4 ms·

There are over 5000 comments here. So it's odd that every time I read a (fairly rare) bait comment, it has the same username: yours. To be clear I don't gener

There are over 5000 comments here. So it's odd that every time I read a (fairly rare) bait comment, it has the same username: yours. To be clear I don't generally track or pay attention to user names, you just seem to be making a clear and persistent effort to kick off arguments in bad faith.

anon291 2y ago
[flagged]
- something98 2y ago
  You'll need to provide credible sources for that wild claim.
  - anon291 2y ago
    which claim? Almost everyone agrees that people across the political spectrum believed the election had fraud in 2020. As for evidence of actual fraud. I'll just wave my hands towards the fact that democrat turnout in 2020 is way out of line with national trends, whereas 2024 is exactly in line with past trends.
    - something98 2y ago
      Now you're making two claims, neither of which you're providing evidence for. If "everyone agrees...the election had fraud", I'm sure you can provide multiple reputable polls showing this sentiment of "everyone". (I'll be generous and lower the bar to just a majority of Americans, but I'm not going to accept polls that show -only- a majority of Republicans, since your claim is "across the political spectrum") Second. Even if, as you've admitted elsewhere, every single court case was lost (or denied due to lack of standing) in 2020, you do realize that evidence can be presented outside courts, right? Where is this evidence? They've had 4 years to collect it. If it's widespread and, as you said elsewhere is a statistical anomaly, then it, almost by definition, should be obvious to spot. Hand waving to vibes and feels and "sure seems obvious to me" doesn't mean jack. Now, I'll grant you, that vibes and feels certainly mean a lot to the animal natures of all of us. But feels and vibes are not proof of anything.
      - anon291 2y ago
        > Where is this evidence? So for me, I saw the evidence with my own eyes when thousands of ballots came in for Joe Biden, and my immediate thought was... oh so those must certainly be fake. That's evidence enough for me. We all have our own bar. > If "everyone agrees...the election had fraud", I'm sure you can provide multiple reputable polls showing this sentiment of "everyone". (I'll be generous and lower the bar to just a majority of Americans, but I'm not going to accept polls that show -only- a majority of Republicans, since your claim is "across the political spectrum") I will restate. A significant (not a majority) number of democrats believed the election was fraudulent. Enough believed it was fraudulent, that this should concern anyone bothered about democracy and legitimacy. Here are the polls: First, across the spectrum: https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/1f428bba-56ee-4800-b00d-7fd1b0004627.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_4 https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/1f428bba-56ee-4800-... (30% of people in 21, 33% in 2023) https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/01/15/voters-reflections-on-the-2020-election/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/01/15/voters-refle... (34%) https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revisited/ https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revis... (only 55% of people think Biden legitimately won!) Independents: https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/almost-third-americans-still-believe-2020-election-result-was-fraudule-rcna90145 https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/almo... (42% of independent believe there was fraud... easily enough to swing a future election) Democrats: https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revisited/ https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revis... (1 in 9, ~ 11% , believe there was fraud in 2020... so again, enough to swing an election). Look you probably think you 'won' because I mis-spoke about a majority of democrats, but these numbers are .. not great. 45% of the country, 11% of democrats? The results have stayed stable across time. Guess what, they get to vote too? You have to convince them. One easy way to do that is to share their incredulity that 1000s of ballots come in 100% for Biden in the middle of the night. You know, you can approach this like a scientific hypothesis testing, or you can approach it the way everyday voters do. I think this is a choice that democrats need to make. By and large, the 'social sciences' are not very good at understanding human behavior because they don't understand what drives people. They're the 'men without chests' that CS Lewis talks about.
        2y ago
- ath3nd 2y ago
  I find it laughable that the average American can choose to 'believe' something that is simply and provenly not true. That's why there are so many flat earthers, q anon believers, climate change deniers, and all kind of supporters of provenly wrong ideas. I think this is because of the (wrong) notion that an ideology or a stance is better than facts. Well, the Earth is not flat, there are multiple easily accessible proofs, the q anon conspiracies are demonstratably false, and the 2020 elections had multiple investigations which uncovered 0 voter fraud, and as much as you might want to believe the opposite, it's simply not true. Believing in something doesn't make it true.
  - anon291 2y ago
    > Believing in something doesn't make it true. Perhaps not. But believing in something does make your preferred candidate win, if you go and vote.
- BoorishBears 2y ago
  Your edit demonstrates exactly what I mean by bad faith: you're intentionally itching for a fight in all your comments, you're not focused on conveying your points in a way that invites level-headed discourse. Are things ok with you in general? Could there be some non-political reason why you're resorting to inflammatory techniques to get people to talk with you?
  - anon291 2y ago
    I mean I've been doxxed before several times for 'level-headed' discourse with various people on the internet. People make fun of Trump supporters far basically embracing all the various insults that get hurled at us, but I would venture the vast majority of us don't really care anymore. We're tired of it. If the level-headed discourse gets us violence, might as well just say what we really think. As for my claims: 1. The United Nations bankrolled UNRWA and has for the last few decades, which has funneled money to Hamas. They have consistently voted against Israel, and they stood by silently in their peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and Gaza while Hamas, Gazans, and Hezbollah literally raped and massacred people on live TV. Yes, they need to go. They've not given us anything that American leadership has been unable to provide. 2. The election. The election turnouts between 2016 and 2024 are in line with each other but are extremely at odds with 2020. There was massive last-minute rule changes (like in PA) by executive action (which have now been undone by the supreme court). There were many instances of poll watchers being blocked (videos in fact) in 2020. Counting would suddenly stop and restart. Then there would be thousands of ballots in ballot dumps 100% for Biden. This is not normal. I have no hard evidence. I've freely admitted that elsewhere. But the totality of evidence points to some really fishy business going on here. I mean, Putin wins his elections too, and 'won' a referendum in Crimea. I'm not sure what other takes are in bad faith, but as I've said many times, happy to discuss
    - BoorishBears 2y ago
      So your answer to discourse getting out of hand in the past is to take an approach that starts it out of hand, seems counterproductive no? Although now that you're presenting those takes with some more surface area, the rationale doesn't feel all there. After all, for how massive the UN is and its mandate, I don't think the UNRWA or ill equipped peacekeeping forces avoiding entering a full blown engagement justifies the extraordinary claim they're actually a terrorist organization. And the voter fraud rationale is similarly light: most of what you mentioned was covered in numerous lawsuits, and the vast majority were lost or dismissed. The remaining few don't account for any significant gap in the election process. Is there a case that would have materially affected the outcome of the election that wasn't dismissed or lost?

anon291 2y ago

[flagged]

something98 2y ago
You'll need to provide credible sources for that wild claim.
- anon291 2y ago
  which claim? Almost everyone agrees that people across the political spectrum believed the election had fraud in 2020. As for evidence of actual fraud. I'll just wave my hands towards the fact that democrat turnout in 2020 is way out of line with national trends, whereas 2024 is exactly in line with past trends.
  - something98 2y ago
    Now you're making two claims, neither of which you're providing evidence for. If "everyone agrees...the election had fraud", I'm sure you can provide multiple reputable polls showing this sentiment of "everyone". (I'll be generous and lower the bar to just a majority of Americans, but I'm not going to accept polls that show -only- a majority of Republicans, since your claim is "across the political spectrum") Second. Even if, as you've admitted elsewhere, every single court case was lost (or denied due to lack of standing) in 2020, you do realize that evidence can be presented outside courts, right? Where is this evidence? They've had 4 years to collect it. If it's widespread and, as you said elsewhere is a statistical anomaly, then it, almost by definition, should be obvious to spot. Hand waving to vibes and feels and "sure seems obvious to me" doesn't mean jack. Now, I'll grant you, that vibes and feels certainly mean a lot to the animal natures of all of us. But feels and vibes are not proof of anything.
    - anon291 2y ago
      > Where is this evidence? So for me, I saw the evidence with my own eyes when thousands of ballots came in for Joe Biden, and my immediate thought was... oh so those must certainly be fake. That's evidence enough for me. We all have our own bar. > If "everyone agrees...the election had fraud", I'm sure you can provide multiple reputable polls showing this sentiment of "everyone". (I'll be generous and lower the bar to just a majority of Americans, but I'm not going to accept polls that show -only- a majority of Republicans, since your claim is "across the political spectrum") I will restate. A significant (not a majority) number of democrats believed the election was fraudulent. Enough believed it was fraudulent, that this should concern anyone bothered about democracy and legitimacy. Here are the polls: First, across the spectrum: https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/1f428bba-56ee-4800-b00d-7fd1b0004627.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_4 https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/1f428bba-56ee-4800-... (30% of people in 21, 33% in 2023) https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/01/15/voters-reflections-on-the-2020-election/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/01/15/voters-refle... (34%) https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revisited/ https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revis... (only 55% of people think Biden legitimately won!) Independents: https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/almost-third-americans-still-believe-2020-election-result-was-fraudule-rcna90145 https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/almo... (42% of independent believe there was fraud... easily enough to swing a future election) Democrats: https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revisited/ https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-january-6-revis... (1 in 9, ~ 11% , believe there was fraud in 2020... so again, enough to swing an election). Look you probably think you 'won' because I mis-spoke about a majority of democrats, but these numbers are .. not great. 45% of the country, 11% of democrats? The results have stayed stable across time. Guess what, they get to vote too? You have to convince them. One easy way to do that is to share their incredulity that 1000s of ballots come in 100% for Biden in the middle of the night. You know, you can approach this like a scientific hypothesis testing, or you can approach it the way everyday voters do. I think this is a choice that democrats need to make. By and large, the 'social sciences' are not very good at understanding human behavior because they don't understand what drives people. They're the 'men without chests' that CS Lewis talks about.
      - 2y ago
ath3nd 2y ago
I find it laughable that the average American can choose to 'believe' something that is simply and provenly not true. That's why there are so many flat earthers, q anon believers, climate change deniers, and all kind of supporters of provenly wrong ideas. I think this is because of the (wrong) notion that an ideology or a stance is better than facts. Well, the Earth is not flat, there are multiple easily accessible proofs, the q anon conspiracies are demonstratably false, and the 2020 elections had multiple investigations which uncovered 0 voter fraud, and as much as you might want to believe the opposite, it's simply not true. Believing in something doesn't make it true.
- anon291 2y ago
  > Believing in something doesn't make it true. Perhaps not. But believing in something does make your preferred candidate win, if you go and vote.
BoorishBears 2y ago
Your edit demonstrates exactly what I mean by bad faith: you're intentionally itching for a fight in all your comments, you're not focused on conveying your points in a way that invites level-headed discourse. Are things ok with you in general? Could there be some non-political reason why you're resorting to inflammatory techniques to get people to talk with you?
- anon291 2y ago
  I mean I've been doxxed before several times for 'level-headed' discourse with various people on the internet. People make fun of Trump supporters far basically embracing all the various insults that get hurled at us, but I would venture the vast majority of us don't really care anymore. We're tired of it. If the level-headed discourse gets us violence, might as well just say what we really think. As for my claims: 1. The United Nations bankrolled UNRWA and has for the last few decades, which has funneled money to Hamas. They have consistently voted against Israel, and they stood by silently in their peacekeeping missions in Lebanon and Gaza while Hamas, Gazans, and Hezbollah literally raped and massacred people on live TV. Yes, they need to go. They've not given us anything that American leadership has been unable to provide. 2. The election. The election turnouts between 2016 and 2024 are in line with each other but are extremely at odds with 2020. There was massive last-minute rule changes (like in PA) by executive action (which have now been undone by the supreme court). There were many instances of poll watchers being blocked (videos in fact) in 2020. Counting would suddenly stop and restart. Then there would be thousands of ballots in ballot dumps 100% for Biden. This is not normal. I have no hard evidence. I've freely admitted that elsewhere. But the totality of evidence points to some really fishy business going on here. I mean, Putin wins his elections too, and 'won' a referendum in Crimea. I'm not sure what other takes are in bad faith, but as I've said many times, happy to discuss
  - BoorishBears 2y ago
    So your answer to discourse getting out of hand in the past is to take an approach that starts it out of hand, seems counterproductive no? Although now that you're presenting those takes with some more surface area, the rationale doesn't feel all there. After all, for how massive the UN is and its mandate, I don't think the UNRWA or ill equipped peacekeeping forces avoiding entering a full blown engagement justifies the extraordinary claim they're actually a terrorist organization. And the voter fraud rationale is similarly light: most of what you mentioned was covered in numerous lawsuits, and the vast majority were lost or dismissed. The remaining few don't account for any significant gap in the election process. Is there a case that would have materially affected the outcome of the election that wasn't dismissed or lost?