Evidence of Incitement

[Staidhup]

Show me one example where the Donald promoted mobs storming the capitol building and I can show you 100's of examples of Dim-shits aiding and abetting violence across this country.

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

 

[Slade3200]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited need to be removed.

Excellent, so let’s start with Trump since that’s the freshest situation and then we can go from there. Deal?

 

[Beef_Supreme]

There is a lot of hand-wringing, indignation and virtue signaling going on in the MSM right now about DC’s riots. This has been building like a pressure dome under a volcano and finally it blew, the eruption of a long simmering Mount St. Helen's. No one was paying attention.

– democrats spent four years calling Trump a “traitor” and a “Russian agent”
– They called him “illegitimate
– They said he stole the election
– They said the Russians rigged the election
– They impeached him for Biden’s extortion of Ukraine
– democrats denied the violence of Antifa and BLM
– For nine months that violence has raged
– Nadler said it was a “myth”
– Hoyer denied Antifa was violent
– They said Antifa doesn’t exist
– Antifa raided and burned the Federal building in Portland while people were inside. No democrat even blinked an eye
– Antifa vandalized Federal property in Philadelphia
– During the violence in Minneapolis, Kamala Harris was asking for help bailing out the rioters
– Antifa/BLM burned the nation’s Capitol. democrats weren’t especially bothered.

Remember this from Kenosha?
– 30 people (at least) have died in that mythical violence, among them David Dorn and Patrick Underwood. ( I know their names. I wrote about them)
– As Minneapolis burned, Ali Velshi kept telling us it was “not unruly”
– Those mythical riots caused between $1-2 billion in damages
– 700 cops were injured
– Ayanna Pressley called for “unrest in the streets”
– democrat governors and the left are destroying the economy with lockdowns that are never going to end
– Violence is wrong, you say? Let’s hark back to Chris Cuomo

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErFmfNnVkAEwZT6?format=jpg&name=small

You still wonder why there was pent up rage? This has been brewing for a long time. Capitol cops murdered an unarmed 14 year woman vet because she climbed into a window. Unlike the during the BLM/Antifa riots, no cops were shot. Outside of her murder it’s hard for me to get too exercised about this when no one on the left got exercised about the above. In fact, they asked for violence. Repeatedly, and the MSM calls BLM riots "peaceful protests"?!

 

[Rye Catcher]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited need to be removed.

You're a racist and misogynist. You will incite other louche like you to continue with your hateful rhetoric; rhetoric which supports violence not debate, not compromise and a rejection of the principles of a civilized society.

 

[Beef_Supreme]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited need to be removed.

You're a racist and misogynist. You will incite other louche like you to continue with your hateful rhetoric; rhetoric which supports violence not debate, not compromise and a rejection of the principles of a civilized society.

Lol.
You sound ridiculous, just in big letters.

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

 

[miketx]

But a cop did die..and someone is going to fry for that:

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2021-01-07/us-capitol-police-officer-dies-from-injuries-in-riot-by-trump-supporters

A U.S. Capitol Police officer, Brian Sicknick, has died of injuries suffered when supporters of President Donald Trump assaulted the legislative building, the force said, bringing to five the number dead from the riot.

Wednesday's breach of the U.S. Capitol building took place as lawmakers were in the building certifying the victory of President-elect Joe Biden.
"Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots...and was injured while physically engaging with protesters," police said in a statement.
He died on Thursday after being taken to hospital following his collapse afer he returned to his divisional office, it said. An affiliate of CBS News reported that Sicknick was a 15-year veteran of the force and 40-years-old.
The report said he had earlier suffered a stroke and was on life support before his death.
Metropolitan homicide officials will investigate the death of Sicknick, who joined the U.S. Capitol Police in 2008, along with the Capitol force and its federal partners, police said.

Too bad. They murdered that woman.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

Nope. You still have yet to address the fact that the risk of fraud is significantly higher with mail in ballots. The Libertarian candidate received 3mil fewer votes when compared to 2016. Hard to swallow and Trump who as you say is divisive and a villain received 74.2 million votes. Something is rotten in Denmark. I believe there is fraud on both sides and the whole voting landscape needs to be revamped.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

Nope. You still have yet to address the fact that the risk of fraud is significantly higher with mail in ballots. The Libertarian candidate received 3mil fewer votes when compared to 2016. Hard to swallow and Trump who as you say is divisive and a villain received 74.2 million votes. Something is rotten in Denmark. I believe there is fraud on both sides and the whole voting landscape needs to be revamped.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

I have addressed that claim. Again. Between rotty relationships between parents/siblings/offspring/significant other. The chance that there was massive fraud with mail-in ballots without any instance of it coming out that I'm aware of is nil. Show me any case presented in the sixty or so claims that assert it and I'll take it seriously. Until then you are simply giving an opinion without a good justification.

Why is it hard to swallow. Be honest have you ever talked about politics as much as in the last four years? I haven't and that's true for most anybody I know. More interest, more participation. Doesn't seem hard to swallow. Here are my points.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

Nope. You still have yet to address the fact that the risk of fraud is significantly higher with mail in ballots. The Libertarian candidate received 3mil fewer votes when compared to 2016. Hard to swallow and Trump who as you say is divisive and a villain received 74.2 million votes. Something is rotten in Denmark. I believe there is fraud on both sides and the whole voting landscape needs to be revamped.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

I have addressed that claim. Again. Between rotty relationships between parents/siblings/offspring/significant other. The chance that there was massive fraud with mail-in ballots without any instance of it coming out that I'm aware of is nil. Show me any case presented in the sixty or so claims that assert it and I'll take it seriously. Until then you are simply giving an opinion without a good justification.

Why is it hard to swallow. Be honest have you ever talked about politics as much as in the last four years? I haven't and that's true for most anybody I know. More interest, more participation. Doesn't seem hard to swallow. Here are my points.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

I never Cared about politics til my kids hit middle school (2018) and I noticed all the PC crap. You conflating Manson with Trump is laughable. And Trump was not the cause but the effect. That’s why he won in 2016.

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

Nope. You still have yet to address the fact that the risk of fraud is significantly higher with mail in ballots. The Libertarian candidate received 3mil fewer votes when compared to 2016. Hard to swallow and Trump who as you say is divisive and a villain received 74.2 million votes. Something is rotten in Denmark. I believe there is fraud on both sides and the whole voting landscape needs to be revamped.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

I have addressed that claim. Again. Between rotty relationships between parents/siblings/offspring/significant other. The chance that there was massive fraud with mail-in ballots without any instance of it coming out that I'm aware of is nil. Show me any case presented in the sixty or so claims that assert it and I'll take it seriously. Until then you are simply giving an opinion without a good justification.

Why is it hard to swallow. Be honest have you ever talked about politics as much as in the last four years? I haven't and that's true for most anybody I know. More interest, more participation. Doesn't seem hard to swallow. Here are my points.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

I never Cared about politics til my kids hit middle school (2018) and I noticed all the PC crap. You conflating Manson with Trump is laughable. And Trump was not the cause but the effect. That’s why he won in 2016.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

So much for that.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

Nope. You still have yet to address the fact that the risk of fraud is significantly higher with mail in ballots. The Libertarian candidate received 3mil fewer votes when compared to 2016. Hard to swallow and Trump who as you say is divisive and a villain received 74.2 million votes. Something is rotten in Denmark. I believe there is fraud on both sides and the whole voting landscape needs to be revamped.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

I have addressed that claim. Again. Between rotty relationships between parents/siblings/offspring/significant other. The chance that there was massive fraud with mail-in ballots without any instance of it coming out that I'm aware of is nil. Show me any case presented in the sixty or so claims that assert it and I'll take it seriously. Until then you are simply giving an opinion without a good justification.

Why is it hard to swallow. Be honest have you ever talked about politics as much as in the last four years? I haven't and that's true for most anybody I know. More interest, more participation. Doesn't seem hard to swallow. Here are my points.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

I never Cared about politics til my kids hit middle school (2018) and I noticed all the PC crap. You conflating Manson with Trump is laughable. And Trump was not the cause but the effect. That’s why he won in 2016.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

So much for that.

OK...so you won’t give me a specific example to address? I did it with you. Lol

 

[forkup]

View attachment 439269

I agree that those who incited were acting out for an unacceptable reason.

Oh, you left out Trump's inciteful remarks, a picture of the mob in action, and a picture of the 4 dead people. I do agree with you, but just don't give sound bites.
Keep in mind that the ballots in those swing states were recounted ad nausea and no fraud was detected.

Some fraud was but not enough to overturn the results. The optics look bad. Mail in votes, which are more difficult to audit (not absentee ballots) lean heavily Democrat. Don't care about this election anymore. Its done. But future ones need to be more transparent.

Mail-in votes and absentee ballots is distinction without a difference. And the reason why they lean more Democratic because Trump ranted against them and in general Democrats are wearier about the pandemic.

As to transparency. I'm interested to know what you mean by that. There are not one but several safeguards in place for both mail-in votes and in-person votes. Both parties have people at the ballot places to monitor the elections. In most places where they count you can literally go online and watch them do it. When there are disputes recounts can be asked for and there are thousands of lawyers on both sides. What do you want exactly to make it more transparent?

I'm also interested to know where you get the idea that they are more difficult to audit?

Lastly... optics???? Not for nothing, we just saw a mob stopping the business of governing in an attempt to perform a coup ( not hyperbole but the only right description of breaking into the Capitol to stop the verification of the election results), as a direct result of the current President of the United States claiming the future one is illegitimate and asking the mob to march on the Capitol. As far as optics go, I can't think of much worse.

#1) Absentee ballots are requested. So if I request a ballot it is one thing if one is sent to me and my wife without a request and someone else can grab it, it is another thing.

#2) Poll watchers could not see very well what was happening as I understand it and there are questions of ballot harvesting, ballot dumping, dead people voting, etc. When I vote in person I give my address, they then check my name off and give me a reference tag. I then upload by ballot via a machine. To me that is very straightforward and I also see that my ballot was processed. If someone steals mail in ballots and fills them out for me and my wife or I do so for my wife then there are no true checks and balances. Say I live with my parents and my wife. They are agnostic and don't vote. I receive four unsolicited ballots. I fill all four out for my candidate. My wife and parents either don't know or care and now instead of one vote, my vote counts as four. How do we police that?

#3) It is the Capital and the mob is angry because of the media. You watch CNN and you see a completely different reality from that of Fox. Traditional and Social media both have divided this country. This board is another example. We are at each others throats. BLM protests were not mostly peaceful and 19 people died. The police have been hamstrung and could not do much vs. BLM nor much vs. the Capital uprising. People are angry and I blame the media.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

You didn't address my point so let us do it concretely. If the state sends me four blank voting envelopes. What stops me from filling out all four vs. just mine? Especially if my wife and parents don't know nor care. It is different if I REQUEST mine and they request theirs.

Address this specific example.

And they didn't condemn the violence. Seattle Mayor said it was the summer of love. Nadler called it a myth. Fredo Cuomo asked who said protests have to be peaceful. CNN called them mostly peaceful. Disgraceful.

Sure. First, your parents live with you? Ballots are sent by address. Second, you need to forge their signature, when in doubt election officials can and do call, better hope they don't reach them. Third, congratulations you just committed a felony in order to swing a grand total of TWO votes. Seems a bit risky. Fourth, the chances that that happened presupposes that every person who had their votes stolen either didn't find out or decided to cover for the felon since few actual examples of this happening on any scale are being alleged.

So now please answer my counterarguments.

#1) In my example they do.
#2) They are my wife and parents they would say sure and I doubt the FBI would call.
#3) Felony if you get caught and its tough to catch.
#4) Multiply that example by thousands.

In swing states elections can be divided by thousands or even hundreds. Ask John James. To me mail in ballots are a terrible idea. Absentee ballots, no issue at all.

I'll just answer 2 and 4. Signatures are checked by computer and flagged to be then checked, so yes not the FBI but election officials DO call. And if I multiply it by the thousands the chances that every single parent/sibling/offspring is willing to silently have their votes stolen, especially this day and age is essentially nil. Proof would have been found.

So you have seen the signatures? LOL. You trust the computers? To me it looks fishy that most of the mail in ballots lean Democrat. I find it fishy that BOTH sides garnered so many more votes while the Libertarian candidate garnered 3 mil fewer votes. I find it impossible that the officials check every signature with a computer. I find it odd when nursing homes have thousands of ballots suddenly. Easy to forge those signatures. So let's not pretend that the risk of fraud is not greater than if we all had either in person voting or REQUESTED ballots.

If we cannot agree there then we need to drop this and agree to disagree. To me the RISK of fraud is higher. Doesn't mean there was fraud but I am highly suspicious.

Be suspicious all you want, although I'll say now your suspicions don't seem to be not moored in anything concrete or are easily explained if you are willing to think things through. Libertarians have so much fewer votes for instance because Trump has been so divisive that he nearly eliminated the third party vote. You are for or against there is no middle ground.

So you have called me out because I didn't address your hypothetical. I have done you the courtesy of spending 3 posts on what is the least consequential of your arguments. Can you do me the courtesy of trying to rebut the points I made?

Nope. You still have yet to address the fact that the risk of fraud is significantly higher with mail in ballots. The Libertarian candidate received 3mil fewer votes when compared to 2016. Hard to swallow and Trump who as you say is divisive and a villain received 74.2 million votes. Something is rotten in Denmark. I believe there is fraud on both sides and the whole voting landscape needs to be revamped.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

I have addressed that claim. Again. Between rotty relationships between parents/siblings/offspring/significant other. The chance that there was massive fraud with mail-in ballots without any instance of it coming out that I'm aware of is nil. Show me any case presented in the sixty or so claims that assert it and I'll take it seriously. Until then you are simply giving an opinion without a good justification.

Why is it hard to swallow. Be honest have you ever talked about politics as much as in the last four years? I haven't and that's true for most anybody I know. More interest, more participation. Doesn't seem hard to swallow. Here are my points.

#1) Again a distinction without a difference. The principle is exactly the same. You send in your vote by mail. It's interesting though that too you putting up barriers to voting is considered making voting better. I understand it from a partisan standpoint but it makes the argument that you want elections to be fair ring hollow. The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

#2)If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts. I've actually read some of the rulings. It wasn't even close. To me, it says something that people make grand claims in places that carry no penalty for lying to then either tone down their claims to a fraction or not assert it all.

3#) Oh, so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt? Not for nothing Azog but that argument is not a little bit weird not to mention ironic since a few months ago we had an argument where you were blaming me for not convicting riots although I did not one time but several times in the OP and the Democrats as a whole although every single politician clearly condemned the violence. As to whom you blame, the media bears responsibility, although I personally am very careful before I accept anything from any media. That's why I try to see primary sources and am allergic to people both left and right who don't even try to nuance stuff. Having said that, leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

I never Cared about politics til my kids hit middle school (2018) and I noticed all the PC crap. You conflating Manson with Trump is laughable. And Trump was not the cause but the effect. That’s why he won in 2016.

What points would you like me to address? Give me a specific example and I will happily address it.

So much for that.

OK...so you won’t give me a specific example to address? I did it with you. Lol

I've distilled it some more for you. These are 4 distinct points I made I want you to adress.

The fairest election you can possibly have is the one that has all eligible voters cast their vote and the person who gets the most be declared the winner. I'm willing to grant that the constitution provides an impediment for the second one but you also object to the first.

If you have things to contest fine. All the things that you are claiming happened have either been rejected by the courts or have simply not been asserted to the courts.

so as long as a mob is angry, whatever they do can be forgiven, including making a coup attempt?

leaving out the person who clearly was the reason for the crowd being so mad by both propagating and directing their anger at other people and simply blaming it on the media seems not credulous. To put it bluntly, Charles Manson didn't kill anybody but that didn't make him any less responsible for what happened.

By the way I didn't compare Trump to Charles Manson. I engaged in a Reductio in Absurdum. What I'm saying is that it's absurd to try to not hold Trump responsible because he didn't personally engage in the riots. The fact that it was because of him and under his direction that it happened is enough to hold him responsible.

 

[iceberg]

Ruskie troll farms are working overtime to build the Trumpenstein Monster to eat you.

Turn off OAN and Newsmax.

Bad News for America.

why is our own media absolved from their actions that far more divide us than a russian troll?