3 ms·

There is a difference between difference of opinion and difference of facts. And yes it’s true popular opinion affects things irrespective of their factual basi

There is a difference between difference of opinion and difference of facts. And yes it’s true popular opinion affects things irrespective of their factual basis, yet having a factual basis does play a strong and often determining role. Trump lost the election, objectively. Elections are the basis of democracy. if you do not accept their outcome, you do not support democracy. The vocal left did not LIKE the outcome of the last election, and did not approve of the electoral colleges role. But they did not at any poin reject that the democratic process was valid . They are arguing very different things ultimately.

AnHonestComment 6y ago
> Trump lost the election, objectively. Prove it. I’ve yet to have anyone even try to factually address the irregular vote tallies in PA and other states — numbers so suspect, I’d report them as a financial auditor. There’s unusual temporal, spatial, and similarity discontinuities that strongly indicate cheating occurred, particularly in battleground states. These are the same techniques we use to address fraud in industry. - Temporal discontinuities are sharp spikes in the rate of vote tallying. There’s many of these, and huge ones in battle grounds after the media blackout. - Spatial discontinuities are when adjacent precincts are wildly different (in a way unlike similar nearby differences). - Similarity discontinuities happened in two forms: 1. similar races didn’t have similar voting patterns; 2. similar precincts behaved differently. All three occurring together, and in “critical” races like Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, is a very strong indication of fraud. I think you’re asserting your opinion as objective fact.
nitrogen 6y ago
I am replying for the sake of the hidden sibling comment: I don't watch any major media coverage of politics, but a mathematician and comedian I follow on YouTube (from a different country who presumably has no horse in the race) has analyzed some of the numerical allegations of fraud: - https://youtu.be/ua5aOFi-DKs https://youtu.be/ua5aOFi-DKs - https://youtu.be/aokNwKx7gM8 https://youtu.be/aokNwKx7gM8 - https://youtu.be/etx0k1nLn78 https://youtu.be/etx0k1nLn78

AnHonestComment 6y ago

> Trump lost the election, objectively. Prove it. I’ve yet to have anyone even try to factually address the irregular vote tallies in PA and other states — numbers so suspect, I’d report them as a financial auditor. There’s unusual temporal, spatial, and similarity discontinuities that strongly indicate cheating occurred, particularly in battleground states. These are the same techniques we use to address fraud in industry. - Temporal discontinuities are sharp spikes in the rate of vote tallying. There’s many of these, and huge ones in battle grounds after the media blackout. - Spatial discontinuities are when adjacent precincts are wildly different (in a way unlike similar nearby differences). - Similarity discontinuities happened in two forms: 1. similar races didn’t have similar voting patterns; 2. similar precincts behaved differently. All three occurring together, and in “critical” races like Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, is a very strong indication of fraud. I think you’re asserting your opinion as objective fact.

nitrogen 6y ago

I am replying for the sake of the hidden sibling comment: I don't watch any major media coverage of politics, but a mathematician and comedian I follow on YouTube (from a different country who presumably has no horse in the race) has analyzed some of the numerical allegations of fraud: - https://youtu.be/ua5aOFi-DKs https://youtu.be/ua5aOFi-DKs - https://youtu.be/aokNwKx7gM8 https://youtu.be/aokNwKx7gM8 - https://youtu.be/etx0k1nLn78 https://youtu.be/etx0k1nLn78