Election 2020 Election Fraud: Let's face it, this year will be a shitshow

Cherico

Well-known member
So if there are 40,000 unanswered questions about the Maricopa votes, should I also believe that there are likely in the ballpark of 40,000 questions about the votes in Gila, whose current total votes are less than that?

I mean, fundamentally you're suggesting that the smaller counties, mostly deep Republican, are vastly more brazen in their cheating (because the cheating is so much bigger proportional to their population). Without evidence or, come to think of it, even really an identifiable reason. What is that reason?


stages-of-grief.png



when you get to anger we will understand because most of us went through it, when you get to barganing we will not judge you, when you get to depression we will support you and when you get to stage five you will join the rest of us.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
So if there are 40,000 unanswered questions about the Maricopa votes, should I also believe that there are likely in the ballpark of 40,000 questions about the votes in Gila, whose current total votes are less than that?

I mean, fundamentally you're suggesting that the smaller counties, mostly deep Republican, are vastly more brazen in their cheating (because the cheating is so much bigger proportional to their population). Without evidence or, come to think of it, even really an identifiable reason. What is that reason?
We're kinda in uncharted territory here; all I'm saying is that making assumptions probably won't serve you well in this case. There could be any number of fraudulent votes in Gila County. 40,000, 400,000; it's theoretically feasible for the Dems to have falsified any number of votes to ensure their victory, and put them anywhere. As many as were required.

Remember; this is the first time in generations more than a small minority of people have taken the accusation of election fraud seriously. Who knows what the establishment have been getting away with all this time. If there is to be any hope for the validity of our election process, we need this to be investigated thoroughly; unrestricted by preconceptions and assumptions.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Romney won AZ by nine points; Trump won in 2016 by three and a half; Biden allegedly won in 2020 by a smidgen. To dispute the claim "AZ is trending blue lately" you'd have to not just reverse those ten thousand votes but reverse them and then multiply by 9 (vs. 2016) or 20 (vs. 2012).

Isn't it true that the entire sum of ballots being questioned is not sufficient to dispute the claim if you trust the 2016 numbers?
Who says I trust the 2016 numbers now? I'm not so sure about historical elections any longer.

Look, there were 34,000 duplicate ballots.

That's means 17,000 people voted twice. In one county.

That is massive, wide scale fraud, and in this one county alone, nearly doubles the margin of victory for Biden.

Since we don't know the tally of those duplicate votes, we can't actually say who really won.

Might have been Trump. Maybe those ballots were a mix and Biden still wins when you remove them. Thing is, we don't know for certain. What we do know is that 17000 people in one county voted twice. That's massive fraud.

Not only that, but 25%-30% of them came in after election day, and there is tons of evidence that people destroyed other evidence on voting computers. Perhaps that might have been evidence that shows a massive late night sirbe of Biden votes? We aren't sure, but they destroyed the data that would have told us. Which is a felony of it's own. So they committed a felony nd destroyed data because there was no fraud to be found? Do you expect people to believe that?

Are you willing to move on past the denial stage and admit that the evidence uncovered suggests that the likely explanation for all this is fraud?

Because even if you claim "there isn't bulletproof evidence to shred any doubt," there is enough SOLID evidence to put together, that it clearly points in the direction of fraud. If at this point you aren't admitting AT LEAST that it looks like there was some considerable fraud, I have to Question your honesty.

Because even if you rule it EVERYTHING ELSE, 17,000 people in one county voted twice. That's fraud, on a large scale. A large enough scale to tip the balance and change the winner.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Most of those came from damaged ballots. 3000 of them did not.
you're actually mixing up two parts of the presentation.

They spoke of two different kinds of duplicates and you're condensing the reports into one thing.

The duplicates to which you refer, are when a machine can't read the ballot, like damaged ballots, or Braille ballots.

These are okay. There's no problem with these kind of duplicates. They would be filled out by poll workers, documented, and the original ballots retained for record keeping. The issue found with these types of duplicates, is that for each one of these, where there should be a corresponding original ballot, 3000 did not have that original ballot.

That's ONE issue.

The OTHER kind, of duplicates? They found 34,000. These are from identical signatures/handwriting on the dates. There were 34,000 of those. They said that is about 17,000 unique individuals who had submitted two (in some cases 3 or even 4) ballots.
 
Last edited:

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
Who says I trust the 2016 numbers now? I'm not so sure about historical elections any longer.

Look, there were 34,000 duplicate ballots.

That's means 17,000 people voted twice. In one county. [...] That's fraud, on a large scale. A large enough scale to tip the balance and change the winner.
Well, if you think the historical elections could reasonably contain sufficient fraud (on either side) to undo a trend of 208,422+R --> 91,234+R --> 10,457+D, then never mind, I guess?

Because that's what I was focusing on with these posts. Not whether evidence plausibly supports sufficient fraud to move the needle from 1+R --> 10,457+D. (Or 6,543+R to include your 17k.) Because that would still mean "AZ is trending blue lately".
 

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
So the argument is something something assume R's cheated just as much. That means the Ds still WON!!! Something something?

Novel argument against a fraud allegation I will admit. Well not really. Novel that is.
Jesus Christ is that really your takeaway? Let me dumb it down for you.

Three options:
1. "AZ is trending blue lately" (interpreted by me as comparing 2012, 2016, 2020 presidential cycles)
2. From 2012 to 2020, Ds fraudulently padded their vote to the tune of 220k (more than whatever they may have already been doing)
3. From 2012 to 2020, regarding that 220k, it's a combination of Rs previously fraudulently padding their votes but stopping for some reason, and Ds starting to fraudulently pad.
4. If you have some other category that fits none of the above, feel free. Note that Ds doing less than 220k of net fraudulent padding means #1 is still true.
 

Abhishekm

Well-known member
Jesus Christ is that really your takeaway? Let me dumb it down for you.

Three options:
1. "AZ is trending blue lately" (interpreted by me as comparing 2012, 2016, 2020 presidential cycles)
2. From 2012 to 2020, Ds fraudulently padded their vote to the tune of 220k (more than whatever they may have already been doing)
3. From 2012 to 2020, regarding that 220k, it's a combination of Rs previously fraudulently padding their votes but stopping for some reason, and Ds starting to fraudulently pad.
4. If you have some other category that fits none of the above, feel free. Note that Ds doing less than 220k of net fraudulent padding means #1 is still true.
Not Long Did Read. Can still be summed up as R's cheated too because I say so.
 

Sobek

Disgusting Scalie
Jesus Christ is that really your takeaway? Let me dumb it down for you.

Three options:
1. "AZ is trending blue lately" (interpreted by me as comparing 2012, 2016, 2020 presidential cycles)
2. From 2012 to 2020, Ds fraudulently padded their vote to the tune of 220k (more than whatever they may have already been doing)
3. From 2012 to 2020, regarding that 220k, it's a combination of Rs previously fraudulently padding their votes but stopping for some reason, and Ds starting to fraudulently pad.
4. If you have some other category that fits none of the above, feel free. Note that Ds doing less than 220k of net fraudulent padding means #1 is still true.

This sort of mathematical logic ignores the humanities aspect of the question, that being "every single one of those elections had massively different candidates and platforms going on". It's perfectly valid that AZ was trending Blue naturally but they had to cheat to ensure it went blue this time.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Jesus Christ is that really your takeaway? Let me dumb it down for you.

Three options:
1. "AZ is trending blue lately" (interpreted by me as comparing 2012, 2016, 2020 presidential cycles)
2. From 2012 to 2020, Ds fraudulently padded their vote to the tune of 220k (more than whatever they may have already been doing)
3. From 2012 to 2020, regarding that 220k, it's a combination of Rs previously fraudulently padding their votes but stopping for some reason, and Ds starting to fraudulently pad.
4. If you have some other category that fits none of the above, feel free. Note that Ds doing less than 220k of net fraudulent padding means #1 is still true.

the democrats are the assholes in this situation.

They broke the law, its not just voter fraud now its also evidence tampering, and we can add in obstruction of justice. Obstruction of justice is a felony that carries an 8 year prison sentence. Don't defend them for crying out loud don't defend them they were caught red handed and they need to go to prison.

Next we need to audit everything to find out just how much they cheated and how many other people need to go to jail. Because no this isnt a both side are guilty bullshit situation. There isnt moral equivelence there was a crime and there needs to be punishment.

deal with it.
 

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
Not Long Did Read. Can still be summed up as R's cheated too because I say so.
That is only option 3, which I only included for completeness's sake to round out the technical possibilities. [edit: to be 100% clear, I do not consider it likely and only added it to cover a possibility logically left open by options 1 and 2.]
It's perfectly valid that AZ was trending Blue naturally but they had to cheat to ensure it went blue this time.
Yes, and that would agree with the proposition being discussed, "AZ is trending blue lately". AZ trending blue does not mean that Ds would necessarily win, or did not cheat if they did win. Note that AZ trended blue 2012-->2016, and lost. (Calling one cycle a "trend" is kind of a stretch but I think you see my point.)
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top