4 ms·

> The divide is on topics like anti-vax, nonexistent election fraud, et cetera. IE, actual lies. It's funny that the party of "my body my choice" is so against

> The divide is on topics like anti-vax, nonexistent election fraud, et cetera. IE, actual lies. It's funny that the party of "my body my choice" is so against people wanting a say over what goes into their bodies. I am personally vaccinated, but I think it's reasonable to let individuals make that choice. Also regarding election fraud, when on election night you see charts like [1] with enormous one party spikes, it is entirely natural for people to be suspicious. Those people then asked for audits and were told to go to hell. If you want to undermine trust in the election system, that is exactly how to accomplish it. None of this is "you aren't allowed to lie" it's "You aren't allowed to ask questions" [1] https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/politics/us/2020/michigan-wisconsin.jpg https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/politics/us/2020/michigan-w...

skinkestek 5y ago
Exactly this. Again, I don't believe there was widespread fraud but people who refuse to discuss what happened and refuse inspections sure aren't helping us becomong more confident.
- seppin 5y ago
  > I don't believe there was widespread fraud They people that do are basing it on no evidence and lies. There aren't two sides to a lie, and it doesn't deserve equal time to the truth.
bigtex1988 5y ago
Last I checked, pregnancy isn't contagious. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison. Who was told to "go to hell"? There were plenty of recounts in all of the close states. Even the recent farcical commission checking fraud in Arizona didn't find anything. As to the "spike" in that picture, a simple Google search of "Michigan spike voting" produces plenty of resources showing how the "spike" was not fraud. And if you're so worried about the spike in Biden votes later in the process, why are you not also worried about the spike in Trump votes at Nov 3 21:00 (on the graph on the right)? You're being downvoted because these arguments are so bad as to almost clearly be in bad faith.
- war1025 5y ago
  > You're being downvoted because these arguments are so bad as to almost clearly be in bad faith. I'm being downvoted because some subset of people here view down vote as "I disagree". I used to be bothered by it. I don't think much about it anymore. Edit: I'm also fairly certain I've got some followers who take it upon themselves to go through my comment history and start downvoting other posts of mine just for good measure. You know, really sticking it to the man or whatever.
  - stouset 5y ago
    I downvoted you. Not because I disagree, but because I too believe your arguments are in bad faith and/or misrepresenting the positions of those you disagree with. > It's funny that the party of "my body my choice" is so against people wanting a say over what goes into their bodies. Unlike anti-abortion laws which force women to take pregnancies to term against their will, I am aware of zero proposed legislation that aims to force people into vaccination against their will. The one potential exception to this is for entry to public schooling, for which religious exemptions are (generally but not always) easy to come by. If not bad faith or misrepresentation, then what? > Also regarding election fraud, when on election night you see charts like [1] with enormous one party spikes, it is entirely natural for people to be suspicious. Those people then asked for audits and were told to go to hell. It is reasonable for people to be suspicious. But far from being told to go to hell, people have been given repeated and convincing evidence for why these spikes occur (blue votes tending to cluster in high-density, high-population districts). There was even ample discussion in advance of the election about how, where, and when we expected these spikes to occur, why they're expected, and demonstrating their historical precedent. Some people still demanded investigations of fraud. Most of those claims were dismissed through official processes due to lack of evidence. Being denied an investigation into claims that have been repeatedly debunked is not being told to go to hell. In fact some of those claims were investigated, but essentially zero systemic fraud has been found to date. If not bad faith or misrepresentation, then what?
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
seppin 5y ago
> I am personally vaccinated, but I think it's reasonable to let individuals make that choice. A virus doesn't infect you and stop, it uses your body to infect others. Public health is the opposite of "my body my choice". A simple enough distinction to make if you care to do so.
jhgb 5y ago
> It's funny that the party of "my body my choice" is so against people wanting a say over what goes into their bodies. Public health is public health, not purely your business. > I am personally vaccinated, Good on you! > but I think it's reasonable to let individuals make that choice. No, it's not and if you don't see why then you have a major problem with understanding modern medicine.

skinkestek 5y ago

Exactly this. Again, I don't believe there was widespread fraud but people who refuse to discuss what happened and refuse inspections sure aren't helping us becomong more confident.

seppin 5y ago
> I don't believe there was widespread fraud They people that do are basing it on no evidence and lies. There aren't two sides to a lie, and it doesn't deserve equal time to the truth.

bigtex1988 5y ago

Last I checked, pregnancy isn't contagious. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison. Who was told to "go to hell"? There were plenty of recounts in all of the close states. Even the recent farcical commission checking fraud in Arizona didn't find anything. As to the "spike" in that picture, a simple Google search of "Michigan spike voting" produces plenty of resources showing how the "spike" was not fraud. And if you're so worried about the spike in Biden votes later in the process, why are you not also worried about the spike in Trump votes at Nov 3 21:00 (on the graph on the right)? You're being downvoted because these arguments are so bad as to almost clearly be in bad faith.

war1025 5y ago
> You're being downvoted because these arguments are so bad as to almost clearly be in bad faith. I'm being downvoted because some subset of people here view down vote as "I disagree". I used to be bothered by it. I don't think much about it anymore. Edit: I'm also fairly certain I've got some followers who take it upon themselves to go through my comment history and start downvoting other posts of mine just for good measure. You know, really sticking it to the man or whatever.
- stouset 5y ago
  I downvoted you. Not because I disagree, but because I too believe your arguments are in bad faith and/or misrepresenting the positions of those you disagree with. > It's funny that the party of "my body my choice" is so against people wanting a say over what goes into their bodies. Unlike anti-abortion laws which force women to take pregnancies to term against their will, I am aware of zero proposed legislation that aims to force people into vaccination against their will. The one potential exception to this is for entry to public schooling, for which religious exemptions are (generally but not always) easy to come by. If not bad faith or misrepresentation, then what? > Also regarding election fraud, when on election night you see charts like [1] with enormous one party spikes, it is entirely natural for people to be suspicious. Those people then asked for audits and were told to go to hell. It is reasonable for people to be suspicious. But far from being told to go to hell, people have been given repeated and convincing evidence for why these spikes occur (blue votes tending to cluster in high-density, high-population districts). There was even ample discussion in advance of the election about how, where, and when we expected these spikes to occur, why they're expected, and demonstrating their historical precedent. Some people still demanded investigations of fraud. Most of those claims were dismissed through official processes due to lack of evidence. Being denied an investigation into claims that have been repeatedly debunked is not being told to go to hell. In fact some of those claims were investigated, but essentially zero systemic fraud has been found to date. If not bad faith or misrepresentation, then what?
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago

seppin 5y ago

> I am personally vaccinated, but I think it's reasonable to let individuals make that choice. A virus doesn't infect you and stop, it uses your body to infect others. Public health is the opposite of "my body my choice". A simple enough distinction to make if you care to do so.

jhgb 5y ago

> It's funny that the party of "my body my choice" is so against people wanting a say over what goes into their bodies. Public health is public health, not purely your business. > I am personally vaccinated, Good on you! > but I think it's reasonable to let individuals make that choice. No, it's not and if you don't see why then you have a major problem with understanding modern medicine.