Except in the first debate, when it was considered rude and aggressive and unwelcome interrupting by the bad orange man.
Big D vs Twitter
- Thread starter Mors
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Except in the first debate, when it was considered rude and aggressive and unwelcome interrupting by the bad orange man.
I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter
To paraphrase ...
Trump knew Tuesday night that he was losing this election, which is why he went on the attack. If he thinks he’s losing the game, he attacks the game itself.
____________________
All Republicans
Larry Hogan, the Republican governor of Maryland, tweeted there was “no defense for the president’s comments tonight undermining our Democratic process”
Tom Ridge, the former secretary of homeland security under George W Bush, said the speech “disrespected every single American who figured out a way to safely vote amid a pandemic”.
Will Hurd, the Republican congressman of Texas, said: “A sitting president undermining our political process and questioning the legality of the voices of countless Americans without evidence is not only dangerous and wrong, it undermines the very foundation this nation was built upon. Every American should have his or her vote counted.”
Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), “Stop. Full stop. The votes will be counted and you will either win or lose. And America will accept that. Patience is a virtue,” Kinzinger wrote.
And what’s wrong with what I said?
That even after the FBI investigated and found nothing they could charge anyone for you still ask for verifiable proof that there was no collusion.
The lizard media worked on you.
Wow. The answer to why they never used widespread mail votes before this pandemic is because they like the vast majority of countries believe it is too susceptible to fraud. If they did not believe that, then they would have used mail in voting before because it is easier and cheaper and delivers the highest turnout.
In your deranged notion of whatever trump says = lie, you are taking the position that there cannot possibly be any fraud, it never happened, no evidence, etc. Then reading my question back to front and giving a dumb answer. I gave you some credit in thinking you were trying to be a smart arse. It pains me that you were not.
It is inevitable that there will be the odd incident (such as Trump re. the military ballots being trashed ... which involved a grand total of 9 ballots found in a trash can), the odd nutter (either Republican or Democratic) as per the one (I think it was a voting official in Maryland) that changed 100 votes. But to think it is rampant and could in any way affect any result, is conspiracy level rhetoric.
Four investigations following the 2016 election (one of them Trump's own mail-fraud investigative team, one from the FBI) failed to find ANY evidence of collusion or rigging on any scale worthy of further investigation (again, just individuals - from both parties).
Despite Trumps' false claims, a BCJ study found the actual rate of voter fraud is between 0.00004% and 0.0009%. http://trib.al/GDjOyDg
Wrong.
It has been in use in the USA since the late 1800s (particularly during wartime, starting with the Civil war) and most recently the vast majority of votes are mail-in votes in at least 4 US states (Oregon & Washington state are exclusively mail-in) with almost zero fraud denoted.
Of course it should also be noted that Trump actually admitted blocking additional funding to the USPS at this election because he knew it would disadvantage him in some key battleground states.
It is inevitable that there will be the odd incident (such as Trump re. the military ballots being trashed ... which involved a grand total of 9 ballots found in a trash can), the odd nutter (either Republican or Democratic) as per the one (I think it was a voting official in Maryland) that changed 100 votes. But to think it is rampant and could in any way affect any result, is conspiracy level rhetoric.
Four investigations following the 2016 election (one of them Trump's own mail-fraud investigative team, one from the FBI) failed to find ANY evidence of collusion or rigging on any scale worthy of further investigation (again, just individuals - from both parties).
Despite Trumps' false claims, a BCJ study found the actual rate of voter fraud is between 0.00004% and 0.0009%. http://trib.al/GDjOyDg
In the first paragraph "most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices", ohhhh so when you incorrectly award a vote but call it a clerical error instead of fraud, look, look mommy, no more fraud, I made the fraud go away mommy, look look!
Not 50 States then, only 4 states that the outcome is known beforehand anyway because it's so one sided. Why don't they use mass widespread total mail in voting in all the states? What stops them?
Why do you even bother? Both him and Dantes are fucking mental. Reading through this thread, and you'd expect some nurses from a [bcolor=#fdfbf8]psychiatric[/bcolor] ward to be on their way to pick them up.
Here is footage of one of them:
[bcolor=#fdfbf8]
Yep. As I surmised you would you ignored the actual proof against widespread collusion and vote-rigging and went with what you would prefer to be true (which is what Trump is doing - to now widespread GOP disgust and objection).
Not the point. I just wanted to blow your inaccurate assertions re. mail-in voting in the USA (they never used widespread mail votes before this pandemic) to smithereens. Job done 😉
Or rather I am doing the courtesy of reading what you asked me to, when I find the flaw with it coming back to you to explain it. How about you do the same thing. I'll wait.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3666259
Sigh. Man just go and research it instead of winging it 'the Trump way'. Those 4 are almost exclusively mail-in now (2 completely, from 2000 and 2011) and it's been in (wait for it) 'widespread use' (25% of ALL votes cast in 2016) for many years.
To you research is reading what someone wrote, and because they are "experts" adopting their opinion. That's not how I roll because I'm smarter than the person writing the research.
So you refer me to an article that doesn't list the '37 countries' that have banned mail-in voting (likely because most are not technology advanced enough to handle it) with it seems France the most prominent having experienced massive fraud in ............. 1975.
I would think that we've come a long way since then ! And USA as one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world hasn't put in safeguards (hint. It has, including signature and address checks to prevent duplicate voting).
Suggest you go and read up on Trumps' own investigative team's conclusion (and that of the FBI's).
Who is the woman in the blue dress in the first pic?
No verifiable proof was good enough when you were wanging on about Biden and China the other week.
What did Trumps team and the Russians discuss in their meetings - I’m sure the recording will clear it up.
Or are you back to arguing that only Democrats do naughty shit that they should be pulled up on.
And before your head disappears completely up your own arse - I would apply the same standards to both Trump, Biden, Pelosi, etc if they were applied equally , which they aren’t.
You know as well as I do - that not all ballots cast in absentia are fraudulent - the vast majority will be cast in good faith, Pelosi’s ownership of a company that develops software for vote counting machine, in itself, means nothing - it’s circumstantial, Trump has been building a narrative for ages to sow seeds of doubt, if he needed to, he’s not in it to Make America Great Again - he’s in it for whatever benefits him, personally, the most - like they probably all are.
Seriously - what happened to you?
Nah what I see is someone going with what's in their head (wishful thinking) instead of the actually researched reality.
To be fair - it’s at least entertaining when Dantes goes with what’s in his head.
You never know what crazy thing Is going to come out.... all you can do is pray it doesn’t have graphs.
The countries and the rules they use are given in a table about 6 or 7 pages down. I make no comment upon the technological advancement of the EU countries that form the majority of the list.
Oh and they write "Here is what we found. Besides the United States, there are 36 member states in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Forty-seven percent ban absentee voting unless the citizen is living abroad, and 30% require a photo-ID to obtain a absentee ballot. Fourteen percent of the countries ban absentee mail voting even for those living abroad." in case you don't do tables/graphs.
If I wanted to be entertained I'd watch a film or a comedian.
If I wanted to watch a narcissist maniacal liar Id watch Trump.
I'd agree it was weird so many of the channels cut his speech yesterday, was clearly pre meditated. Having said that they should have been doing this for past 4 years.
As for Pelosi I'd imagine it's not mentioned cos it's probably not that relevant?. Did she own then 4 years ago?
She own the voting machine company or the counting machines?
If I wanted to watch a narcissist maniacal liar Id watch Trump.
I'd agree it was weird so many of the channels cut his speech yesterday, was clearly pre meditated. Having said that they should have been doing this for past 4 years.
As for Pelosi I'd imagine it's not mentioned cos it's probably not that relevant?. Did she own then 4 years ago?
She own the voting machine company or the counting machines?
Last edited:
What's in my head is when the ballot gets scanned by the technologically advanced country, the determination of accept/reject is based on code that I understand, and the fake news doesn't. In fact forget the code.
If a person comes into the polling station and votes, do you have a reasonable doubt about whether they exist? No.
When a ballot comes in the post, do you have a reasonable doubt about whether the person who is claiming to have sent it exists? Yes.
It is mathematically impossible to resolve the second doubt perfectly. There's no way to do it. So you try your best. If you use your eye, you'll have an error rate, pick any number you like for that. The error rate will mean you accept some fake ballots, and reject some. You know what, I'm not going to bother finish explaining this to you because I no longer care. Sorry.
Cos it's not controversial?
Similar threads
