down the Jan 6 memory hole with ****er Carlson

[homersapien 12,244]

On 3/14/2023 at 12:49 PM, Son of A Tiger said:

My response in red.

Present any evidence for "widespread voter fraud".

You just said you believe that such evidence exists.  Show it.

[Son of A Tiger 649]

5 hours ago, homersapien said:

It's no wonder you folks are anti-science.

You believe that. Prove it (as you say to others).

[DKW 86 7,910]

On 3/17/2023 at 8:39 AM, aubaseball said:

Just a question?  Would changing the way voting is conducted without going through proper processes fall under voter fraud?  Or would you or anyone just consider that the cost of doing business during an unusual period?  

Personally, I would support anything that was passed thru standard legislative processes. 

[homersapien 12,244]

15 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

You believe that. Prove it (as you say to others).

Some truths are self-evident. Science deniers fall into that category.

(Still waiting on your evidence for "widespread voter fraud".)  

Edited March 18, 2023 by homersapien

[Son of A Tiger 649]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Some truths are self-evident. Science deniers fall into that category.----nice cop out.

(Still waiting on your evidence for "widespread voter fraud".) -posted earlier

 

[homersapien 12,244]

39 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

 

You'll have to explain the contradiction you perceive.  I don't see it.

If someone arbitrarily rejects the science, they are a science denier, ipso facto.  Example: Anyone who doesn't believe the globe is warming.

If someone claims - and believes - there was "widespread voter fraud" they need to present evidence of same.  Example:  You

Edited March 18, 2023 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 4,156]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

You'll have to explain the contradiction you perceive.  I don't see it.

If someone arbitrarily rejects the science, they are a science denier, ipso facto.  Example: Anyone who doesn't believe the globe is warming.

If someone claims - and believes - there was "widespread voter fraud" they need to present evidence of same.  Example:  You

Anyone who tries can find examples of perceived voter fraud. From legislative actions allowing no signature verification voting to unsecured drop boxes. From Zuch bucks to government censorship. Some would call that widespread, others not so much. But lets not pretend these issues weren't problematic. They were and deserve the rightful scrutiny they've received. Thank goodness there were no hanging chads. 

[homersapien 12,244]

14 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Anyone who tries can find examples of perceived voter fraud. From legislative actions allowing no signature verification voting to unsecured drop boxes. From Zuch bucks to government censorship. Some would call that widespread, others not so much. But lets not pretend these issues weren't problematic. They were and deserve the rightful scrutiny they've received. Thank goodness there were no hanging chads. 

"Perceived" voter fraud??    

So we are going to protest election outcomes based on perception instead of actual data (facts)?

And you left out the qualifier "widespread".  Such errors you mention routinely happen in numbers too small to make a difference and effect both sides.

And while they may be "problematic", they don't alter the outcome of the election.

Edited March 19, 2023 by homersapien

[AUFAN78 4,156]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

"Perceived" voter fraud??    

So we are going to protest election outcomes based on perception instead of actual data (facts)?

And you left out the qualifier "widespread".  Such errors you mention routinely happen in numbers too small to make a difference and effect both sides.

And while they may be "problematic", they don't alter the outcome of the election.

I cannot help you logically follow a thread. Nor can I help with your lack of comprehension. 

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I "perceive" voter fraud because Fox told me to "perceive" voter fraud.  It must be real.

Multiple state task forces failure to find any only makes the conspiracy more evident.

 

Can people be any less intelligent, any more disconnected from reality?

[Son of A Tiger 649]

On 3/18/2023 at 2:47 PM, homersapien said:

You'll have to explain the contradiction you perceive.  I don't see it.

If someone arbitrarily rejects the science, they are a science denier, ipso facto.  Example: Anyone who doesn't believe the globe is warming.

If someone claims - and believes - there was "widespread voter fraud" they need to present evidence of same.  Example:  You

I showed this earlier. Guess you chose not to see it.

Voter Fraud Map: Election Fraud Database | The Heritage Foundation

[Son of A Tiger 649]

36 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I "perceive" voter fraud because Fox told me to "perceive" voter fraud.  It must be real.

Multiple state task forces failure to find any only makes the conspiracy more evident

Can people be any less intelligent, any more disconnected from reality?

Sure they can. You are a poster boy for them.

Edited March 20, 2023 by Son of A Tiger

[aubiefifty 18,259]

8 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

Sure they can. You are a poster boy for them.

and you can be poster boy for the fraud folks that stormed the nations capitol.

[aubiefifty 18,259]

don't dish it if you cannot take it scooter.............

[Son of A Tiger 649]

20 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

don't dish it if you cannot take it scooter.............

Ok buster but I don't think I insulted any group of people by questioning their intelligence. If I did show me where.           

[arein0 1,105]

56 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

Ok buster but I don't think I insulted any group of people by questioning their intelligence. If I did show me where.           

Are you saying that fifty insulted the group of people that stormed the capital because he lumped you in that group? 

[arein0 1,105]

1 hour ago, Son of A Tiger said:

I showed this earlier. Guess you chose not to see it.

Voter Fraud Map: Election Fraud Database | The Heritage Foundation

I didn't realize 1,422 cases over all states/territories and an undefined time period (atleast going back as far as 2004) was considered widespread, let alone enough to consider an election compromised. Even the fact that they put this is a sampling at the top is misleading. If it is a sample, then a sample of how many? This page reads like it was created with the sole purpose of creating Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about our election process. 

Now to the matter of the convicted fraud voters. Is it wrong and should they be punished? Absolutely. 

[Son of A Tiger 649]

1 hour ago, arein0 said:

Are you saying that fifty insulted the group of people that stormed the capital because he lumped you in that group? 

No

[Son of A Tiger 649]

1 hour ago, arein0 said:

I didn't realize 1,422 cases over all states/territories and an undefined time period (atleast going back as far as 2004) was considered widespread, let alone enough to consider an election compromised. Even the fact that they put this is a sampling at the top is misleading. If it is a sample, then a sample of how many? This page reads like it was created with the sole purpose of creating Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about our election process. 

Now to the matter of the convicted fraud voters. Is it wrong and should they be punished? Absolutely. 

If so many cases with convictions over the entire country is not widespread I would like your definition of widespread.

I don't think there is evidence of enough fraud to change a national election but sure enough to change a close local election.

[CoffeeTiger 5,878]

3 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

I showed this earlier. Guess you chose not to see it.

Voter Fraud Map: Election Fraud Database | The Heritage Foundation

That's a database of 1,400 cases of fraud in the United States at ALL election levels since 1984. (we're talking presidential, congressional, mayor, city council, etc)

So in 30+ years with literally BILLIONS of ballots cast and thousands upon thousands of various elections, they've got a collection of ~1,400 cases of proven fraud? 

 

That really doesn't seem like much at all.....

Edited March 20, 2023 by CoffeeTiger

[Son of A Tiger 649]

23 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

That's a database of 1,400 cases of fraud in the United States at ALL election levels since 1984. (we're talking presidential, congressional, mayor, city council, etc)

So in 30+ years with literally BILLIONS of ballots cast and thousands upon thousands of various elections, they've got a collection of ~1,400 cases of proven fraud? 

 

That really doesn't seem like much at all.....

Probably not unless it affected you or someone you supported.

[CoffeeTiger 5,878]

18 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

Probably not unless it affected you or someone you supported.

I don't believe I've ever participated in an election where a few instances of potential fraud would have altered the final outcome in any way. 

You have proof of 1,400 cases of fraud in thousands of different elections over 30 years. You don't have any proof that fraud actually had any kind of affect on any of the outcomes. 

[arein0 1,105]

49 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

If so many cases with convictions over the entire country is not widespread I would like your definition of widespread.

I don't think there is evidence of enough fraud to change a national election but sure enough to change a close local election.

Well the Webster dictionary defines widespread as "found or distributed over a large area or number of people." I guess technically it is partially widespread based on the large area part of the definition. But I don't think the volume puts it even close to the widespread definition. To say 1,422 cases of voter fraud all time is widespread when we have a population of 339 million is baffling. It would be absurd to make that claim even if the 1422 cases happened just this last election. To put into perspective that's ~0.0004% of the population or 4 cases for every million people.

To go back to your local claim. If these all happened in a few select locations, it would lose the only part of the widespread definition it meets.

[homersapien 12,244]

22 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I cannot help you logically follow a thread. Nor can I help with your lack of comprehension. 

With your writing skills, you will never be able to help anyone with comprehension.

(But you're great at evasion!) 

Edited March 20, 2023 by homersapien

[homersapien 12,244]

4 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

Ok buster but I don't think I insulted any group of people by questioning their intelligence. If I did show me where.           

Half of your posts insult the intelligence of anyone reading them.