing new would have been found (very likely), you would still point to the existence of this last investigation to prove that something fishy MUST have occurred...otherwise why have the investigation? That's as much as any of the 'proof' you've tried to share here. Just people asking questions.

I used to think maybe if Trump were willing to concede that would be enough to convince people like you. I didn't believe he would actually ever concede. But maybe Trump admitting he lost would work when the courts, and elected Republicans you used to trust couldn't. Now I'm not even so sure you'd believe him if he said it. Likely some 'he was coerced into it' defense.

So here we are. You say "can't you see where I'm coming from" and I say "can't you see you are unreachable".

1) I was talking about abortion, Israel, homosexuality, gender identity, gender equality, and possibly to a lesser extent miscegenation and climate change (there are those who say only god can change the climate), and how much they weigh in someone’s political decisions. I am sure there are other issues. .

2) I think the borders/immigration approach fits here. Also the bathroom/gender-identity approach. For some people his approach on tariffs, farm subsidies and support for fossil fuels fits here.

4)I did say short-term. I also won’t criticize someone for being penny-wise pound-foolish when they don’t have a pound.

RuningManJumpSuit wrote:

Thank you for proving my point.

You're welcome.

trashcan wrote:

1) I was talking about abortion, Israel, homosexuality, gender identity, gender equality, and possibly to a lesser extent miscegenation and climate change (there are those who say only god can change the climate), and how much they weigh in someone’s political decisions. I am sure there are other issues. .

2) I think the borders/immigration approach fits here. Also the bathroom/gender-identity approach. For some people his approach on tariffs, farm subsidies and support for fossil fuels fits here.

4)I did say short-term. I also won’t criticize someone for being penny-wise pound-foolish when they don’t have a pound.

I will just leave it here. I don't see things in your list that Trump did for his followers. Taking equality away from others provides nothing to his followers.

Tariffs? Farm subsidies? Those have become negatives for our consumers. I bought a stove that was $200 higher than the previous month due to Trump's tariff policies. Now if I was buying some of his daughter's clothes that were exempt from the tariffs.....

Your #4? Do you think trumpers believe they prospered short-term financially? If so, how?

No need to reply. I appreciate you trying to see into the head of his followers but I can't believe people can't see the big picture........if they really want to.

This is what you radical leftists don't understand.

It's not about proof.

It's not about evidence.

It's not about legality or the constitution.

It's about Faith. We Trump supporters simply have Faith that Trump was victorious and that there was massive election fraud. As a conservative, I believe that Faith is far more important than "facts".

Let's remember that when Trumps cases have been argued (at some stage) in front of a judge, lawyers have been quick to admit they aren't ACTUALLY alleging voter fraud:

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no-evidence-fraud/

What's the excuse here? Trump picked a terrible legal team? Why would he do that for the most important case of his career?

just the facts, ma'am wrote:

...

I'd like to reverse this for you. Even if you believe today that the election was stolen, is there anything that would convince you otherwise? ...

Sure. I explained that a few posts ago. The level of fraud they claimed would have to be big enough to show up on a statistical analysis. If Trump claims that Dems injected 300,000 votes into PA, then we should be able to see very strange thing happening compared to the normal election trends.

If those anomalies didn't happen or were very small, then I would say "we had the usual fraud of a 1,000 votes or so, but there's no evidence of the claimed massive fraud."

But statistical analysis supports the idea that huge numbers of votes were pumped into the swing states in a fraudulent way to push Biden over the top, and the numbers match up with the eye witness testimony, the weakening of ballot rules, the location of the fraud, the timing, etc. The whole picture is consistent with massive vote fraud.

The data used to create the charts in the link below is still on the nytimes web site. I downloaded it and I'm going to verify the claims they make here. If I can verify this, and if no one can explain to me how such a thing could happen in the normal course of ballot counting, then I will not move off my assertion that the kind of massive vote fraud Trump claims actually did occur and that the election was stolen ... and that our elections are corrupted until the entire process is reformed.

I'll let you know when I finish checking this out. There are other analysis that reveal signs of fraud as well, but this one is so shocking I had to call the source and ask if this whole thing was a troll job. Apparently it isn't. Not good.

I want to thank Letsrun for hosting this debate. Free exchange of ideas, something that use to be the bedrock principle that every American agreed on, can no longer be taken for granted and is being shut down at an alarmingly rapid rate.

It now takes courage to allow people to openly debate the issues of the day on any site, much less a running site.

So I tip my digital hat to the heroes here who have so far resisted the movement to silence free speech.

DiscoGary wrote:

But statistical analysis supports the idea that huge numbers of votes were pumped into the swing states in a fraudulent way to push Biden over the top, and the numbers match up with the eye witness testimony, the weakening of ballot rules, the location of the fraud, the timing, etc. The whole picture is consistent with massive vote fraud.

It doesn't though. You haven't posted any evidence that hasn't been refuted by data or simply explaining that mail in votes were counted last and swung heavily Democratic.

DiscoGary wrote:

Now I'm just curious. After all that can any of you Dems see why people like me think the election was stolen? Even if you don't believe it was, can you see where I'm coming from? Can you put yourself in the other guy's shoes?

I say you can't.

I see that you’re having a mental health crisis and that your junior high teachers failed you.

Your only ‘evidence’ is from blog posts from weeks ago. That same evidence led to your crew losing 50 embarrassing court cases. From there, your crew voted to certify the election.

Can you see why we think you’re mental?

Oh this is great progress Gary! I've discussed this in another thread! I admit I cannot tell you why the vote counter at the NY Times sometimes go negative because I do not claim to be an election logistics expert. I know at the very least the Secretary of State in Georgia isn't referencing NY Times when he is counting the votes...he has his own method for that.

But ALSO, if you look at the source data aggregated here:

https://observablehq.com/@mariodelgadosr/2020-presidential-election-time-series

You will be able to download it into excel files and see that, yes, there were times when Donald Trumps vote total went down, like at 19:42 on Nov 4. But guess what else Gary my boy...there are other times when Biden's total went down instead!

Fully 48 times in Georgia Biden's vote total as recorded by NY Times was less than the prior time stamp. On the other hand, Trump's total went down only 46 times. Your newspaper there seems to omit this fact...that it appears to be a regular occurrence of the vote reporting process for all candidates. No...according to your very trustworthy and not at all misleading sources, there is an implication that this impacted Trump and Trump alone.

Admittedly the final total 'negative' is about 15k greater for Trump than Biden, but to claim that this is evidence of fraud without knowing how these numbers are reported to the NY Times (who is also...I'll note...still not the official vote counter here...so what does it really mean anyway?) would be to be talking out of ones rectum.