2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gehenna said:
Yes to both, but also not just a technicality. Committing Fraud is Separate from Being Convicted of Fraud. And claiming "There is no fraud" isn't dealing with an individual, its dealing with an asserted fact. You don't get presumption of innocence here.

The only reason we HAVE presumption of innocence was because we, as a people, decided that forcing someone to prove their own innocence was wrong.

You don't GET to have that when making claims.
Click to expand...

Operating on that assumption, then, one must conclude that no elections were ever shown to be secure in US history and there exists no evidence otherwise.
Or at the more generous interpretation, every election which did not run a recount or an audit on itself is inherently neither secure nor insecure and neither valid nor invalid.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: GenericReviewerDraco and secret watcher
Just a boy said:
View attachment 1781998
:thinking:
Click to expand...

What the heck??
"New California State and New Nevada State are directly impacted by the arbitrary and capricious changes in election laws and procedures occur with unfortunate regularity in the current States of California and Nevada.Part of the reason for the formation of New California State and New Nevada Sate is to stop the lawless actions of Governors Newsome (California)and Sisolak (Nevada)."
Click to expand...
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
  • Lunacy
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, make_it_so, Vyse Inglebard and 5 others
Just a boy said:
View attachment 1781998
:thinking:
Click to expand...
Well this is just funny. Also THIS Amici Curiae is getting rejected.
Rich Evans Apologist said:
Operating on that assumption, then, one must conclude that no elections were ever shown to be secure in US history and there exists no evidence otherwise.
Or at the more generous interpretation, every election which did not run a recount or an audit on itself is inherently neither secure nor insecure and neither valid nor invalid.
Click to expand...
CORRECT!

Though less so on valid. As they were never opposed, they cannot be deemed invalid, as they have been made valid through common consent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Vyse Inglebard and ThatOneLurker
Rich Evans Apologist said:
And you'd drink it because you'd assume that it was not poisoned, right? Unless you were suicidal.
If we want to enter in the idea that I have a test for every known poison or toxin known to man, the comparison would go that I open the cap, I run these tests, they provide no evidence of poison, but I need to prove that they aren't fake tests.
If I bring in experts to testify, I have to prove that they aren't fake experts. I have to prove that they aren't someone else; that their degrees haven't been photoshopped; that the person who responds at their university isn't in on the scheme; that the university database hasn't been altered so as to suggest that these people are experts, etc. All to drink a bottle of water.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

it's too much work isn't an objection to the process. you could do all that and in the end prove its poisoned or not. or, like i said, you can save time and drink it. if you're poisoned, it's poisoned, if not, its not. the same applies to your objection that sig match audits cost too much and would take too much time. that's not an objection to the process either.

Rich Evans Apologist said:
There's no guarantee that it would prove the election was secure. You've already arbitrarily decided that the recounts have proven nothing, that the cases getting rejected from courts have proven nothing, that the appeals being rejected has proven nothing. Would it hurt to do a signature match? Potentially with human error, but even beyond that - you would come up with another reason to disbelieve if the signature matches followed the pattern of literally every other audit that has been conducted.

For example: https://www.factcheck.org/2020/11/trump-misinformation-on-georgia-ballot-rejections/
You might say, THIS SOURCE IS BUNK. That's fine - do what the source recommends you to do. Compare the rejected mail-in ballot rates, not the rejection of -all- ballot rates.
What is the rebuttal to the apples and oranges explanation?
Click to expand...
we reject the recount because the ballots themselves are in question. which is why we want a sig match to verify the ballots. the slippery slope here is a fallacy because it doesn't follow that we'd find something else to object to if the sig match didn't go our way.

we contend that all the ballots are fucked, not just the mail in, because signature matching was poorly performed or not performed at all. Barnes went through the contentions pretty well in various viva frei and richard barris videos.
Rich Evans Apologist said:
The reason that I suggest religion is a bad idea is because there is no baseline as to whether God exists or doesn't exist that you can default to if someone fails to prove or disprove its existence.
Click to expand...
this is why you lay out the premise before you start debating. religious debates work because the debaters are arguing from the same premise.
Rich Evans Apologist said:
The water bottle example is more straightforward - we have assumptions about what is normal and what is usual that we operate on in everyday life.
You have no assurances in everyday life that when you buy some candy from a candy machine that it won't kill you. But we operate on our basis of what 'normal' is; lacking reason to believe otherwise, we default to the normal, baseline assumption.
Click to expand...
the water bottle works because you bothered to lay out the premise. if you laid out the premises for a religious debate you could debate to the same degree.
Rich Evans Apologist said:
For US elections, this baseline legal assumption is that there has either been no fraud, or there has been at best minor amounts of fraud which are wholly ancillary. While there are plenty of people who believe that every election is rigged and fraudulent and that is their baseline, legally, if there is no sustained contest than the election is concluded as valid.
Click to expand...
there is no baseline. in 2018 north carolina, any fraud meant the election had to be thrown out. in the run up to the 2020 election, any mismatched signatures kept the greens and kayne off the ballot. in the 2020 election, people are saying signature matches aren't doable and aren't actionable. there is no baseline.


Rich Evans Apologist said:
Yes, but the man walking around with crack definitely has crack on him and there's no excuse that gets him out of that. If I showed you an image of the man walking around with a bag of something that looked like crack, would that be enough to convict him?

If every single one of these allegations was substantiated, or even made it as far as the GA suit has, there would be more to go off of. My issue has consistently been that once an explanation is given for the suspicious footage or numbers... that explanation is never argued against beyond re-asserting the original accusation as fact. The state farm arena footage -does- look suspect as hell when you watch it, but then the election official explains what was going on and it changes your perspective. Could there still be a problem? Of course - but I'd have to hear the rebuttal there.

Similarly, when I saw footage of the people putting shit up over the windows? That was suspect as hell. Then someone explained it was because those "observers" outside the building (who would not be qualified as observers, given there were observers inside) were shouting and screaming and banging on the glass "STOP THE COUNT" with footage thereof. What was the argument against that explanation?
--
oh goody, not beaten to the punch I think?: california and nevada speak
Click to expand...
coffee county,ga and wayne county, mi can't balance their pollbooks. if you use 2018 north carolina, you can say the entire election is illegitimate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Vyse Inglebard and babadook
Meat Target said:
Hory shiet. Are they pushing for two new Red states to join the Union?

If so, THAT will be 4d Chess.
Click to expand...
The NCR can finally be real

FNV_NCR_Flag.png
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: George Geef, 1Tonka_Truck, thyme's up and 27 others
PepsiVanilla said:
Could you give a source for this please?

Anyway... color me skeptical but something tells me the party currently endorsing riots and unabashed voter fraud won't exactly care about these laws either.
Click to expand...
Its normal practice, i hadn't been aware that you can nominate for Chief Justice.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Vyse Inglebard, Nguyen Van Phuoc and 3 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back