Are Trump protests finished?

[Mr. Dazzle]

Electronic machines being rigged?
Could it happen? If it was very improbable casinos wouldn’t spend millions of dollars trying to stop people from doing it.

Yeah, absolutely. Banks too.

My point is more that people will go on about 'what big tech wants you to believe' or 'that's just what the media tells you' without bothering to do even the most basic level of fact checking themselves.

If 'big tech' says it; You're being a sheep.
If some random blog on the internet says it; Truth!

[Saga Lout]

Trump had fucked America with his idiocy. It’s never been so divided since the civil war. He even encouraged people to storm the capitol ffs.

Do you think they misunderstood when he used the word "peacefully"? Maybe they remembered the summer's "mostly peaceful" protests and interpreted it accordingly.

I know you won’t be convinced of it as it’s what you believe and we all know how strong beliefs can be no matter how illogical, but trump hasn’t done the USA any favours. At all.

Pot, meet kettle.

[Saga Lout]

Electronic machines being rigged?
Could it happen? If it was very improbable casinos wouldn’t spend millions of dollars trying to stop people from doing it.

I'm still trying to work out the legitimate purpose of the voting machines.
Why is there a need to put a machine between the voter and his vote? It just introduces an extra opportunity for fraud.

[Yambo]

I'm still trying to work out the legitimate purpose of the voting machines.
Why is there a need to put a machine between the voter and his vote? It just introduces an extra opportunity for fraud.

All change is good. Change to a more technical method is even betterer.

Personally, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

[slowsider]

Electronic machines being rigged?
Could it happen? If it was very improbable casinos wouldn’t spend millions of dollars trying to stop people from doing it.

I'm still trying to work out the legitimate purpose of the voting machines.
Why is there a need to put a machine between the voter and his vote? It just introduces an extra opportunity for fraud.

Would it help if you thought of them as vote counting machines? Supposedly less susceptible to fraud than human tellers. :dunno:

[Mr. Dazzle]

I'm still trying to work out the legitimate purpose of the voting machines.

Same reason governments do most things. it's quicker and cheaper.

Why do you trust a manual ballot counter to count accurately BTW?

[Saga Lout]

Electronic machines being rigged?
Could it happen? If it was very improbable casinos wouldn’t spend millions of dollars trying to stop people from doing it.

I'm still trying to work out the legitimate purpose of the voting machines.
Why is there a need to put a machine between the voter and his vote? It just introduces an extra opportunity for fraud.

Would it help if you thought of them as vote counting machines? Supposedly less susceptible to fraud than human tellers. :dunno:

They could be less susceptible to fraud. If they were programmed that way.

Some questions spring to mind:
How much do you trust the programmers?
How much do you trust the manufacturers?
How much do you trust the operators?

[Mr. Dazzle]

Some questions spring to mind:
How much do you trust the programmers?
How much do you trust the manufacturers?
How much do you trust the operators?

All of that applies equally to a paper voting system though, it's not a question of electronic/paper it's just a question of how much you trust the election organisers.

[slowsider]

I'm still trying to work out the legitimate purpose of the voting machines.
Why is there a need to put a machine between the voter and his vote? It just introduces an extra opportunity for fraud.

Would it help if you thought of them as vote counting machines? Supposedly less susceptible to fraud than human tellers. :dunno:

They could be less susceptible to fraud. If they were programmed that way.

Some questions spring to mind:
How much do you trust the programmers?
How much do you trust the manufacturers?
How much do you trust the operators?

How much do you trust the voters?

Democracy huh?

[DEADPOOL]

Yeah, absolutely. Banks too.

My point is more that people will go on about 'what big tech wants you to believe' or 'that's just what the media tells you' without bothering to do even the most basic level of fact checking themselves.

If 'big tech' says it; You're being a sheep.
If some random blog on the internet says it; Truth!

Sometimes cognitive dissonance simply won't let people see what's right in front of them, especially if they are constantly being reassured by huge swathes of the popular press, mainstream media or social networking.

The problem with the last election was the apparent huge increase in absentee ballots and mail in voting which were overwhelmingly Democrat only "votes". Republicans were concerned that this would allow fraud at an industrial level due to ballot harvesting and illegal or unsubstantiated or sometimes downright dead votes to count.

"Oh my god, here we go" I hear you say. Well, why then is "House Resolution Number 1" determined to stamp out this "illegal" activity - by making it legal!

What? Nonsense, They wouldn't dare! They do dare. Look at HR1.

https://democracyreform-sarbanes.house. ... _FINAL.pdf

“A State may not require an individual to provide any form of identification as a condition of obtaining an absentee ballot.”

“…State may not require notarisation or witness signature or other formal authentication (other than voter attestation)”

For the people act 2021. To expand Americans' access to the ballot box. ...for the purpose of fortifying our democracy. I find it interesting that they can tell you one thing to your face while literally doing another. All States will be required by law to accept "no identification" and "no authentication", the very thing that kicked off this voter fraud allegation

If this bill is passed (and the democrats now control the Senate), it will be virtually impossible to vote them out.

[DEADPOOL]

Mark Zuckerberg donated $350 million to the organisation that runs elections to help with Covid prep...that's quite a long way from "Facebook bought voting machines".

My understanding is that the "donation" was offered with the condition the State used the money to conduct the counting process in the specified manner we all saw on various YouTube sites (before they were all removed). That includes the purchase of particular machines (Dominion) and the hiring of particular staff (Democrat).

[DEADPOOL]

Same reason governments do most things. it's quicker and cheaper.

Why do you trust a manual ballot counter to count accurately BTW?

In the constitution, each counting station must have bi-partisan observation. It is a key element of the counting process. At all times a Democrat and Republican observer must be present to ensure the counting process is fair and accurate.

Clearly, that element of the process was rather obviously denied. Blocked up windows, observers not allowed anywhere near the counting machines, late night sessions etc.

[Mr. Dazzle]

All I'm gonna say is that you might want to try reading that document you linked and follow the context around the selected quotes you made.

Similarly, I saw lots of these YouTube videos that purport to show 'something' back in November and I saw lots of those graphs which show 'anomalies'. In the former case you're selectively looking at 3s of footage out of context and in the latter the results weren't even anomalous - there were plenty of Trump only vote jumps etc. too.

I'm not gonna get into a massive multi quote reply string though.

[Mr. Dazzle]

That's why elections are secret and vote counting is carried out behind semi-closed doors with only controlled observers. Indeed, it's why counting places had their windows covered to hide them from the baying mob outside.

For all the claims of 'republicans not allowed in' no-one has come forward with any hard evidence that was the case, the few times it's actually come to court the opposite has been proven true.

[DEADPOOL]

That's why elections are secret and vote counting is carried out behind semi-closed doors with only controlled observers. Indeed, it's why counting places had their windows covered to hide them from the baying mob outside.

For all the claims of 'republicans not allowed in' no-one has come forward with any hard evidence that was the case, the few times it's actually come to court the opposite has been proven true.

Interesting use of the phrase "baying mob" to describe the sort of person who would give up their time to monitor an election process. Clutching at straws to justify covering up windows. I have never been happy with any explanation for that.

To suggest "no evidence" is entirely incorrect. There is a massive catalogue of sworn testimony from those present and despite the widely held view that "it has been tested in court" it has not. These allegations have never been tried in any court. They courts refused to hear them on the grounds of no "standing".

Anyhow, should be super easy for you to throw up a link yourself. Some evidence of a baying mob or some links to the relevant court case.

Or are you simply accepting those things as true because that is the media spin?

[Yambo]

Vote harvesting is simply a fact, especially in ethnic communities.
I remember our company shop steward getting all the apprentices together and telling how to fill out ballot cards in, anyone not voting the right way would be in for a bashing.

I've been intimidated a few times by unions to side with them on left-wing policy, but never from the right wing.

That's why elections are secret and vote counting is carried out behind semi-closed doors with only controlled observers.

Wasn't it Ol' Maggie who brought in secret ballots for Union action, strikes etc? "We can't afford secret ballots!" cried the unions "That's OK" said Maggie "the state will meet the cost." First secret ballot for strike action? No strike. Slowsider's maybe right. You can't trust the voters.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I was born in a coalminers strike.

Technically true, if a little misleading.

[DEADPOOL]

All I'm gonna say is that you might want to try reading that document you linked and follow the context around the selected quotes you made.

Similarly, I saw lots of these YouTube videos that purport to show 'something' back in November and I saw lots of those graphs which show 'anomalies'. In the former case you're selectively looking at 3s of footage out of context and in the latter the results weren't even anomalous - there were plenty of Trump only vote jumps etc. too.

I'm not gonna get into a massive multi quote reply string though.

They are not "selective quotes", I have "quoted" the entire document and I am going to take a flying guess it is the first time you have seen it. Therefore I have highlighted the relevant areas which I suggest makes mail in voting the default for the entire country, legitimises ballot harvesting (despite the Dems claiming they didn't do it, now they inexplicably want to legalise it) and removing the need for formal identification for absentee ballots.

Plenty other shenanigans like allowing undocumented migrants (illegal aliens for those who can't keep up with left wing doublespeak) to be "counted" which bumps up the electoral count for those States with the most illegals.

You are suggesting that allowing absentee ballots from unidentified persons is fine by you and I need to "follow the context" for some unspecified reason. If you have something to say, say it because my take away is that the Dems are simply making those things they were were furiously denying doing illegally, now legal.

I sincerely doubt you looked though the statistical data to the extent that I did and I am not referring merely to the sudden spikes. I also refer to inexplicable drops in incremental vote counts. How is it possible for an incremental count to be negative? Did someone make a "mistake" (several thousand times!) or perhaps it would be so obvious no-one could get away with it?

The answer is easy. All you have to do is make sure the overall vote count goes up but change the unmonitored "batch votes" so that those changes are not flagged. They only exist in the deep data. Votes removed from Trump and assigned to Biden. You avoid the situation where you see the incremental count for Trump going negative (which no-one can argue is impossible) but it is hidden behind the overall count which inexplicably "spikes" for one candidate over another. That data is published by each relevant sate and is there for anyone to see if only they would look.

It is pretty obvious and the reason I am so preoccupied with this nonsense is because people simply refuse to even see it. Relying on rhetoric like "it's been debunked" or "it's been through court" neither of which is true.

Show me ONE example where a court has made a decision on voter fraud. What you will discover is the "decision" was made not to even consider it.

[JackyJoll]

If people such as Mr Dazzle demonstrated that I was lying quite this many times, I’d be too embarrassed to post up more lies.

[DEADPOOL]

If people such as Mr Dazzle demonstrated that I was lying quite this many times, I’d be too embarrassed to post up more lies.

“Many times”. Ok show me one.