5 ms·

Hey ipspam, I think that you should probably question the sources that you're using. I chose to look into one allegation you made: > They "Illegally" encourage

Hey ipspam, I think that you should probably question the sources that you're using. I chose to look into one allegation you made: > They "Illegally" encouraged teens under the age of 17.5 to register to vote. Thousands registered before they were eligible to register. The problem is they would have been 18 when the election happened anyway, so the illegal registration is kind of moot. But the very first search result for "voter registration age georgia" was the Georgia Secretary of State's voter registration guidelines, which states: > To register to vote you must: > ... > Be at least 17 1/2 years of age to register and 18 years of age to vote Casting aspersions on a legal voter registration campaign as illegal, despite being so easily proven as lawful, strongly suggests to me that you've been targeted by disinformation which you've accepted as fact. I found these potential pieces of disinformation in your comment: * Hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes in Wisconsin * Absentee/mail voter fraud in general * That there are enough fraudulent votes to throw the Arizona election result into doubt * That the "left" has a disregard for laws and rules * That it's unknown whether "massive fraud" took place * A conspiracy theory involving the "Center for Civic Life" * Statistical anomalies in multiple states suggesting fraud * A conspiracy theory involving Mark Zuckerberg

ipspam 5y ago
-Let's start with the 17.5 age. Thanks for pulling the data up. As I stated, Teens UNDER the age of 17.5 were registered to vote en masse. These are technically illegal registrations and therefore votes, but as I said, no judge is going to throw them out. This is blatant disregard for the rules by the left, giving the right reason to drum up conspiracy theories by being misleading and not explaining that the voters were 18 when they voted. -Hundreds of thousands of "fraudulent" votes in Wisconsin. These aren't fraudulent, they are improperly cast, and have the potential to provide cover for fraud. Again, the left cheats, the right takes advantage of the left's cheating and brainwashes people that it's fraud. -absentee voter fraud: unknown amount, but easily accomplished with the voting rule changes if any bad actor desired to do so. Arizona: words matter. There is a difference between illegally cast and fraudulently cast. I don't think I said what you implied. But I don't have it in front of me. -the left has a disregard for laws: yes, they do, just look at this election. They said the quiet part out loud, count all votes, laws, regulations and procedures be damned. We can look at this from the perspective of accepting votes after election day or even just accepting that if someone is eligible to vote, they can vote and the rules around voting don't apply, the vote will be counted. -it IS unknown if massive fraud took place. No one has looked before now, they weren't legally allowed because all investigations must have a predicate. Center for Civic Life: not a conspiracy. They gave massive amounts of money, targeted to areas where they could find the most votes, and all areas were majority Democrat voting. They attached strings to the money that required cities and counties to follow rules that were contrary to state and local laws, including equal access laws. They sent special envoys who were given privileged access to voters data and paid people to correct and cure ballots in only areas that vote heavily Democrat. Mostly grey area lawwise but certainly not ethical. -Statistical anomalys DO Indicate fraud. Like ultra high turnout. But there is another explaination. Zuckerbergs nonprofit was given privileged access and used government data to run the most successful voter turnout campaign in history. In the end, yes, it was a conspiracy against Trump. But it was mostly legal, and grey area. The forensic audits are to see if the left overplayed their hand and allowed real straight cut fraud. I don't think it's particularly likely, but I've also seen what has been done to Trump. So I do think it's entirely possible, and no one knows yet. We are only 6 months out from the election. Nothing happens that fast.
- AaronFriel 5y ago
  I believe you're spreading misinformation that has no place on Hacker News - or anywhere else to be honest. It's wildly accusatory and as you say, you are suggesting a vast "conspiracy against Trump" which involved unprecedented amounts of fraud, "improper" voting, and so on.

ipspam 5y ago

-Let's start with the 17.5 age. Thanks for pulling the data up. As I stated, Teens UNDER the age of 17.5 were registered to vote en masse. These are technically illegal registrations and therefore votes, but as I said, no judge is going to throw them out. This is blatant disregard for the rules by the left, giving the right reason to drum up conspiracy theories by being misleading and not explaining that the voters were 18 when they voted. -Hundreds of thousands of "fraudulent" votes in Wisconsin. These aren't fraudulent, they are improperly cast, and have the potential to provide cover for fraud. Again, the left cheats, the right takes advantage of the left's cheating and brainwashes people that it's fraud. -absentee voter fraud: unknown amount, but easily accomplished with the voting rule changes if any bad actor desired to do so. Arizona: words matter. There is a difference between illegally cast and fraudulently cast. I don't think I said what you implied. But I don't have it in front of me. -the left has a disregard for laws: yes, they do, just look at this election. They said the quiet part out loud, count all votes, laws, regulations and procedures be damned. We can look at this from the perspective of accepting votes after election day or even just accepting that if someone is eligible to vote, they can vote and the rules around voting don't apply, the vote will be counted. -it IS unknown if massive fraud took place. No one has looked before now, they weren't legally allowed because all investigations must have a predicate. Center for Civic Life: not a conspiracy. They gave massive amounts of money, targeted to areas where they could find the most votes, and all areas were majority Democrat voting. They attached strings to the money that required cities and counties to follow rules that were contrary to state and local laws, including equal access laws. They sent special envoys who were given privileged access to voters data and paid people to correct and cure ballots in only areas that vote heavily Democrat. Mostly grey area lawwise but certainly not ethical. -Statistical anomalys DO Indicate fraud. Like ultra high turnout. But there is another explaination. Zuckerbergs nonprofit was given privileged access and used government data to run the most successful voter turnout campaign in history. In the end, yes, it was a conspiracy against Trump. But it was mostly legal, and grey area. The forensic audits are to see if the left overplayed their hand and allowed real straight cut fraud. I don't think it's particularly likely, but I've also seen what has been done to Trump. So I do think it's entirely possible, and no one knows yet. We are only 6 months out from the election. Nothing happens that fast.

AaronFriel 5y ago
I believe you're spreading misinformation that has no place on Hacker News - or anywhere else to be honest. It's wildly accusatory and as you say, you are suggesting a vast "conspiracy against Trump" which involved unprecedented amounts of fraud, "improper" voting, and so on.