5 ms·

> ridiculed, ignored, and aren't allowed a day in court to even present their evidence. ..other than the nearly 60 court cases? [1] or the dozens of news outle

> ridiculed, ignored, and aren't allowed a day in court to even present their evidence. ..other than the nearly 60 court cases? [1] or the dozens of news outlets that have attempted and failed to find actual evidence? [2] Saying they're not allowed to present their evidence is patently false. It's not like this is the first time the exact same people made the same claims with no evidence [3]. How long should they be taken seriously for? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related... [2] https://www.google.com/search?q=evidence+of+2020+election+fraud https://www.google.com/search?q=evidence+of+2020+election+fr... [3] https://apnews.com/article/f5f6a73b2af546ee97816bb35e82c18d https://apnews.com/article/f5f6a73b2af546ee97816bb35e82c18d

gnarbarian 6y ago
http://www.hereistheevidence.com http://www.hereistheevidence.com
- grahamburger 6y ago
  I looked through some of what's here. I don't really have the vocabulary to understand if these items are significant or not. Some of them seem like they might be, some of them seem like they're probably not significant, and some seem to point to evidence that claims of fraud are in actuality a farce. I do have some trust in our institutions and our court system, though. The fact that there has been bi-partisan dismissal across the board of claims of election fraud - even from judges and officials who are on-the-record Trump supporters - leads me to believe that there is little here of substance. Why would Republican Trump supporters who are proud (perhaps to a fault) of defying the mainstream media suddenly fall in line? They didn't fall in line with the other 'fake news' events throughput the presidency, why this one? Imagine the credibility they'd gain if there was actually enough fraud to change the election, and they found it! I've seen people point to the fact that many of the cases were dismissed by judges without actually hearing the evidence, due to clerical or timing problems. I am incredulous. In order to accept that, I have to believe that a Republican judge who supports Donald Trump and presumably wanted to see him back in the presidency looked at the lawsuit, understood the situation and it's urgency, and shrugged his (or her) shoulders and said 'sorry, you might be right, but I'm not gonna look at it.' I don't buy it.
  - gnarbarian 6y ago
    Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm not trying to argue a side here beyond describing things from the perspective of the disaffected, and then what the likely outcome will be. These people are already suspicious of the legitimacy of the election, denying them the transparency of discovery and a public trial erodes that faith further. Gore got a trial in 2000 with a challenge to the electoral college. The mass of mail in ballots this year represents a dramatic change from the norm and I understand why people want more scrutiny. But really, if half the country doesn't trust the integrity of our election system do we even have a democracy anymore?
colordrops 6y ago
It's not that the media should have given credence to the election fraud allegations - they are obviously bullshit. It's that they should have also been just as skeptical and censorious of other allegations without any evidence, such as Russiagate. Dozens of people were accused of colluding with a foreign power, which is crazy, and not just Republicans - Bernie Sanders was accused as well. And the impeachment report by Mueller did not reveal a single piece of direct evidence of any collusion. Even the people convicted during the trial were not convicted of collusion but of other crimes. The problem is that you can't pick and choose what you will censor or control based on political preference. The crazy right wing extremists might be ignorant and on the wrong path but they sense unfairness just like anyone else.

gnarbarian 6y ago

http://www.hereistheevidence.com http://www.hereistheevidence.com

grahamburger 6y ago
I looked through some of what's here. I don't really have the vocabulary to understand if these items are significant or not. Some of them seem like they might be, some of them seem like they're probably not significant, and some seem to point to evidence that claims of fraud are in actuality a farce. I do have some trust in our institutions and our court system, though. The fact that there has been bi-partisan dismissal across the board of claims of election fraud - even from judges and officials who are on-the-record Trump supporters - leads me to believe that there is little here of substance. Why would Republican Trump supporters who are proud (perhaps to a fault) of defying the mainstream media suddenly fall in line? They didn't fall in line with the other 'fake news' events throughput the presidency, why this one? Imagine the credibility they'd gain if there was actually enough fraud to change the election, and they found it! I've seen people point to the fact that many of the cases were dismissed by judges without actually hearing the evidence, due to clerical or timing problems. I am incredulous. In order to accept that, I have to believe that a Republican judge who supports Donald Trump and presumably wanted to see him back in the presidency looked at the lawsuit, understood the situation and it's urgency, and shrugged his (or her) shoulders and said 'sorry, you might be right, but I'm not gonna look at it.' I don't buy it.
- gnarbarian 6y ago
  Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I'm not trying to argue a side here beyond describing things from the perspective of the disaffected, and then what the likely outcome will be. These people are already suspicious of the legitimacy of the election, denying them the transparency of discovery and a public trial erodes that faith further. Gore got a trial in 2000 with a challenge to the electoral college. The mass of mail in ballots this year represents a dramatic change from the norm and I understand why people want more scrutiny. But really, if half the country doesn't trust the integrity of our election system do we even have a democracy anymore?

colordrops 6y ago

It's not that the media should have given credence to the election fraud allegations - they are obviously bullshit. It's that they should have also been just as skeptical and censorious of other allegations without any evidence, such as Russiagate. Dozens of people were accused of colluding with a foreign power, which is crazy, and not just Republicans - Bernie Sanders was accused as well. And the impeachment report by Mueller did not reveal a single piece of direct evidence of any collusion. Even the people convicted during the trial were not convicted of collusion but of other crimes. The problem is that you can't pick and choose what you will censor or control based on political preference. The crazy right wing extremists might be ignorant and on the wrong path but they sense unfairness just like anyone else.