4 ms·

There is plenty of evidence of voting irregularities. An irregularity only becomes fraud when it was done with criminal intent. The overarching issue with norm

There is plenty of evidence of voting irregularities. An irregularity only becomes fraud when it was done with criminal intent. The overarching issue with normalization of censorship is that it becomes difficult to tell when evidence does not exist and when it does exist but was censored. https://hereistheevidence.com/ https://hereistheevidence.com/

bqe 6y ago
That website is not a quality source of information. Media Bias/Fact Check rates it as questionable, low quality, and far to the right: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/here-is-the-evidence/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/here-is-the-evidence/
- opwieurposiu 6y ago
  Mediabiasfactcheck.com Claims that hereistheevidence.com is "low quality", because it links to "low quality" sources. But Mediabiasfactcheck has links to those same sources, so by it's own argument Mediabiasfactcheck is "low quality". Please don't take the above argument too seriously, my point is that so many of the fact check orgs are riddled with logical fallacies. In this case we have guilt by association, ad hominem, argument from authority, and appeal to motive. I think a fact check system that did not rely on logical fallacy would be quite useful, however I have yet to find one.
ntsplnkv2 6y ago
All of the "evidence" here is from sources like the Washington Examiner and "The RF angle" Are you kidding me? If you want real evidence of "irregularities" look elsewhere, its certainly not here.
- AuryGlenz 6y ago
  You’ll be hard pressed to find a media organization that actually bothered to investigate things instead of immediately claiming Trump’s allegations were false. Personally, I think that’s the primary reason the riot happened.
  - ntsplnkv2 6y ago
    There's plenty of evidence/public court rulings which thoroughly debunk these claims. Why should I believe anything that supports trump. He said "we have the virus under control." Yea, let's believe his cronies. Give me a break.

bqe 6y ago

That website is not a quality source of information. Media Bias/Fact Check rates it as questionable, low quality, and far to the right: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/here-is-the-evidence/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/here-is-the-evidence/

opwieurposiu 6y ago
Mediabiasfactcheck.com Claims that hereistheevidence.com is "low quality", because it links to "low quality" sources. But Mediabiasfactcheck has links to those same sources, so by it's own argument Mediabiasfactcheck is "low quality". Please don't take the above argument too seriously, my point is that so many of the fact check orgs are riddled with logical fallacies. In this case we have guilt by association, ad hominem, argument from authority, and appeal to motive. I think a fact check system that did not rely on logical fallacy would be quite useful, however I have yet to find one.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago

All of the "evidence" here is from sources like the Washington Examiner and "The RF angle" Are you kidding me? If you want real evidence of "irregularities" look elsewhere, its certainly not here.

AuryGlenz 6y ago
You’ll be hard pressed to find a media organization that actually bothered to investigate things instead of immediately claiming Trump’s allegations were false. Personally, I think that’s the primary reason the riot happened.
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  There's plenty of evidence/public court rulings which thoroughly debunk these claims. Why should I believe anything that supports trump. He said "we have the virus under control." Yea, let's believe his cronies. Give me a break.