Election 2020 Election 2020: It's (almost) over! (maybe...possibly...ahh who are we kidding, it's 2020!)

Reader mode
Hlaalu Agent said:
If they aren't a singular organization with one voice why are they acting like it? Independent? What are you talking about? Most of the mainstream media is confined to the ownership of a few people. They are owned by the oligarchs, they are not at all independent. So again your argument falls flat. And people in media all run in the same circles by and large, so your argument falls even more flat. So flat as to make Death Valley justice. And as we said these world leaders are playing politics, yet you ignore all we say. Do I need to post clips of these supposedly independent news outlets all having the same talking points? Because I can.
Click to expand...

Let's take it as read that pretty much every media outlet, from Fox to the BBC to the People's Daily over in China has called the election for Biden.

One possibility is that there's some sort of conspiracy or shared malicious agenda whereby a small handful of owners are all pushing a shared line to give the election to the Democrats, stealing it from its rightful winner, Trump; and then other outlets are just copying those liars. Another possibility is that they're all simply reporting the truth, based on the available evidence.

Right? Okay, every major outlet calls it for Biden. But then, every major outlet called it for Trump in 2016. Every major outlet called it for Obama in 2012 and in 2008. There is nothing suspicious about every major media outlet identifying the same person as winning the election. That's the expected result of someone winning the election.

What rest of the world? You mean the millions of people who believe in fraud or the world leaders who backed Trump don't exist? That we are all imaginary. You know it sucks being non-existent, really sucks. I guess, I need to fade from the world now.
Click to expand...

I mean non-Americans, yes, and as far as I can tell widespread belief in fraud is limited almost entirely to Republican voters in the US. As for world leaders who backed Trump, that would be Bolsonaro and... uh... maybe Putin? But note that even they have not alleged fraud. Bolsonaro supports Trump as an individual but has pointed said nothing on the election results, apparently taking a wait-and-see approach. The same seems true of Putin, who is maintaining silence.

As far as I'm aware those are the only two? Duterte's congratulated Biden. So have traditional US allies like Boris Johnson or Scott Morrison (both from right-wing parties). I suppose Obrador in Mexico hasn't, but bilateral US-Mexico relations are tricky enough as it is. At any rate, I don't think AMLO really qualifies as backing Trump.

No, just some men who would have reason to fear that he might retaliate if they don't play ball. Is it not at all congruent to say that a man who was mean enough to engage in such dirty politics then would do so know? A man who threatened a country over investigating corrupt he was linked to, would threaten a country over something equally as petty?
Click to expand...

I think you make it sound like we're only talking about one or two people, rather than, if I might emphasise this again, the entire world. The UK, France, Germany, Canada, Saudi Arabia, India, China, Japan, Indonesia, Australia, Argentina, you name it. That doesn't seem like a few men intimidated by Biden. I keep saying 'everyone' for a reason.

Sorry, but polls in this day and age have a track record of being inaccurate. So thusly, I will take it with a grain of
Click to expand...

Look, I've been doing my best to include links and data in all my posts on this topic. It is rather frustrating to do this and for everything to be roundly ignored. Okay, maybe the polls are skewed. How so? Do you think that changes my conclusion any? The point that those statistics support is that it's pretty much only Trump voters who think there was fraud, and it's unsurprising that Trump voters would believe Trump.

Something being partisan does not make it incorrect. And just because it is one man versus the world as you say does not make him wrong. I seem to remember that this is said about a certain man from the Levant, how the entire world was against him, but he knew the truth and that though doomed he was he still persisted in the truth and ultimately prevailed.
Click to expand...

Donald Trump is not Jesus.

Yes, partisan claims are not necessarily false claims. We would need to return to the discussion of evidence. As I've previously indicated, I do not think there is compelling evidence of fraud, and I think the overall case for widespread fraud is far less plausible than the case for, well, Biden just winning and Trump being a liar.

Yes it does prove something. That they want to derail this so much that they will stoop to low tactics? And why would they then want to derail this so much? Does that not show fear? And what innocent man would fear the revelation of truth in a court so much? In fact it is not just something, it is plenty. And here is why I call you blind, you ignore the apparent, you ignore the logical conclusions that can be drawn.
Click to expand...

So, people trying to intimidate Trump's lawyers is... evidence that the case those lawyers are making is correct?

Remember that Trump motorcade trying to intimidate the Biden bus in Texas? Does that prove that the Trump campaign was afraid of the Biden campaign speaking the truth to America?

It's a high-stakes election, and political polarisation is at an all-time high. Aggressive idiots exist, and inappropriately try to intimidate the other side. This is tragic and to be condemned, but it's not proof of anything substantial.

I am talking about every time, I have seen people on the right talk to you. And bring up their issues on the right. Not about you getting into fights with the left as well, because you are a fence sitter.
Click to expand...

I'm a centrist or a moderate. I thus often get into fights with both the right and the left. That means to the right I can look like a leftist, and to the left I can look like a rightist. To be honest I don't care very much how people label me. If your point is that I often argue with conservatives, though, then... um, okay? I agree? I often argue with conservatives. I often argue with all sorts of people. I like arguing. :)

I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove, if anything.

And if you weren't blind, then why aren't you calling out the poor actions of those on your side in this very thread? You know supporting violence when political decision making doesn't go their way?
Click to expand...

I'm on nobody's side but my own. At any rate, I am currently arguing with you.

GoldRanger said:
As far as the American media is concerned, like @Hlaalu Agent has mentioned, most media outlets are owned at the highest levels by a handful of the ultra-rich elite. Also, there's such a thing as "professional culture" and groupthink, outlets following the cue of other outlets and so on and so forth. It's overwhelmingly obvious that Trump-bashing, and right-bashing in general, has been deeply ingrained in journalist culture for years now. News companies are unlikely to hire new employees if they are not conforming to their own ideology, meaning that the problem gets worse over time. In all objective "tests", such as reporting on extremely similar events, except one with a pro-left slant and the other a pro-right slant, virtually all the big media outlets have put a left-wing spin on it. It's not a conspiracy and it honestly doesn't require a lot of plotting and scheming to make it happen, it's simply fact. There are ex-journalists that have talked in length about these kind of media agenda stuff and their personal experiences with them, Tim Pool among the most famous ones, but by far not the only one.
Click to expand...
Unhappy Anchovy said:
The final point is more of a pre-emptive response to criticism. I included a lot of links in the above two paragraphs: Newsweek, Axios, The Independent, NPR, CNN. I have been told before that I put far too much trust in the mainstream media. I think there would be an argument against me that says that all these media outlets are untrustworthy: they might not be part of a conspiracy in a formal sense, but they are part of what Neoreactionaries would call 'the Cathedral': a self-organising consensus of elite and media organisations that push progressive views. So none of the sources I cite can be trusted. Instead we should go to... who, precisely? OAN? Randoms on Twitter? If you go with this theory, even Fox News must be now somehow part of the Cathedral, of the progressive consensus pushing lies. (I recall in this topic itself a dispute about whether the Murdoch press were liberal, globalist, or pro- or anti-Trump.) In response to this, well, obviously I can't prove that every media source is trustworthy, so instead I would put a different question out there. If every professional media source, from the BBC to Fox News, is so clearly wrong and untrustworthy... then how do you know that any source is trustworthy? If everyone else in the world is being fooled by their media, how do you know that you're not being fooled, by OAN or Project Veritas or even just people on Twitter? If everyone is a liar, how do you know that your favoured sources aren't liars? To be clear, my position on this is not that all the mainstream media sources are unbiased. Of course they're biased: every source in the world has some bias, you have to take it into account, and indeed most media sources lean left. But there's a difference between acknowledging that bias and asserting that everyone must be lying. I am taking the media with a grain of salt, but if you believe there's an omnipresent media agenda to lie to you, how do you know that anything that's going on is true?

To put it another way, I think I have an idea of what it looks like when mainstream media are trying to push a line that is at variance with observed reality: the obvious example might be there were no riots mixed in with the Floyd protests. But in cases like that, you notice that even though it was trying to play them down, the media did in fact report on riots and violence. Basically, I think there are media narratives, sure, but there are limits: they try to put events in a certain light, but outright, massive-scale deception, on the kind of universal global level that would be required here, does not really happen.
Click to expand...
Unhappy Anchovy said:
My response would be basically, "Such scandals do occur, but the scandal or conspiracy alleged here is far, far larger than that".

This is not a case of left-leaning papers spinning the news uncharitably. For the fraud argument to be plausible, you don't just need the New York Times to be lying and malicious. You need Fox News to be lying and malicious. You need international media to be lying and malicious. You need obvious Trump allies to be lying and malicious! The international element is important: Benjamin Netanyahu and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, for instance, leaders who have every reason to prefer a Trump victory, have called to congratulate Biden on victory.

You don't just need the Washington Post or whatever to be wrong. You need practically the entire global media to be wrong. Is everyone wrong? Even countries that have every reason to want Trump to win?

For that matter, as noted, you have Republican officials, who themselves have every reason to want Trump to win, saying that there's no significant fraud. You've already seen discussion of Brad Raffensperger, for instance. There are Republican calls to respect the process.

So I think the case for fraud here needs more than just the normal level of left-wing bias from sources like the New York Times or MSNBC. It needs a huge amount of people from all across the global political landscape - including Republicans, including right-wing news channels, including foreign observers, including people with every reason to want Trump to win - to either be lying or deceived. I do not think that's plausible.
Click to expand...
Unhappy Anchovy said:
Oh, the media certainly hate Trump. That was never in question.

But that's not what the question is. The question is not, "Does the media hate Trump?" The question is, "Was there election fraud?"

This is the same media that did not hesitate to call the election for Trump in 2016. Today we are not just talking about left-wing or mainstream media: we're talking about Fox, we're talking about media outlets in every other country, we're talking about Republicans. Pastor Robert Jeffress grants that Biden won, and he is literally the guy behind this. You cite cutting away from a press conference: Fox did that as well, and Fox are pretty darn right-wing.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying that a lot of mainstream media outlets strongly dislike Trump, would prefer Biden winning, and are likely to put as negative slant a possible on Trump-related news. But that's a far cry away from a massive conspiracy to falsify the election.

Hlaalu Agent said:
@Unhappy Anchovy I am going to lay this out clearly. I am not insulting you or accusing you, I honestly think you are being blind. And I may be getting mean about the thing, and being too forthright with it due to being frustrated, upset, on the edge and many things. And I will apologize for how I am voicing these opinions if I have gone too far in that.

Or just too unkind in general. It don't like mistreating people and I am sure you have talked to me enough to gather than any sort of unkind action towards you is my own temper or passions getting the better of me rather than any malice towards you.
Click to expand...

If it helps, I'm not angry at you. I am rather disappointed that we're at this point - and I have, alas, been losing a lot of respect for some of my right-wing friends over the last two weeks - but I'm not feeling angry or spiteful. I'm just doing my best under the circumstances.
 
Honestly, I'm just curious at this point. Clearly Trump actually won Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and the only reason he lost was due to voter fraud.

But surely those aren't the only states? So what other states did Trump win that otherwise lost due to voter fraud? Maybe he actually won in Virginia, where I served as a poll worker? In Colorado? In California? How far does the voter fraud go?
 
random_boy232 said:
Sigh, this place is gonna be fun come 21th January. I'm trying to help you guys avoid a nasty shock
Click to expand...
Concerntroll is very concerned for us. Is worried that people seem to disbelieve the always truthful media and are instead using their eyes and brains to work things out for themselves. Would like people to stop because concerntroll only has our best interests in mind and would never have any ulterior motives, only concern.
 
Unhappy Anchovy said:
Let's take it as read that pretty much every media outlet, from Fox to the BBC to the People's Daily over in China has called the election for Biden.

One possibility is that there's some sort of conspiracy or shared malicious agenda whereby a small handful of owners are all pushing a shared line to give the election to the Democrats, stealing it from its rightful winner, Trump; and then other outlets are just copying those liars. Another possibility is that they're all simply reporting the truth, based on the available evidence.

Right? Okay, every major outlet calls it for Biden. But then, every major outlet called it for Trump in 2016. Every major outlet called it for Obama in 2012 and in 2008. There is nothing suspicious about every major media outlet identifying the same person as winning the election. That's the expected result of someone winning the election.
Click to expand...

And that doesn't mean squat, the electoral college decides it, not the media. And the BBC and People's Daily are both left wing state-run outlets. The latter is intentional, the former is unintentional in regard to leftism.

The media reports truth. Since when? They always have had a tenuous relationship with the truth, such as the yellow journalism

I am pretty sure how they acted over all is what is suspicious, such as refusing to call states for Trump when he obviously has it in the bag, and then calling states for Biden before it even starts, and keeping it called even when it looks like it flipped Trump.


I mean non-Americans, yes, and as far as I can tell widespread belief in fraud is limited almost entirely to Republican voters in the US. As for world leaders who backed Trump, that would be Bolsonaro and... uh... maybe Putin? But note that even they have not alleged fraud. Bolsonaro supports Trump as an individual but has pointed said nothing on the election results, apparently taking a wait-and-see approach. The same seems true of Putin, who is maintaining silence.

As far as I'm aware those are the only two? Duterte's congratulated Biden. So have traditional US allies like Boris Johnson or Scott Morrison (both from right-wing parties). I suppose Obrador in Mexico hasn't, but bilateral US-Mexico relations are tricky enough as it is. At any rate, I don't think AMLO really qualifies as backing Trump.
Click to expand...

You aren't listening then, because there are pro-trump people all over the place. I mean the fact that you are arguing with a Canadian and an Israeli about this is a good counterpoint. And again, I think you are relying on polls that have been proven to be unreliable at best.

And just because world leaders lack any moral conviction doesn't back your point.


I think you make it sound like we're only talking about one or two people, rather than, if I might emphasise this again, the entire world. The UK, France, Germany, Canada, Saudi Arabia, India, China, Japan, Indonesia, Australia, Argentina, you name it. That doesn't seem like a few men intimidated by Biden. I keep saying 'everyone' for a reaso
Click to expand...
n.

The entir

Look, I've been doing my best to include links and data in all my posts on this topic. It is rather frustrating to do this and for everything to be roundly ignored. Okay, maybe the polls are skewed. How so? Do you think that changes my conclusion any? The point that those statistics support is that it's pretty much only Trump voters who think there was fraud, and it's unsurprising that Trump voters would believe Trump.
Click to expand...

Because the polls don't reflect reality reliably at all, remember how Clinton was massacred, even though the polls assured us that it was impossible? Or the shy Trump supporter effect. Face it the polls are there to manufacture consent, and really with the overwhelming negative covering who but Trump supporters would dare to admit it? Who would dare to admit that they think the election has been stolen when you have people on the left openly declaring their wish to score settle with Trump and his supporters? When people openly attack others for believing different?

And honestly I don't, I think you are using these polls to support your preconceived conclusion. And neither me nor Goldranger are Trump voters. We are not American citizens, nor are many of the people here.

Donald Trump is not Jesus.

Yes, partisan claims are not necessarily false claims. We would need to return to the discussion of evidence. As I've previously indicated, I do not think there is compelling evidence of fraud, and I think the overall case for widespread fraud is far less plausible than the case for, well, Biden just winning and Trump being a liar.
Click to expand...

And neither is he Socrates as I referenced as well and did I claim neither. But I am sure the left would be happy to feed Trump hemlock for the same reasons Socrates was and then nail Trump to a cross for the same reason Jesus and Peter were too. And I am sure they'd want to crucify him as Jesus was and then as Peter was, then they'd get two for the price of one.

And we all do. And have provided it to you. And my point is that just because one man says one thing and many say another does not make them a liar. Does not make them any more likely to be a liar. What makes one a liar is speaking the opposite of what is true, which Trump is not.

If that were the case Socrates and Jesus would be liars, and we all know they are not. At the least men with differing opinions that got them persecuted, and at best men who were put to death for speaking the truth.

So, people trying to intimidate Trump's lawyers is... evidence that the case those lawyers are making is correct?

Remember that Trump motorcade trying to intimidate the Biden bus in Texas? Does that prove that the Trump campaign was afraid of the Biden campaign speaking the truth to America?

It's a high-stakes election, and political polarisation is at an all-time high. Aggressive idiots exist, and inappropriately try to intimidate the other side. This is tragic and to be condemned, but it's not proof of anything substantial.
Click to expand...

Some zealous supporters going too far is different than interfering with the legitimate legal process. You are smart enough to k now this. This is an attempt to interfere with the legal process, nay, the democratic process. Being a yahoo is not a sign of fear, it is a sign of being a boor. But trying to stop a legal process which might reveal wrongdoing by you, is a sign of fear, because if you did nothing wrong then why do want to keep what happened hidden?

It is evidence, because if it wasn't true and would be laughed out of court, then why would they need to target the lawyers? Also why would they eject poll watchers and deploy all sorts of dirty tricks if they weren't doing something shady?

I'm a centrist or a moderate. I thus often get into fights with both the right and the left. That means to the right I can look like a leftist, and to the left I can look like a rightist. To be honest I don't care very much how people label me. If your point is that I often argue with conservatives, though, then... um, okay? I agree? I often argue with conservatives. I often argue with all sorts of people. I like arguing. :)

I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove, if anything.
Click to expand...

I am actually a moderate right-winger. And as you know, and I am not impressed by some of the takes on this site myself, such as the rampant fellation of Russia. Putin can go commit coitus on himself.

I am not sure if I like arguing or not. I think I like discussing, but am argumentative.

It is probably because I see you as a milquetoast fencesitter, and I tend to be unimpressed by those. But, maybe I need to change my mind and that you are a genuine middle of the road type, with natural human blindspots-which we all have. Depends on the evidence really.

I'm on nobody's side but my own. At any rate, I am currently arguing with you.
Click to expand...

In this debate, however you are on the side of the anti-trumpers and have at least partially hitched yourself to their wago.


I'm not denying that a lot of mainstream media outlets strongly dislike Trump, would prefer Biden winning, and are likely to put as negative slant a possible on Trump-related news. But that's a far cry away from a massive conspiracy to falsify the election.
Click to expand...

You are ignoring our point that it isn't a conspiracy at all.

If it helps, I'm not angry at you. I am rather disappointed that we're at this point - and I have, alas, been losing a lot of respect for some of my right-wing friends over the last two weeks - but I'm not feeling angry or spiteful. I'm just doing my best under the circumstances.
Click to expand...

Then you know exactly how I feel.

We are all doing our best under the circumstances, this world has gone mad long ago. Remember you are at the very least fighting with an Israeli and a Canadian, over whether or not there was election fraud in the USA. Doesn't that sound like a lead up to a joke? A Canadian, and Israeli and an Australian? There is a reason why I support Trump is that he is the least insane option, among other things he isn't a blood thirsty warhawk. And by my reckoning has done right by the American people, his people, which a leader is supposed to do. Not kow-tow to international interests, and sell his people out to big business.

And if it turns out we were all right? What then? I am curious how you'd react to us being right all along. If I am wrong, and am proven wrong to my satisfaction I am admitting it and conceding that I was wrong, even though I had many reasons to believe I was right. And if it is somewhere in the middle, I will concede that I was wrong, but also still say I was right as much as I was wrong.

random_boy232 said:
A listserv isntl realy proof of anything.
Click to expand...

It literally is. It is proof that they can and will do such things, and thus proof of their capacity to do it again. Let me ask you, how is it literally not proof. If it is so apparent then you can explain it right here and right now.

Also why do you support Biden, when he is the big business candidate who is going to hurt the interests of the lower classes? I thought you lefties were supposed to care about those weaker than you? Or is it for show? What do you think Biden will do for the American people? I think he is going to tax them to death, send them to die in needless foreign wars, and let their wealth get transferred to rich transnational businessmen.

random_boy232 said:
Sigh, this place is gonna be fun come 21th January. I'm trying to help you guys avoid a nasty shock
Click to expand...

I agree. But not for the reasons you will think. And nah, you are just trying to troll us and troll us weakly. Can you try harder? You are still at sub-jeb energy levels.
 
Wargamer08 said:
Concerntroll is very concerned for us. Is worried that people seem to disbelieve the always truthful media and are instead using their eyes and brains to work things out for themselves. Would like people to stop because concerntroll only has our best interests in mind and would never have any ulterior motives, only concern.
Click to expand...
Wonder what your "eyes and ears" are gonna say on January 21th when Biden is inaugarrated and Trump is evicted.

Wonder if it'll be denial of your denial or else an attempt to pretend trump is still president.
 
random_boy232 said:
Wonder what your "eyes and ears" are gonna say on January 21th when Biden is inaugarrated and Trump is evicted.

Wonder if it'll be denial of your denial or else an attempt to pretend trump is still president.
Click to expand...

And if Trump isn't evicted and remains president will you come here and graciously admit defeat?

Because I already said I will admit that I was wrong if proven it. And I guess if Trump loses and I still think he was cheated, I will grumble and be forced to accept it. And hope for next time.
 
Wargamer08 said:
Concerntroll is very concerned for us. Is worried that people seem to disbelieve the always truthful media and are instead using their eyes and brains to work things out for themselves. Would like people to stop because concerntroll only has our best interests in mind and would never have any ulterior motives, only concern.
Click to expand...
Who the fuck would have an ulterior motive? None of you are in a position to do anything, apart from some of the staff, who are also some of the people not screaming about fraud. There are no psyops to somehow demoralize this one forum.
 
Xilizhra said:
Who the fuck would have an ulterior motive? None of you are in a position to do anything, apart from some of the staff, who are also some of the people not screaming about fraud. There are no psyops to somehow demoralize this one forum.
Click to expand...

If you have no ulterior motive for being here, then why would you be here. The only obvious one is to troll us, because you aren't actually contributing anything, except to our reaction scores- which I do appreciate.
 
random_boy232 said:
Wonder what your "eyes and ears" are gonna say on January 21th when Biden is inaugarrated and Trump is evicted.

Wonder if it'll be denial of your denial or else an attempt to pretend trump is still president.
Click to expand...
Have you done any investigation for your self? Looked to confirm any of the lists of dead against active voter rolls, taken even the most basic look at the raw election results, spent even a couple minutes looking over the confirmed claims of people having votes cast by their maiden names in different states? Or did you just decide that the guy you didn’t like lost and that’s good enough for you?
 
Xilizhra said:
Who the fuck would have an ulterior motive? None of you are in a position to do anything, apart from some of the staff, who are also some of the people not screaming about fraud. There are no psyops to somehow demoralize this one forum.
Click to expand...

By certain other forums, or at least certain subsets of their users (ID comes to mind)? Very likely there is something akin to "psyops", yes. Ever heard of board invasions?
 
Xilizhra said:
Who the fuck would have an ulterior motive? None of you are in a position to do anything, apart from some of the staff, who are also some of the people not screaming about fraud. There are no psyops to somehow demoralize this one forum.
Click to expand...
Well instead of being very concerned for us, the person in question could just be trolling. What with the constant shit stirring and lack of even the most basic engagement. Pretty much every post in this thread is some variation of “lol you’ll be mad when inauguration comes.”.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top