killerjimbag
(Banned)
- 4,018
- The Great White North
- abetterplaya
The GTP Unofficial 2020 US Elections Thread
- Thread starter Sanji Himura
- 9,513 comments
- 400,610 views
Danoff
Premium
- 34,058
- Mile High City
So... the link you provided, and the one I provided, are examples of election fraud. As far as I know, neither of them resulted in a single vote cast. I was serious about you answering my question, how many votes did she successfully cast in the election?
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,756
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
It's (for the third time) 99.99994% perfect, how much better does it need to get before you will accept (that Trump lost, which is what I suspect the real reason behind your objection actually is).If it's not perfect fix it. Tulsi Gabbard a Democrat that was screwed by Google has said the same thing. Even she knows it's a fraud. Personally I hope the 🤬 doesn't hit the fan in the USA.
- 6,080
- Simcoeace
If it's not perfect fix it. Tulsi Gabbard a Democrat that was screwed by Google has said the same thing. Even she knows it's a fraud. Personally I hope the 🤬 doesn't hit the fan in the USA.
In life, practically NOTHING is "perfect". Obsessing over fixing problems that are so small as to be irrelevant is a fool's errand.
What Trump & his followers have been doing is INVENTING fraud on a gigantic scale in order to try & offset his massive loss.
Last edited:
- 4,713
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
This video is the perfect example of what some of us can right fully label it as "deep fake", but then others will somehow confused it as is shown here as their own (alternate) reality, and then they themselves call (our) reality as "deep fake".
Exactly. Republicans are a different sort of idealist, who at the same time reject the notion of government overstepping bounds, but they themselves demand total respect/compliance/abidance to every single rules to the cross and dots of T and I...
I agree with you Joey.
Why can't these people understand we do not live in a perfect world and as much as we ALL (on both sides of the aisle) want fraud free elections, it just is not going to happen...
Either you are playing dumb/devil's advocate, or you truly are not Canadian... I thought you people up north are very nice and respectuous of one another... you sound more like an American Southerner... sorry for generalizing... my bad lol
but more seriously:
It is still acceptable to have fraud so long as we are able to control, minimize, mitigate the risks and the impact to a low margin...
That is why we have a margin of error.
Just like in production chains... you will always have junk and scraps, you dont reject the entire set of products... there will be acceptable loss.
you move on and you learn to better control next time...
The majority is still the majority...
It is only an major issue if the majority of the votes are fraudulent, which is not the case...
anything above the 5% is worrisome, anything less is an acceptable loss... I am being generous here...
can you substantiate beyond what the officials that we have more then 5% fraud ?
if not, the shut up and let the process work.
There is already quality gates and control in the voting and election process... no need to over worry.
- 11,299
- Sweden
- eran0004
The fact there is voter fraud doesn’t mean that there is enough of it to change the result of the election.
Why should we not have a democratic process of elections?
killerjimbag
(Banned)
- 4,018
- The Great White North
- abetterplaya
Danoff
Premium
- 34,058
- Mile High City
You mean like this kind of ballot harvesting? Those fraudulent drop boxes put in place by california republicans are another great example of election fraud. Again, as far as I know, this has resulted in zero actual fraudulent votes processed. But I suppose you want us to throw out the California result?
Last edited:
- 30,019
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Yes, that's unfortunate, but it's not particularly relevant.
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
Jesus Harvey Christ, could you please take one second to digest what's being pointed out to you? Do you know how many verified instances of voter fraud have occurred? 1,308. And that's not just 2020, that's the cumulative total dating back to 1979. Biden won by 7 million votes. Put another way, Biden's margin of victory was 5,350 times the number of all fraudulent votes cast in the last forty years. I'm not sure why Scaff bothered working out the percentages for you, it's immediately obvious on its face that no, nobody receives an advantage from such vanishingly rare occurrences.
In any other context, something that works as well as the anti-fruad measures of the US Election system would be considered a smashing success. But, since you're apparently the only person smart enough to realize that it could somehow be improved, why don't you share with us how you'd go about it?
I'd say it's a good thing she didn't win then, because it sounds like she's an idiot.
- 17,337
- United Kingdom
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,756
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
I’m well aware of it, how many actual fraudulent votes did it result in? You’ve been asked and ignored it repeatedly, along with ignoring the findings of a study of 20 years of US election results showing voter fraud to be at the level of 0.0006%.
- 35,440
- Downtown North Dakota
- Cy-Fi
Five percent is massive. The automatic recount for some elections is as low as 0.1% and we don't even get that high with the fraud.
@killerjimbag - You have got to be smart enough to understand that taking a grain or two of sand off one side of a scale and putting it on the other side ultimately doesn't change anything. You'd need to move thousands before anything meaningful would result. Same with the election. A vote here or there doesn't collectively add up to enough to just throw the entire thing away.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,058
- Mile High City
Honestly, I'd like to pick at that number too. Were those votes actually tallied during the election and successfully cast for the person running? If I stole my neighbor's ballot out of the mail, forged her signature, and cast the vote, only to have her dispute it and get it discarded, and then have myself later prosecuted for fraud, that vote never got tallied. She still even gets to vote.
@killerjimbag is pointing out an example of someone who inappropriately harvested ballots to be cast (like the GOP drop boxes), and maybe have in some cases paid people to vote a particular way. But it's not clear to me that any of those votes were either fraudulently cast or successfully cast. It sounds like she was under investigation in October.
What we'd need to find is an example of someone who successfully cast a bunk ballot, that ballot got tallied, and it didn't get corrected before the results were certified. And then of course we'd have to find it in significant enough numbers to make it worth worrying about.
Last edited:
- 4,713
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
There was a risk, and as pointed out by Danoff here below, yes The Republicans went ahead and carried out the fraud of installing fake vote drop boxes...
And Republicans Vietnamese State representatives even open their partisan offices as a way to gather votes themselves, here in California...
That is (deeply) troubling... because they can very well sort out votes after they are unofficially "cast"/gathered before being officially submitted.
There should ONLY Official and politically neutral points of gathering votes, and it should be done with more than one party being present...
I reckon Tulsi G had the correct intent to call out on such mal-practice...
She was trying to be part of the solution, trying to make the voting and election process more robust/reliable and improve it by removing fraud and potential fraud techniques/loopholes...
In agreement with you,
Ballot harvesting through unofficial drop boxes is a form of potential voter suppression/fraud...
... which at this point seems to be mostly/mainly done by the republicans, who are the same entity crying "Wolf"....
Projectionism .... when they (republicans) are their own actors in this "forgery"... should i say "deep fake"
Last edited:
Pigems
Premium
- 9,220
- Canada
- TT_Pigems
For one, republicans already have a built in advantage, they don’t even need to win the popular vote to win the presidency, let’s talk about fixing that first.
Second, who says all the fraud is on one side? I’d be willing to be it’s fairly evenly distributed between parties. Why would you assume it’s only one side who cheats?
Last edited:
- 11,916
- Marin County
Besides the massively misrepresented "fraud" allegations, I think there is also an issue of perspective going on here.
If 1 vote in 160+ million is fraudulent, do you think that makes the entire election illegitimate? This is an actual question, I'm curious to hear your take.
Personally, I don't think that's right. Because to hold that position, it would follow that a single voter can effectively disenfranchise everyone else. We have to treat every vote as a discrete democratic process, subject to individual review. I think you're stuck in the perspective that it's the Democratic Party vs the Republican Party in an event like a basketball game where there are only two participants. If there are two participants and one of them cheats, even a little bit, then the results are understandably in question. But it isn't a two-participant game, democratic voters are not a single entity. If a vote in Vermont for the democratic candidate is found to be fraudulent, do you really think it's fair that it invalidates my legitimate vote for the same candidate in California? The same is also true in reverse. Should a guy in New Hampshire voting with his dead mom's ballot for Trump invalidate a Texan's vote for the same candidate? I think there is serious harm in both cases. So that leaves disqualifying individual ballots where fraud is proven as the most reasonable/fair solution.
Example: Candidate A has 106,000 votes and candidate B has 100,000 votes. If candidate A won by 6000 votes and there was 5999 fraudulent votes for Candidate A, the result cannot change without disenfranchising every legitimate vote (in this case, 100,001 votes) cast for candidate A. Does that make sense?
Last edited:
- 13,181
- Seattle-ish
Wait, Project Veritas? The Project Veritas that during the 2016 presidential campaign, falsely claimed the Hillary Clinton campaign accepted illegal donations from foreign sources? The Project Veritas whose leader James O'Keefe was sued for defamation by a man he wrongfully depicted as a "willing participant in an underage sex-trafficking scheme"? The suit led to a settlement in 2013, in which O'Keefe issued an apology and paid $100,000. The Project Veritas that was caught in a failed attempt to trick The Washington Post into posting a fabricated story about Roy Moore? Rather than uncritically publish a story that accused Republican candidate Moore of impregnating a teenager, The Washington Post critically examined the story that they were presented with, checked the source, assessed her credibility and ultimately found that there was no merit to her claims, and that instead Project Veritas were trying to dupe The Washington Post. The Project Veritas that has yet to back up even a single claim with the facts? That Project Veritas?
You are arguing to disenfranchise 159,633,396 votes because two votes for Trump were found to be fraudulent. Let's just do the math, shall we? Biden got 81,283,098 votes. Donald Trump got 74,222,958 votes. Biden won the popular vote by 7,060,140 votes. Subtract the two fraudulent votes for Trump, and hey look! Biden still won! Okay, but we don't elect the president by popular vote, we use the Electoral College. The narrowest state win by Biden was Arizona. He won 1,672,143 votes to Trump's 1,661,686 votes for a difference of 10,457 votes. No need to subtract the two fraudulent votes cast for Trump (because they weren't cast in this state), and golly gee, Biden still wins!
No. I don't agree with that at all. It's incredibly sad that you are so cynical that you believe this to be true.
Look, buddy, I don't know what happened to you, but it must have been pretty traumatic to make you this cynical and this willfully ignorant. I know the world is a scary place, but you need to see it as it is, not as you want it to be.
Last edited:
McLaren
Premium
- 45,635
- Texas
"Oh, a person trying to cast illegal votes for the Dems. was caught, that means everything should be questioned". Didn't see you in here questioning the 74 million votes cast for Trump when this made headlines.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...rump-under-dead-mothers-name/?sh=274636f559bf
**** outta here with this fake outrage.
Edit* I'm gonna add this because Paxton is involved in your example. Paxton is a crook & finally has an active FBI investigation pending. He is sitting on indictment charges from 5 years ago. He remains the only state AG who has not condemned the protests.
https://www.ksat.com/news/texas/202...sign-letters-condemning-capitol-insurrection/
Tin foil hat time: Paxton arresting anyone for voter fraud is what should be questioned. He & the Lt. Gov. of this state offered a $1,000,000 reward to anyone bringing forth voter fraud evidence in the US. It was ignored the moment the Lt. Gov. of Pennsylvania* brought forth a Trump voter. Paxton is not fit to be serving any sort of authority position.
*PA, not Philly. Sorry.
Last edited:
- 13,181
- Seattle-ish
Well this sounds ominous: Ayanna Pressley's chief of staff said her office's panic buttons 'had been torn out' before Capitol riot. That has attempted murder written all over it.
Last edited:
- 21,006
- NJ/USA
- Blitzbay
- Blitzbay
There is a report going around that Republicans were giving tours to people (whether or not these same people were the ones who participated in the riot last week is unknown) in the Capitol a few days beforehand.
- 4,713
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
