3 ms·

I'm not an American but as a citizen of the world I care about what's going on in the USA. So I decided to click on one of your links and go down that rabbit h

by YZF 6y ago

I'm not an American but as a citizen of the world I care about what's going on in the USA. So I decided to click on one of your links and go down that rabbit hole. I picked [3]. This certain Nahshon Garret who claims that he has not voted in Arizona yet somehow did vote in Arizona. So it seems this dude is a wrestler, and here's a random Twitter quote: "If the CHURCh understood the Laws of God which govern our relationship with Him, our neighbor, and those whom he has given authority to we wouldn’t be in this situation. The Church has failed to represent the lawful nature character and heart of God. Lawlessness is rampant." Anyhow, look him up on Twitter. If you Google this story you'll see this dude got a fair bit of media exposure. I'd say more than I'd expect. So much for "the media doesn't report on this". We also have some mystery Arizona law firm involved here. So what's the story exactly in how this specific person got involved with this specific law firm? I'd follow that lead but I sort of got an idea about who is involved here. Just because we have a signed affidavit doesn't mean its true... This guy (or rather these lawyers) did have their day in court: https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/records/election-2020/cv2020-015285 https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/records/election-2020/... and the Justice offers a lengthy and educated opinion on the issue as a whole (basically while there might have been some irregularities there is no way they would have changed the outcome of the elections). And man, there is a lot of minutes/paperwork here. Is this your best evidence of fraud? I think it's pretty thin. Also please vote in your elections, it impacts all of us.

Proziam 6y ago
That isn't the strongest evidence that I linked, let alone the strongest evidence that exists. I recommend looking into the data gathered by the Voter Integrity Fund (I linked a video from an individual presenting their findings) to have a place to start. You picked the one high-profile case where an individual who did not vote in a specific state somehow had a signature verified ballot cast in their name. Because of who he is, and because of his beliefs, it made headlines (in conservative media). If you google "Nahshon Garrett CNN" you see the following results: https://pasteboard.co/JIuN3X9.jpg https://pasteboard.co/JIuN3X9.jpg You can swap CNN for almost every major media outlet(NBC, MSNBC, etc) and see the same results. So, compared to the amount of articles posted that call allegations of fraud baseless, or claim there is no evidence, the coverage this well-documented counterexample is extremely minimal. It's noteworthy that an independent channel (Tim Pool) has such a presence in the results. > Also please vote in your elections, it impacts all of us. There hasn't been a President in 40 years (until Trump, ironically) that has not started a new war. As someone who strongly believes that violence should only be tolerated as a defensive measure of last resort, I cannot in good conscience vote for anyone who does not believe the same.
- YZF 6y ago
  Well, if this guy makes your top N list, and I just sampled it randomly I think I have some justification of extrapolating to the rest of your list. Like I was saying, this dude got more media coverage than I'd have given him. CNN doesn't have to report any random story of someone claiming something. For sure they have a bias but they don't have to give everyone a stage to air their grievance. Where exactly is that "well-documented" documentation? It's not in the affidavit. For all we know this guy voted in Arizona just so he could cry foul, or nobody really voted in Arizona using his name. Even if we say that one of his friends or acquaintances (clearly a Biden supporter) knew that he moved and took advantage to fake a vote where does that exactly leave us? How many people are in this situation? Would it change the results? Was this somehow systematically exploited? And how exactly? Why should I assign any credibility to what some seem to call "Pro-Trump ‘voter integrity’ group that is calling Pennsylvania voters has ties to White House"? Does this group have any credibility? Now I need to watch a video? But sure, let's see what they're saying and I'll get back to you. We have plenty of credible sources, including from the current administration, who tell us that the elections was generally fair. Not voting has an impact, so if the president that won starts a war, and you didn't vote for the other guy (hypothetically) then you did actually effectively vote for the president. You don't get to walk away from democracy like that. EDIT: So I went to the video. I gotta say "Trump Pence" in the background inspires confidence in the message. I'm not gonna spend an hour of my time listening to this so I jumped to the "dead voters" segment because that seemed interesting. "blah blah blah", "no records", "duplicate names make this difficult", "very small numbers", "small numbers", "I can not say there was an effort to vote in the name of the deceased"... "Its very difficult to determine who is dead and who is not". So great, it's all good then?
  - Proziam 6y ago
    I'm just a guy on the internet. I don't have a 'Top List' at all, I just have access to google. You seem to have a strongly held position on the subject, and I have no interest in trying to change your position. However, it would be beneficial for democracy if you would take the time to understand the position of those with different views than yourself. It helps a lot if you don't actively admit (and condescendingly phrase) that you won't spend your time to understand their concerns. > Not voting has an impact, so if the president that won starts a war, and you didn't vote for the other guy (hypothetically) then you did actually effectively vote for the president. You don't get to walk away from democracy like that. Actually, not voting very specifically does not have an impact and reduces the thresholds required for recalls for elected officials. I'll vote in every election once we have a voting system that doesn't perpetuate the powers of the two most corrupt institutions in America.

by YZF 6y ago

Proziam 6y ago

That isn't the strongest evidence that I linked, let alone the strongest evidence that exists. I recommend looking into the data gathered by the Voter Integrity Fund (I linked a video from an individual presenting their findings) to have a place to start. You picked the one high-profile case where an individual who did not vote in a specific state somehow had a signature verified ballot cast in their name. Because of who he is, and because of his beliefs, it made headlines (in conservative media). If you google "Nahshon Garrett CNN" you see the following results: https://pasteboard.co/JIuN3X9.jpg https://pasteboard.co/JIuN3X9.jpg You can swap CNN for almost every major media outlet(NBC, MSNBC, etc) and see the same results. So, compared to the amount of articles posted that call allegations of fraud baseless, or claim there is no evidence, the coverage this well-documented counterexample is extremely minimal. It's noteworthy that an independent channel (Tim Pool) has such a presence in the results. > Also please vote in your elections, it impacts all of us. There hasn't been a President in 40 years (until Trump, ironically) that has not started a new war. As someone who strongly believes that violence should only be tolerated as a defensive measure of last resort, I cannot in good conscience vote for anyone who does not believe the same.

YZF 6y ago
Well, if this guy makes your top N list, and I just sampled it randomly I think I have some justification of extrapolating to the rest of your list. Like I was saying, this dude got more media coverage than I'd have given him. CNN doesn't have to report any random story of someone claiming something. For sure they have a bias but they don't have to give everyone a stage to air their grievance. Where exactly is that "well-documented" documentation? It's not in the affidavit. For all we know this guy voted in Arizona just so he could cry foul, or nobody really voted in Arizona using his name. Even if we say that one of his friends or acquaintances (clearly a Biden supporter) knew that he moved and took advantage to fake a vote where does that exactly leave us? How many people are in this situation? Would it change the results? Was this somehow systematically exploited? And how exactly? Why should I assign any credibility to what some seem to call "Pro-Trump ‘voter integrity’ group that is calling Pennsylvania voters has ties to White House"? Does this group have any credibility? Now I need to watch a video? But sure, let's see what they're saying and I'll get back to you. We have plenty of credible sources, including from the current administration, who tell us that the elections was generally fair. Not voting has an impact, so if the president that won starts a war, and you didn't vote for the other guy (hypothetically) then you did actually effectively vote for the president. You don't get to walk away from democracy like that. EDIT: So I went to the video. I gotta say "Trump Pence" in the background inspires confidence in the message. I'm not gonna spend an hour of my time listening to this so I jumped to the "dead voters" segment because that seemed interesting. "blah blah blah", "no records", "duplicate names make this difficult", "very small numbers", "small numbers", "I can not say there was an effort to vote in the name of the deceased"... "Its very difficult to determine who is dead and who is not". So great, it's all good then?
- Proziam 6y ago
  I'm just a guy on the internet. I don't have a 'Top List' at all, I just have access to google. You seem to have a strongly held position on the subject, and I have no interest in trying to change your position. However, it would be beneficial for democracy if you would take the time to understand the position of those with different views than yourself. It helps a lot if you don't actively admit (and condescendingly phrase) that you won't spend your time to understand their concerns. > Not voting has an impact, so if the president that won starts a war, and you didn't vote for the other guy (hypothetically) then you did actually effectively vote for the president. You don't get to walk away from democracy like that. Actually, not voting very specifically does not have an impact and reduces the thresholds required for recalls for elected officials. I'll vote in every election once we have a voting system that doesn't perpetuate the powers of the two most corrupt institutions in America.