Uninformed and Compliant
.450/400 Nitro Ex
HUGE BOMBSHELL SATURDAY, though
Too funny. You chose slimy while I chose Blowme.Fuck you slimy.
Robin
This audit was not about showing who won, the AZ Senate will need to decide to keep the elections as is or decertifyInteresting listen.
*ssshhh* don’t tell them that the duplicate ballots favored TrumpDon't worry guys. Trump has it in the bag, wait until next Thursday. That's when we release the Cerberus.
So, what you're saying is that if they don't secure the election by 2024 we should just stuff the shit out of the boxes for Trump ?*ssshhh* don’t tell them that the duplicate ballots favored Trump
Surely my position was made clear back in November.So, what you're saying is that if they don't secure the election by 2024 we should just stuff the shit out of the boxes for Trump ?
At this point I think the only way to guarantee a secure election is to make the Democrats afraid of fraud.
Even if they don't cast them, someone should leave pallets of Trump ballots in an abandoned truck somewhere to be found during early voting next time.
Whether there was fraud is irrelevant at this point. The ability to prove the election was secure was eliminated last summer.Surely my position was made clear back in November.
I, in absolutely very clear and no uncertain terms, believe this is a fantasy, and the people who still think fraud was extensive enough to switch the winner of the election are delusional. This has all been vetted through dozens of lawsuits, which so predictably turned up nothing of significance.
I was vocal about this in November, starting two days after the election, and consistently about it when I constantly derided his legal team as a bunch negligent hacks (who are presently defending themselves in lawsuits), when I said the kraken redemption story was a fabrication, and at this point there is little left to say to these people but point and laugh. The same who mightily resisted any acknowledgment of the pre-election polls that said Trump would lose, who used lawn signs as their statistical analysis, were so shocked they bought into a pitiable narrative.
This maricopa county fan-fiction was supposed to be ground breaking. After months, millions of dollars, 360 more votes for Biden. This is pure comedy.
If you were conducting an experiment to determine who in society was irredeemably hopeless there would be no better way to do it.
At this stage I couldn’t care less what gets people who bought into this fairytale to the polls. If they want to stay home next November and wail about fraud the country is better off without their vote.
I know we've gone back and forth on this, but your thing about government proving that is impossible. It is a logical fallacy; proving a negative. Nobody can ever prove that, anymore than you can prove I am not able to see the future or fly. How can you prove it? I insist it's true. Prove it's not. You can't. The government cannot ever prove there was no fraud, particularly going on the very safe assumption that there was some because every election almost certain has, and will always have, some fraud.Whether there was fraud is irrelevant at this point. The ability to prove the election was secure was eliminated last summer.
And, no, you do not need to prove fraud. The government needs to prove the election was legitimate.
Just like the government doesn't need to prove fraud when they audit your taxes. You have to prove each deduction was legitimate.
All that matters is the potential for fraud, and that is obviously there.
If they are not going to close that door and nail it shut, then the only response is to exploit it as heavily as possible.
They don't have to prove that there is no fraud.I know we've gone back and forth on this, but your thing about government proving that is impossible. It is a logical fallacy; proving a negative. Nobody can ever prove that, anymore than you can prove I am not able to see the future or fly. How can you prove it? I insist it's true. Prove it's not. You can't. The government cannot ever prove there was no fraud, particularly going on the very safe assumption that there was some because every election almost certain has, and will always have, some fraud.
...and instead, their response has largely been to stick their thumb in the eye of anyone who questions the result.They don't have to prove that there is no fraud.
They *do* have to prove that a level of fraud capable of altering the result of the election did not happen.
Just like a drug manufacturer doesn't need to prove that dangerous side effects never happen. but they *do* need to prove that they are below an acceptable level.
It's very simple. Any study (and an election is a form of study) will have a non zero confidence interval. If the result is so close that it is within that window, then the result is inconclusive.
So, the government doesn't need to prove 0 fraud. That would be impossible, there is always going to be some fraud.
They need to demonstrate that there couldn't have been more than X amount of fraud then if the election is any closer than that, then it was a draw.
The real question is why should *anyone* trust an election if you can't prove it wasn't fraudulent....and instead, their response has largely been to stick their thumb in the eye of anyone who questions the result.