Voter Fraud

[canpakes]

I’m fairly certain if there proof of ‘targeted’ election fraud we’d see it posted right here. Right? Like. Instead of spending a few pages on wild conspiracy theories Xanax would actually post something, right?

- Doc

Yeah, just ask the Republican election observers to tell us what they saw from 100 yards away in Philadelphia. According to the Democrat controlled state government 100 yards away means both sides get to see the votes being counted as the law states. No fraud here, otherwise the partisan observers should have seen it.

Heres an actual pic of the recount in PA. Your 100 yards is a myth.



Can you tell us about any actual voter fraud episodes besides your unsubstantiated claim of two dozen dead folks having voted?

Is that sort of claim all that it takes for you to actively try to subvert the system and to sow doubt?

Are Republicans just being snowflakes that cannot deal with the idea that their candidate was deemed an unacceptable choice?

[canpakes]

More ‘100 yard’ observation. This is a pic of both the Democrat and Rep observer at a station.

[Some Schmo]

If there's voter fraud, who is actually doing all that fraud? Whoever it is seems to have very strange priorities. If it's Democrats, why would they fix the election to lose members of congress?

Strange how the voter fraud lunatics never get around to explaining that.

[Some Schmo]

Essentially, the basis of their claim is, "It's unbelievable Trump would lose." Seems to me they are starting with that conclusion and looking for supporting evidence, of which there is none because... well, just how outrageous is the belief in the first place?

This is an excellent example of cultishness in action. Start with an idiotic premise and look for evidence to back it up, no matter how tenuous and stupid.

It occurs to me that what we're seeing in court is a perfect distillation of what happens when religion goes head to head with science. The religious make an assertion, and the evidence based folks say, ok, where's the evidence? The religious people shrug their shoulders, mumble something about faith and leave with what would be shame, if only they could feel it. Instead, they go look for another court to see if they can con someone else.

Does religion make people stupid or are stupid people attracted to religion? Chicken or egg?

[canpakes]

If there's voter fraud, who is actually doing all that fraud? Whoever it is seems to have very strange priorities. If it's Democrats, why would they fix the election to lose members of congress?

Strange how the voter fraud lunatics never get around to explaining that.

They haven’t gotten around to explaining much of anything.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Sooo... where's the proof again? I get there are wild allegations, but there's no evidence any of these things happened. For example, all you have to do is google 'more votes than registered voters' and you have a bevy of sites that explain, in detail, why that's false.

And, yet. Here we are. We have Xanax thinking he's proving something by simply making an allegation over and over again. Even with photographic evidence will he admit he was wrong? Remember, one of the tactics Trump cultists openly discuss is to never, ever, admit wrong doing and simply to pivot to something else.

Will Xanax admit he was wrong re: the 100 yard thing? Let's see if he has integrity.

- Doc

[ajax18]

For example, all you have to do is google 'more votes than registered voters' and you have a bevy of sites that explain, in detail, why that's false.

If google were objective, they'd allow their search engine to also bring up arguments and evidence that voter fraud exists, rather than modifying it so that such information is buried beneath thousands upon thousands of opinion pieces that it doesn't exist.

And, yet. Here we are. We have Xanax thinking he's proving something by simply making an allegation over and over again. Even with photographic evidence will he admit he was wrong? Remember, one of the tactics Trump cultists openly discuss is to never, ever, admit wrong doing and simply to pivot to something else.

Just because big tech is capable of suppressing information doesn't mean it's not there or didn't happen.

Will Xanax admit he was wrong re: the 100 yard thing? Let's see if he has integrity.

You'll have to prove to me that each of the people who came forward with sworn affidavits (under penalty of perjury!)of voter irregularities and fraud were lying. Kelly Mceananie held them up in front of us on Hannity. Then CNN tried to claim they were blank documents. So she held them up again and showed them to the viewers the next night. We've got the Philadelphia election officials on tape throwing out partisan observers on this election. It happened.

Then you'll have to admit to me you were wrong about the dirty Clinton brought and paid for dossier that you used to try to undue the election of 2016. No you won't. There is just to much money and military power in the deep state for free and fair elections to exist in this country anymore.

[Chap]

May I just recall that Trump has had his lawyers (who must be the very best lawyers available, surely?) appearing in a couple of dozen cases, before several different courts, in which they have repeatedly failed to come up with evidence of significant fraud that stood up in court?

This isn't just a problem about a few under-resourced Trump supporters trying to find stuff on Google, as ajax18 seems to imagine.

These are, we may assume, the most highly motivated and most highly skilled people we can imagine (again, surely Trump has the best lawyers?), with all of Trump's immense resources of money and talent behind them. And so far they have simply failed to cut the mustard on this issue.

[Some Schmo]

May I just recall that Trump has had his lawyers (who must be the very best lawyers available, surely?) appearing in a couple of dozen cases, before several different courts, in which they have repeatedly failed to come up with evidence of significant fraud that stood up in court?

This isn't just a problem about a few under-resourced Trump supporters trying to find stuff on Google, as ajax18 seems to imagine.

These are, we may assume, the most highly motivated and most highly skilled people we can imagine (again, surely Trump has the best lawyers?), with all of Trump's immense resources of money and talent behind them. And so far they have simply failed to cut the mustard on this issue.

Well, it's the Consortium of Conspiratorial Judges (one branch of the deep state) who have the audacity to expect Trump's lawyers to produce evidence. They're all in on it, ever since they got their liberal educations in law. Only a liberal lawyer or judge needs evidence.

This was not the kangaroo court Trump's people expected.

[Res Ipsa]

Ajax’s posts are classic illustrations of how conspiracy theorists reason. He starts by asserting a questionable premise — that economic nationalism is a slam-dunk winner. Let’s just examine that for a second.

Economic Nationalism is a winner only when voters like Ajax don’t understand how it really works. In fact, to sell it at all to the American people it has to be wrapped up in racism, xenophobia, patriotic virtue signaling, and lots and lots of lies.

The best example: Trump’s trade war against China. Trump slapped tariffs on certain imports from China. Then he lied over and over and over again about how tariffs work. China did not pay the tariffs — American citizens did. That’s how tariffs work. American importers of goods subject to the tariffs paid the tariffs and then passed them onto us in the form of higher prices. And the government got the money. A tariff is a tax on the citizens of the nation that imposes it. Ajax, who claims to be anti-tax — has been snookered, along with millions of Americans who think they are anti-tax.

In the meantime, China retaliated by imposing tariffs on US agricultural projects. US farmers lost a major market for their crops and farm bankruptcies spiked. The results — tons of taxpayer money spent to try and keep farmers in business. So, Ajax, who thinks there should be no welfare ever, supports massive welfare payments to farmers because he doesn’t understand what economic nationalism is.

And nations not conducting trade wars do better because the nations in the trade war start making deals with them.

Our entire capitalist system is built on the concept that people are better off if they are allowed to freely trade. If I have a blue widget and want a red one, and you have red but not blue, says the theory, we are both better off by trading. It doesn’t matter whether who gains more from the transaction. The difference between red and blue may be minimal to me but extremely important to you. We’re both still better off.

Economic nationalism uses the coercive power of the state to change the rules for trade that cross national borders. Instead of allowing individuals and groups to trade for mutual benefit, it insists permitting trades that capture as much of the total increase in benefit to both parties and the government dictates to its citizens which trades they are permitted too make. As a result, lots of trades that would benefit Americans in the form of cheaper goods or revenues to farmers simply don’t get made.

Economic nationalism is self-contradictory. It is a massive restriction of individual freedom — no different that the kind of government oppression Ajax claims to hate. Economic nationalism and the trade war that result do tremendous damage to the participants until they get it through their thick heads that there are tons of trading partners out there to do business with.

It’s a loser of an economic strategy, which is why it has to be sold in a flashy wrapper of patriotic virtue signaling and xenophobia.