Serious thread about election fraud

Well Johnny99. Do you want to keep going?

Or you know, blacks just commit more crimes (which all the statistics support), which makes a lot more sense than a secret, nationwide conspiracy of white people to oppress blacks. It's hilarious that liberals believe that the criminal justice system was purposely designed to oppress black people (despite there being no pro-discrimination laws on the books) but cannot even fathom the thought of someone committing election fraud. Your bias is showing.

Paradoxical wrote:

Or you know, blacks just commit more crimes (which all the statistics support).

False.

DiscoGary wrote:

Well Johnny99. Do you want to keep going?

I'm beginning to think that you weren't telling the truth when you said you had LOADS of evidence of election fraud.

Here's another report claiming election fraud:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1344173684983017473?s=20

There are some commonalities between this report and the Amistad Project;

1) Both involve extremely conservative people.

2) The numbers presented are dubious and if true, a conspiracy of 1,000 people or more would have been needed.

3) Neither report mentions Dominion. Why are people requesting for an inspection of the Dominion machines when the two major studies point to different sources of fraudulent votes? That gives the impression that theories are being thrown against the wall to see what sticks.

Paradoxical wrote:

Or you know, blacks just commit more crimes (which all the statistics support), which makes a lot more sense than a secret, nationwide conspiracy of white people to oppress blacks. It's hilarious that liberals believe that the criminal justice system was purposely designed to oppress black people (despite there being no pro-discrimination laws on the books) but cannot even fathom the thought of someone committing election fraud. Your bias is showing.

Let me spell it out for you: if you think black people are predisposed to commit more crime because of the color of your skin, you are racist. That one's really simple.

This entire country was built on the back of oppressing black people. It's not a conspiracy. Are you unfamiliar with slavery? Are you unfamiliar with the fact that a compromise after the civil war was indentured servitude for "criminals"? So, "this black person can't be forced into labor against his will anymore, oh...until he's been arrested...then all bets are off."

It's not that I can't fathom election fraud existing in the world. It's that I've seen no credible evidence of election fraud in favor of Joe Biden.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Here's another report claiming election fraud:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1344173684983017473?s=20

There are some commonalities between this report and the Amistad Project;

1) Both involve extremely conservative people.

2) The numbers presented are dubious and if true, a conspiracy of 1,000 people or more would have been needed.

3) Neither report mentions Dominion. Why are people requesting for an inspection of the Dominion machines when the two major studies point to different sources of fraudulent votes? That gives the impression that theories are being thrown against the wall to see what sticks.

Care to explain your claims here?

What do you mean both studies involve "extremely" (define "extremely) conservative people? Are you claiming the research is biased because it was conducted by conservative people, and by that logic, would opposite claims made by liberal people be equally as biased? Does biased automatically mean it's false?

What do you mean by the numbers are "dubious?" How did you determine how many people would have been needed to carry out the election fraud? What is a plausible number of people needed to have been involved in order for the election fraud allegations to be true?

Face it. You could have a video confession from people in the count room. Johnny99 and the leftists wouldn't accept it. There's no point trying to convince these people.

"Indeed, many European countries have voting rules stricter to prevent fraud than what

we have in the United States.

For example, 74% entirely ban absentee voting for citizens who

live in their country. Another 6% allow it, but have very restrictive rules, such as limiting it to

those in the military or are in a hospital, and they require evidence that those conditions are

met. Another 15% allow absentee ballots but require that one has to present a photo voter ID

to acquire it. Thirty-five percent of European countries completely ban absentee ballots for

even those living outside their country. The pattern is similar for developed countries."

So we've got 130% of European countries covered here (74+6+15+35), and the pattern is similar in "developed countries." European countries are undeveloped? Dubious.

johnny99 wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Well Johnny99. Do you want to keep going?

I'm beginning to think that you weren't telling the truth when you said you had LOADS of evidence of election fraud.

OK. Let's give it a shot.

First piece of evidence:

Media censorship of election fraud claims

Here's one link of many:

What do you think of that?

DiscoGary wrote:

Harambe wrote:

...

Or you are just a dumb boomer (it is hard to tell the difference these days).

That didn't take long.

Discussion over.

We are talking about election fraud and you launch into a paragraph about George Floyd.

Wasn't one of the ground rules about staying on topic?

DiscoGary wrote:

johnny99 wrote:

I'm beginning to think that you weren't telling the truth when you said you had LOADS of evidence of election fraud.

OK. Let's give it a shot.

First piece of evidence:

Media censorship of election fraud claims

What do you think of that?

Not evidence of fraud. Why don't you start with that first.

Harambe wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

OK. Let's give it a shot.

First piece of evidence:

Media censorship of election fraud claims

What do you think of that?

Not evidence of fraud. Why don't you start with that first.

So you want back into our tiny civil club huh? OK. I understand how hard it is to break old habits.

Now you are really sure that media censorship of election fraud is NOT evidence that it occurred? Your gonna be hard line on that?

Zzzzzzzzz...

DiscoGary wrote:

So you want back into our tiny civil club huh? OK. I understand how hard it is to break old habits.

Now you are really sure that media censorship of election fraud is NOT evidence that it occurred? Your gonna be hard line on that?

I was civil the whole time :). You need thicker skin.

And yes, I want direct evidence of fraud. I don't care what a private media company does. Show me the data!

Yeah... if Youtube realizes its good for their bottom line to kick off the conspiracy folks... that's their prerogative. Doesn't lend credence to any one theory or another.

Harambe wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

So you want back into our tiny civil club huh? OK. I understand how hard it is to break old habits.

Now you are really sure that media censorship of election fraud is NOT evidence that it occurred? Your gonna be hard line on that?

I was civil the whole time :). You need thicker skin.

And yes, I want direct evidence of fraud. I don't care what a private media company does. Show me the data!

Harambe wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

So you want back into our tiny civil club huh? OK. I understand how hard it is to break old habits.

Now you are really sure that media censorship of election fraud is NOT evidence that it occurred? Your gonna be hard line on that?

I was civil the whole time :). You need thicker skin.

And yes, I want direct evidence of fraud. I don't care what a private media company does. Show me the data!

So you don't think media censorship of corruption discussions is evidence that it occurred. Fine. I tend to agree.

But watch what happens when I do this.

Trump is being accused of colluding with Russia. Hundreds of people in the government swear under oath they saw thousands of ballots being brought in from unknown places with counting rules being broken all over the place, and Democrat poll watchers being thrown out. Something REALLY weird happened during the election counting process that gave the election to Trump ... but in the interests of protecting the credibility of our election process all our main stream media outlets and tech giants censor the accusations and shut down accounts of those who continue to question what happened. And those outlets and tech giants are controlled by Trump supporters and they don't want anything to do with deep investigations into the process.

How does it look now? Would you say that censorship would be evidence something really bad happened?

No.. I'd want to see the actual evidence.

Next!

DiscoGary wrote:

johnny99 wrote:

I'm beginning to think that you weren't telling the truth when you said you had LOADS of evidence of election fraud.

OK. Let's give it a shot.

First piece of evidence:

Media censorship of election fraud claims

Here's one link of many:

https://youtubecensorship.com/2020-12-10-youtube-remove-videos-exposing-2020-election-fraud.html

What do you think of that?

Media censorship and election fraud are two entirely different things. Not that what Youtube does is censorship, but even if it was it's not evidence of election fraud.

When are you going to post actual evidence of election fraud? You said you had LOADS of it; where is it?