Democrats steal ANOTHER election????

[Blimey]

You're looking at this backwards.

You're arguing that nobody has proven it was stolen.

The point is that it was conducted in a manner in which it could be stolen without any ability to detect that.

Imagine if some new drug was released and the FDA had to prove it was unsafe, not the drug company prove it was safe.

Then the drug company arranged so that there was no record of who took it and who didn't making it impossible to gather any data on side effects ?

Would you trust such a drug ?

Would the fact that the drug company won every lawsuit because the plaintiffs were unable to prove the drug caused their harm mean it must be safe ?

Because that's what the 2020 election looked like.


The burden of proof is on the government to demonstrate that the election was secure. They can't do that because they do not have the records to be able to do it.

The fact that people haven't proven in court that it was stolen is not the point, and IMHO they were foolish to try. They're accepting the government moving that goal post.

This is illogical because it's inconceivable, literally, for any government at any point in history to prove that fraud did not exist, because it is not omniscient. Fraud is a crime and crimes must be proven. The burden of proof is on the accuser. It can't work any other way.

Even if that was the topic it's not enough because the vast bulk of big lie believers believe things that have been proven as false. E.g. the georgia cases under desks narrative. No entity should have to continual placate people's paranoia and ignorance. Already the election officials in contested states have gone to historic lengths and found either no fraud or fraud on a scale so miniscule as to be completely irrelevant.

People who suffer from clinically significant levels of paranoia cannot, by the virtue of their mental illness, be convinced of reality. Not ever. Nobody will ever convince a person who believes in something so absurd and glaringly false as nanobots of anything he does not want to be convinced of. As I likened it to teaching a dog to write. You can't get there from here.

 

[Defilade]

Pausing an Election count in the dead of night doesn't pass the sniff test. Haven't seen that ever done before. Also with changing Election laws with "Non" lawmakers is a new one too.

 

[spat]

Fact: the 2016 Trump campaign solicited election assistance from foreign agents. That was a crime. It did not give him the win but it was still a crime.

And when they investigated that it turns out the only ones colluding with the Russians were the from the Clinton campaign (with the help of the FBI).

You're right, it wasn't enough to give her the win though.

They pulled out all the stops for 2020 and squeeked Biden in.

 

[spat]

This is illogical because it's inconceivable, literally, for any government at any point in history to prove that fraud did not exist, because it is not omniscient. Fraud is a crime and crimes must be proven. The burden of proof is on the accuser. It can't work any other way.

Even if that was the topic it's not enough because the vast bulk of big lie believers believe things that have been proven as false. E.g. the georgia cases under desks narrative. No entity should have to continual placate people's paranoia and ignorance. Already the election officials in contested states have gone to historic lengths and found either no fraud or fraud on a scale so miniscule as to be completely irrelevant.

People who suffer from clinically significant levels of paranoia cannot, by the virtue of their mental illness, be convinced of reality. Not ever. Nobody will ever convince a person who believes in something so absurd and glaringly false as nanobots of anything he does not want to be convinced of. As I likened it to teaching a dog to write. You can't get there from here.

You can't prove that fraud did not exist. Because it always exists. Every election of that scale has *some* fraud.

What you need to do is prove that the scale of the fraud is low enough that it won't alter the outcome.

If you can't do that, then nobody should trust the results at all.

But the bottom line is that regardless of what you *think* about the evidence, or how irrational you think the doubters are, you need to figure out how to satisfy them or you've got a world of bad shit coming.

If you really think it's impossible to satisfy them, then you'd better liquidate your stocks and trade for canned goods, because we're in for a very bumpy ride.

 

[Acer-m14]

i'm checking to see if SUNY Geneseo has a Gender Study degree class i can sign up for and then take out a 30K loan to buy a new car/truck so i can get to class and then make you all pay for it ..

its the Democratic way

LOL

 

[ronstar]

You can't prove that fraud did not exist. Because it always exists. Every election of that scale has *some* fraud.

What you need to do is prove that the scale of the fraud is low enough that it won't alter the outcome.

If you can't do that, then nobody should trust the results at all.

But the bottom line is that regardless of what you *think* about the evidence, or how irrational you think the doubters are, you need to figure out how to satisfy them or you've got a world of bad shit coming.

If you really think it's impossible to satisfy them, then you'd better liquidate your stocks and trade for canned goods, because we're in for a very bumpy ride.

It's absurd to demand someone prove a negative. If you are going to claim that there was a international conspiracy to steal the election with massive fraud, you have the burden of proof

 

[Blimey]

You can't prove that fraud did not exist. Because it always exists. Every election of that scale has *some* fraud.

What you need to do is prove that the scale of the fraud is low enough that it won't alter the outcome.

If you can't do that, then nobody should trust the results at all.

But the bottom line is that regardless of what you *think* about the evidence, or how irrational you think the doubters are, you need to figure out how to satisfy them or you've got a world of bad shit coming.

If you really think it's impossible to satisfy them, then you'd better liquidate your stocks and trade for canned goods, because we're in for a very bumpy ride.

If that is your standard I'm not sure why you'd ever bother voting again. That goes for all the people who still buy into the big lie. They claim they believe it was rigged but they will get in line next election.

 

[Defilade]

View attachment Watters- ‘The FBI Rigged the 2020 Election’.mp4

Watters: ‘The FBI Rigged the 2020 Election’

WATTERS: “This election was decided by 44,000 votes in Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin. If we, the people, hadn’t been lied to, Trump would have won. This was not a free and fair election. The FBI rigged the 2020 election.”

 

[Defilade]

 

[Defilade]

 

[spat]

It's absurd to demand someone prove a negative. If you are going to claim that there was a international conspiracy to steal the election with massive fraud, you have the burden of proof

The burden of proof is on the people who claim the election was fair.

That is who is making the claim.

If I claim you owe me $100, the burden of proof is on me. You don't have to prove its a fraudulent claim.

 

[spat]

If that is your standard I'm not sure why you'd ever bother voting again. That goes for all the people who still buy into the big lie. They claim they believe it was rigged but they will get in line next election.

Why make it easier to steal by not voting ?

 

[ronstar]

The burden of proof is on the people who claim the election was fair.

Elections are assumed to be fair unless there is overwhelming evidence of fraud.

Show us your evidence or be quiet.

 

[99cummins]

Elections are assumed to be fair unless there is overwhelming evidence of fraud.

Show us your evidence or be quiet.

So do you feel the same way towards the dems who claimed fraud and election stealing after the 2016 election when trump won? Were they just as foolish as you think the current folks screaming fraud are?

 

[tirwin1]

Here's an example of fraud using dominion machines in just one county in Georgia:


Extrapolate this nationwide and it's very easy to believe there was fraud in the presidential election.

 

[Blimey]

So do you feel the same way towards the dems who claimed fraud and election stealing after the 2016 election when trump won? Were they just as foolish as you think the current folks screaming fraud are?

I can't speak for him but I sure do. The main difference of course was the scale of the delusion was a tiny fraction of the one most republicans are presently under.

 

[FRB]

Public college should be free. Mitch McConnell paid $500.

Nice try... that was 1964 dollars, today it is approx 10 tens more

 

[spat]

Elections are assumed to be fair unless there is overwhelming evidence of fraud.

Show us your evidence or be quiet.

LoL.

No, elections are not assumed to be fair.

Just like drugs are not assumed to be safe and scientific discoveries are not assumed to be real.

Joe Biden is claiming that 80 million people voted for him.

Prove it.

 

[spat]

Public college should be free. Mitch McConnell paid $500.

There is no such thing as "free'. That's a democrat lie. What they really mean anytime they use the word is "paid for by someone else".

Why do you think people who got a roofing job right out of high-school and worked their asses off for the next 10 years and make $60k should have to pay for someone else's college when they make $100k ?

As for the cost increase, that seriously needs to be addressed.

Who do you think is responsible for the cost of a degree rising at many times the rate of inflation for decades ? If you really want to transfer that student loan debt to the guilty party, shouldn't it be them and not our enterprising roofer and people like him ?

 

[spat]

Nice try... that was 1964 dollars, today it is approx 10 tens more

View attachment 171536

That's what it should cost today.

But, it costs another 20x that much.

If you want to go after someone for exploiting people you should go after the people responsible for that cost increase.

$5000 in student loan debt today is where it *should* be. $200k is where it is.

If you just transfer that debt to the public at large, they're just going to double down on their scheme.

That same degree will cost $400k by 2040. Why wouldn't it ?

 

[spat]

It's absurd to demand someone prove a negative. If you are going to claim that there was a international conspiracy to steal the election with massive fraud, you have the burden of proof

If Trump had won 2020 you guys would still be screaming about Russian interference.

The facts are simple. If you want the American people to trust the election results, you need to convince them it was fair.

If you don't care if they trust the results, then you are admitting the whole democracy thing is a facade.




Hey, I held a national poll recently. Turns out neither Trump or Biden won the 2020 election. I did, massive write in campaign. I really got 94% of the vote. The poll only has a 3% margin of error.

There was no fraud, trust me.

If you can't prove it was fraud you have to accept the result, right?

 

[Blimey]

If Trump had won 2020 you guys would still be screaming about Russian interference.

The facts are simple. If you want the American people to trust the election results, you need to convince them it was fair.

If you don't care if they trust the results, then you are admitting the whole democracy thing is a facade.




Hey, I held a national poll recently. Turns out neither Trump or Biden won the 2020 election. I did, massive write in campaign. I really got 94% of the vote. The poll only has a 3% margin of error.

There was no fraud, trust me.

If you can't prove it was fraud you have to accept the result, right?

Define what "fair" means. By whose standard? Must 100% of constituents believe it was fair and before you say yes what about the mentally ill ones who believe the moon landing was fake?

You've talked yourself into an impossible, thoroughly illogical position that, if unpacked, would mean no election in history has been "fair" and no election in the future ever will be, for all it would take is some random voice to claim the election wasn't fair and now suddenly it's not because the government cannot placate their irrationality.

 

[spat]

Define what "fair" means. By whose standard? Must 100% of constituents believe it was fair and before you say yes what about the mentally ill ones who believe the moon landing was fake?

You've talked yourself into an impossible, thoroughly illogical position that, if unpacked, would mean no election in history has been "fair" and no election in the future ever will be, for all it would take is some random voice to claim the election wasn't fair and now suddenly it's not because the government cannot placate their irrationality.

By the standards of the people you're trying to convince.

You don't get it. This is not a legal standard we are discussing. This is literally convincing people to trust you.

Your side had better figure it out, soon.

Playing the "we can ignore half the country by just calling them ignorant hicks" card will only work for so long.

Poll finds 43% of Americans believe it's likely civil war will break out within the next 10 years

Around three-fifths of the 1,500 Americans polled also believe political violence and division will increase over the next few years.

news.yahoo.com

Around three-fifths of the 1,500 Americans polled also believe political violence and division will increase over the next few years.

 

[ronstar]

So do you feel the same way towards the dems who claimed fraud and election stealing after the 2016 election when trump won? Were they just as foolish as you think the current folks screaming fraud are?

Nobody claimed election fraud.

Many Democrats claimed that Trump campaign got help from the Russians, and we know that the Trump campaign did indeed solicit help from Russian agents.

 

[ronstar]

If Trump had won 2020 you guys would still be screaming about Russian interference.

The facts are simple. If you want the American people to trust the election results, you need to convince them it was fair.

If you don't care if they trust the results, then you are admitting the whole democracy thing is a facade.




Hey, I held a national poll recently. Turns out neither Trump or Biden won the 2020 election. I did, massive write in campaign. I really got 94% of the vote. The poll only has a 3% margin of error.

There was no fraud, trust me.

If you can't prove it was fraud you have to accept the result, right?

I'm sorry but if the Supreme Court says it was fair and Congress certifies the election that means the election was fair.

That is what our constitution says.

 

[spat]

I'm sorry but if the Supreme Court says it was fair and Congress certifies the election that means the election was fair.

That is what our constitution says.

No, our Constitution says the legitimacy of the government comes from the consent of the governed.

If you can't convince the vast majority of the people that the government is legitimate, then it isn't.

 

[spat]

Nobody claimed election fraud.

Many Democrats claimed that Trump campaign got help from the Russians, and we know that the Trump campaign did indeed solicit help from Russian agents.

No, we know that all the evidence of the Trump campaign "colluding with the Russians" was fabricated by Russians with help from the Clinton campaign and the FBI.

What do you think "the election was stolen" means if not election fraud ?

Fraud is not limited to just interfering with the actual count.

Even today the left is simultaneously saying you have no fraud, *and* claiming there is widespread voter suppression.

So which is it ? The level of cognitive dissonance on the left is staggering.

 

[spat]

I doubt there is a person here who doesn't think I'd skull fuck you in a real debate. Even those who disagree with my beliefs. You just don't have the brain for it.

Remember that time you believed that democrats tried to "ban the pledge of allegiance"? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Democrats Tried to Slip a Law Banning Pledge of Allegiance Into Aid Package (fake news - locked)

https://bustatroll.org/2020/03/24/democrats-tried-to-slip-a-law-banning-pledge-of-allegiance-into-aid-package/?fbclid=IwAR0CHW7TbaIalU3QpMlAK47BaqBWf96l3M8atumwhLkmg7_aM3HBl5tQ1K8

nygunforum.com

I have no doubt you would think you won any debate you had with anyone.

The level of arrogance that leftists have is matched only by the condescending attitude they show to those who offer any resistance to their notions.

 

[ronstar]

No, our Constitution says the legitimacy of the government comes from the consent of the governed.

If you can't convince the vast majority of the people that the government is legitimate, then it isn't.

One day when you read the US Constitution you will understand that an election is legitimate when Congress has certified it as such. Especially when claims of fraud have been rendered mute by our justice system, including the highest court in the land.

After that point the only argument one has left is dangerous paranoid delusions. Trump should be in a mental institution.

 

[Modean]

They were talking massive Red wave a few months ago. Now they're saying Democrats will keep their hold and maybe increase their power!

Many folks say the 2020 election was stolen, are the Dems about to steal another one?

What say you?

Thank the Dobbs decision.