At this point Seriati, you're just gish-galloping, right? Deliberately making long confusing arguments in 9 paragraphs that you could have done in 3 lines, but you're not making them in 3 lines, because everyone would see how ridiculous they'd look.
Not making anything longer than it needs to be. My concern has always been that cheating in elections is rampant, largely unpunished and virtually impossible to correct. Showing statistical oddities, oddities that were easily correctable but that one party went very far to ensure would not be corrected, helps to highlight the first and second and hopefully to broach the idea that we need to consider the 3rd. Of course, that will back fire because like with most things in our two tiered justice system it will only ever be allowed to overturn an election that goes for the Republican candidate.
Here's the TLDR (3 lines worth) of your comment for anyone who couldn't bother to follow it: You claim that ALL 50 the states' election numbers are fraudulent.
I did not. I do expect that you could find fraudulent votes in all 50 states if you knew where to look.
Hardline-red-states and hardline-blue-states, supposedly they all faked their numbers so that it *looked* as if turnout was significantly higher across the nation, even in states that weren't battleground states at all.
I don't think any states faked their numbers. It may be that people in certain states engaged in significantly more successful scams and actually faked numbers. In most locations I suspect that what happened most in this election was expansion of existing vote by mail vote harvesting scams. Unprecedented vote by mail created an unprecedented opportunity.
They increased both Biden's and Trump's numbers in comparative amounts, just so that it *looked* as if turnout was higher, as it would be suspicious if Trump's numbers remained the same while only Biden's increased.
Nope. I suspect they increased Biden's not realizing that Trump's were going to increase. They pretty much hate Trump and were convinced that he'd lose votes. That was kind of my point in showing the stats and talking about the pre-election polls. Those polls were a concerted effort ahead of the election to hard sell a much better result for the DNC than occurred anywhere - to normalize a fraudulent result as what was expected.
I think a surprising number of real voters switched from a prior candidate to Trump. I think that's what is behind one of the oddest statistical anomalies of the election. Trump increased his percentage of the votes with black men, black women, hispanic men, hispanic women, other minority women and other minority men. He "lost" statistically because he lost ground mostly with white men. Interesting statistical result for the candidate that many on here have repeatedly asserted is a racist. But probably a pretty likely result if you were trying to manipulate the vote for the DNC as you'd want to minimize attention by pushing the fake votes through white men and white women to minimize the "look" that minority districts had been manipulated. It's also a result you may expect with manipulation in favor of Trump, where he would have added votes everywhere to fit his themes. The problem is that it's far harder for Trump or the RNC to have accomplished it than it is for the DNC to have done so.
A detailed local look at Demographics, voter registration and voter turn out might (or might not) reveal statistical impossibilities that would clarify.
They supposedly did fraud in favour of both Biden & Trump across all 50 states, so that their additional fraud in the battleground states in favour of Biden wouldn't... look out-of-place. (and yet wmLambert's very argument was that it was indeed supposedly out of place....
Ultimately even if you through confusion and clutter by adding some fake votes for the other team for fraud to work you have to add significantly more votes to your own team.
I no longer believe you believe anything you say.
That's disappointing but not surprising. Maybe you could show me where I said something untrue that warrants it. Otherwise it seems like covering your ears to avoid hearing that you don't want to hear.
wmLamber does believe the things he says, because he clearly has some mental illness
That seems defamatory for you to claim, and unlikely to be true. Maybe not worse than asserting he has TDS (or I guess BDS), but with a lot less evidence. In any event, it's literally the fault of the media. They openly lied in this election to help get Biden elected. Your team knows they lied and rather than calling them to account egged them on and then engaged in a persistent gaslighting campaign to claim their lies were true. There is no credible source of objective and fully verified information BECAUSE your team destroyed it to gain a momentary advantage. Against that background there is no mental illness in not accepting what the media claim, or in believing sources that later may turn out to be false.
-- but *you*, no, I don't believe that *you* believe any of this crap. I think you're purposefully being dishonest, and purposefully spreading lies and confusion to make "your side" look as if they're not the villains of the story that they are.
I believe that the DNC cheats virtually all the time. I believe that DNC politicians misuse and abuse every single lever of power they control nearly all the time. It's not all Democrats, its not even all politicians, but it's enough and enough more useful morons that don't know the difference to have an impact.
When they misuse power so often and so egregiously, it's hard to believe that they'd suddenly find principles when it comes to an election. And the evidence is that they didn't. Every single legal case fighting a non-existant voting issue that required a "solution" that made the election less secure came from DNC lawyers. Every last minute voting law change to laws that have been in place in 4 years came from DNC activist lawyers and generally DNC appointed judges. And lets not pretend, if Trump was in the lead at this point, you'd not only have 10 times the legal actions, you'd have 10,000 times the media coverage, and there's absolutely no chance that say YouTube would be threatening to remove content that claims the election was fraudulent. Nope they'd be removing content that "falsely" claimed Trump had won or that that the election was secure.
And you add your "maybe"s at the end, to cover your ass, as if saying that "something looks like a scam" (when you don't believe it does) makes it all the better, when your end motivation is to obfuscate and confuse rather than clarify and enlighten.
I have to add maybe for the simple reason that you can't prove it in this system. If we set up a system where you're going to get a million bucks if a coin flip comes up heads, and owe me a million where it comes up tails, but I flip the coin in private in my house and tell you the result is there anyway at all that you're going to believe that it came up tails just because I told you it did? That's a straight up 50/50 chance, just as probable that it was tails as not, but the system was set up in a way that you CAN'T verify it and I have every opportunity to cheat. When you take it to court your case will get dismissed because you can't prove the coin came up heads, you'll have no evidence.
When a system has been rigged, and openly rigged, to make it unsecure and the party that benefits from it being unsecure wins, there's no way that it's believable. Finding statistical unlikliehoods against that backdrop really are the only kind of proof there ever could be and they're enough to persuade on something that deliberately by design can never been fully known.
We also have a roughly 20% voter turnout increase nationwide, which aligns roughly with the CA increase (ignoring historical differences that should have resulted in a difference in CA). But a state like FL for example didn't see such a large jump in voter turn out,
2016 Florida votes: 4,504,975 Clinton - 4,617,886 Trump
2020 Florida votes: 5,297,045 Biden - 5,668,731 Trump
5,297,045 / 4,504,975 = an increase of 17% for the Democratic ticket in Florida
5,668,731 / 4,617,886 = an increase of 22% for the Republican ticket in Florida
Where did you get there wasn't a large jump in voter turn out in Florida?
I see where I confused you there. We had a 20% increase in voting, not a 20% increase in voter turnout. If you look at what I said about FL you didn't see a big jump in voter turn out in this election. Now there's lots of reasons that could be, FL has been a battle ground state. I was looking at this article at the time
https://www.news4jax.com/vote-2020/2020/11/04/florida-voters-turnout-highest-in-28-years/. You can clearly see that while high, it's not a big jump over the last Presidential elections 75% for each of Obama and Trump's first years - both of which were historic firsts (first black man, first woman).
FL's population is 21.5 m (2019) versus 20.2 m (2015 for the four year comparison). 12.5 registered in 2016, versus 14.225 in 2020. So roughly speaking, the state gained 1.3 million people but 1.725 m registered voters, and as you noted saw roughly almost 1.9 m more votes between Biden and Trump than Trump and Hillary.
Your extra votes were roughly in line with your extra registrations though again turn out was higher than you'd expect. Florida has been a battleground in virtually everyone of those elections, with maximum pressure to register and get out the vote in each year, and 2 of those years were historic first elections, with a lot of people passionate to get out and vote the first black president and others passionate about electing the first woman president (Trump v. Hillary was also an election where both candidates were passionately hated). Yet in 2020, where we have senile old Biden on the ticket, a candidate that literally no one was the least bit excited by we get even more? I mean in theory Kamala Harris was a first as well, but there's little indication that she was ever liked or that any relevant demographic group broke more because of her. Anyway, here's the link on registration, you can check the population yourself.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/20/democrats-advantage-over-republicans-among-florida-registered-voters-has-shrunk-since-2016/The biggest oddity in FL is the registration increase, which gives some cover to the turn out only be 77%, which doesn't seem a huge jump, but is in fact a big jump for a state that it seems impossible to imagine wasn't already nearly fully harvested in adults that cared enough to register and to vote.
But oh, look, wmLambert liked your post, your lies are feeding his delusion and you don't care about that. Cheers, mate.
Nothing I said was a lie. I'm not even you sure you can reasonably dispute much of it. You can disagree with interpretations and implications of course.
But when so many had no problem believing (and some agianst all evidence still believe) a whole convoluted theory of Russian collusion by Trump, or that a Ukraine scandal flagged by a secret whistleblower that was drafted by DNC activist lawyers and never had actual evidence of tying to Trump was a valid basis for impeach, it seems very off for you to apparently find it troubling to your core that election fraud occurred. I mean, you had one whistleblower in Ukraine that didn't report on anything actually illegal, and here there seem to be hundreds (if not thousands) of whistleblower accounts about improprieties in this election, and you and the media are doing everything in your power to ignore them. There are easily identifiable oddities in a system where one team has done everything they can to ensure that you can't actually verify the coin flip.
I'm not what you would expect to find in a rigged election, but honestly, I'm stunned given the back drop how much has already been found.
And that's before you even consider all the apparently legal election manipulation that occurred before we got around to voting. I mean according to the DNC it is of overwhelming vital importance to be sure that every vote is counted - which would seem to imply that they believe that everyone should have a say - yet they overwhelming all support suppressing information that should have been provided to those same votes. Apparently
informed voters are not desirable. What kind of people what to ensure that "every vote" counts but also that only uniformed people are voting?
