3 ms·

I don't support the Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/etc censorship at all. With that established, I want to point out that the comment you responded to said there was

I don't support the Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/etc censorship at all. With that established, I want to point out that the comment you responded to said there was no evidence of mass voter fraud. I think it's impossible for a country the size of the USA to hold an election with literally zero cases of voter fraud. The yardstick is whether there's evidence of voter fraud on a scale that could conceivably even remotely impact the results of the election. Of that, there is none.

ctdonath 6y ago
Semantics. Don’t need “mass” if targeted distortions in a few counting centers throws the outcome. Yes, consequential abnormalities in key locations were apparent.
- germinalphrase 6y ago
  So provide the evidence rather than mere assertion. And, is there no way to do this without Twitter or Facebook? Have we no television news? No newspapers? No court system with judges amiable to the President’s party? It’s a farce.
  - ctdonath 6y ago
    A major vote counting center shut down mid evening. They never shut down until completion - except this time. Once observers were gone, count resumed. Unusual activity occurred, recorded by surveillance cameras. During this period, a freak consequential spike in tally occurred - for one candidate. If that doesn’t get at least your curiosity, no point in continuing.
    - germinalphrase 6y ago
      Sure, I’m curious; however, you are merely making an assertion that 1) these events happened the way you’re presenting them, 2) there is no legitimate reason for the events to have happened as you’re presenting them, 3) this constitutes a conspiracy to commit election fraud, and 4) this indicates the election was wrongly decided.
      - ctdonath 6y ago
        1. The incidents are well documented in general news media. 2. Illegal to count votes without observers present. 3. Between deceptive removal of observers, and subsequent dramatic change in counters’ behaviors per video recordings, conspiracy is at least a reasonable suspicion of not proven outright. 4. Vote tally for one candidate spiked from decisive loss to commanding lead in minutes during this period. Considering you’ve moved the goalposts for this subthread, from “no evidence” to “prove intent”, I’ll consider my point made.
        loceng 6y ago
        So you have a link(s) you can share to said media that we can review?
    - nmfisher 6y ago
      Rather than wasting my time guessing which events you’re referring to, how about you provide sources for the specific claims you’re making so we can tell you why they are either debunked or inconsequential to the results of the election.
  - loceng 6y ago
    I saw someone say a comment that made me laugh a few days ago: Trump going on Fox News to say whatever he wants to millions of people, while claiming his speech is being prevented.

ctdonath 6y ago

Semantics. Don’t need “mass” if targeted distortions in a few counting centers throws the outcome. Yes, consequential abnormalities in key locations were apparent.

germinalphrase 6y ago
So provide the evidence rather than mere assertion. And, is there no way to do this without Twitter or Facebook? Have we no television news? No newspapers? No court system with judges amiable to the President’s party? It’s a farce.
- ctdonath 6y ago
  A major vote counting center shut down mid evening. They never shut down until completion - except this time. Once observers were gone, count resumed. Unusual activity occurred, recorded by surveillance cameras. During this period, a freak consequential spike in tally occurred - for one candidate. If that doesn’t get at least your curiosity, no point in continuing.
  - germinalphrase 6y ago
    Sure, I’m curious; however, you are merely making an assertion that 1) these events happened the way you’re presenting them, 2) there is no legitimate reason for the events to have happened as you’re presenting them, 3) this constitutes a conspiracy to commit election fraud, and 4) this indicates the election was wrongly decided.
    - ctdonath 6y ago
      1. The incidents are well documented in general news media. 2. Illegal to count votes without observers present. 3. Between deceptive removal of observers, and subsequent dramatic change in counters’ behaviors per video recordings, conspiracy is at least a reasonable suspicion of not proven outright. 4. Vote tally for one candidate spiked from decisive loss to commanding lead in minutes during this period. Considering you’ve moved the goalposts for this subthread, from “no evidence” to “prove intent”, I’ll consider my point made.
      - loceng 6y ago
        So you have a link(s) you can share to said media that we can review?
  - nmfisher 6y ago
    Rather than wasting my time guessing which events you’re referring to, how about you provide sources for the specific claims you’re making so we can tell you why they are either debunked or inconsequential to the results of the election.
- loceng 6y ago
  I saw someone say a comment that made me laugh a few days ago: Trump going on Fox News to say whatever he wants to millions of people, while claiming his speech is being prevented.