Trump vs Biden 2020, Day 64 of the Pennsylvania count (pt 5) Read OP

Padre_Pio

briany wrote: »

Before the advent of 24-hour news and the proliferation of online 'news', the way people got their news was to watch or listen to a news report that would come on the TV or radio twice a day, and read news in their local paper. What's really missing from this time was the lack of editorialist comment which now feels like an intrinsic part of news programming and really introduced the concept of bias. This is not to say that old news couldn't be biased. They could have, for example, simply omitted things they didn't want out in the public sphere, but at least it wasn't so overt as to stake out these battle lines and tell people what to think.

What's lacking is the time for details to emerge and the full story to present itself.
Modern media is paid by the click, so the faster and more sensationalised the story, the more money that's made.
Of course this has led to outright lies being peddled as fact, witness statements that are factually wrong, and a story that is often out of context with larger events. News stories based on unverified tweets is an obvious example of this. It's reduced most media to no better than red top rags with their "sources close to the person in question" excuse for makey-uppy stories.


How many times have you seen "more on this story as it develops" or online articles being ninja-edited when they realise they f*cked up?
TheJournal is notorious for this and you can see echoes of these changes in the comments section:rolleyes:

Tony EH

RickDeckard wrote: »

They are gathering fact and making the case I guess, I dunno, I'm not saying Team Trump is correct, but things look odd at a minimum.

Nothing looks "odd". You're just parroting bullshit you've been fed by partisan YouTubers. Repeating algorithmic data that has been inputted into you...

...like a robot.

It's time for your Voight-Kampff test, Mr Deckard.

Padre_Pio

RickDeckard wrote: »

It stinks, I just want everything investigated and verified, what's the problem with that if all is above board?

Nothing stinks.

It's like investigating a murder when the person is alive and standing right beside you.

mcmoustache

sdanseo wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with informing yourself with various non-mainstream sources once you do it correctly: watch knowing the information is more likely to be drastically one-sided, not reviewed or fact checked and then use a consensus of all your sources to draw a conclusion.

Expecting people to use only CNN to get the news is just as bad a practice as the people using only Newsmax.

Of course. There are less than mainstream sources of news that are credible. Bellingcat have done some great work but they are very transparent in their methodology. There are others with a proven expertise in their field and a reputation that they depend on.



The problem is the sources that are just opinion, often from people without a clue or who are actively deceptive.


I disagree with this idea of using lots of slanted sources for anything more than knowing what the slanted sources are on about. The truth isn't always somewhere in the middle - it could be on another axis entirely or one side could have the correct take. The earth isn't half round and truth doesn't reside between Cenk Uigher and Alex Jones on anything related to Syria.

RickDeckard

Tony EH wrote: »

Nothing looks "odd". You're just parroting bullshit you've been fed by partisan YouTubers. Repeating algorithmic data that has been inputted into you...

...like a robot.

It's time for your Voight-Kampff test, Mr Deckard.

Good Man, cheers for the BL Ref.

Christ, I sure upset you bunch anyway.

We will see, all is fine the I guess, and you guys sure told me wot for.

ohnonotgmail

RickDeckard wrote: »

Good Man, cheers for the BL Ref.

Christ, I sure upset you bunch anyway.

We will see, all is fine the I guess, and you guys sure told me wot for.

nobody is upset. You have done nothing that hasn't been done a dozen times since the election. It is exasperation that anybody would fall for youtube experts rather than what trump has argued in court. the two are very different yet you still believe somebodies opinion over verifiable fact. have you read any of the court cases filed by trump? if you had you would see that he is a busted flush.

Leroy42

RickDeckard wrote: »

Good Man, cheers for the BL Ref.

Christ, I sure upset you bunch anyway.

We will see, all is fine the I guess, and you guys sure told me wot for.

Oh, stop feeling sorry for yourself.

You made some claims, people challenged you on them and you were not able to provide anything even close to evidence. At one point you even stated that they must be working on something and we will have to wait and see?

You claimed the election was stolen from Trump. That is quite a serious and important claim. That you had nothing but a few Youtube video pieces to back up your claim and failed to deal with any of the quite obvious questions is not because people are picking on you or that you have annoyed anyone.

It is because you have tried to claim something and now feel silly because even you acknowledge that you have been duped into believing known liars.

ExMachina1000

mcmoustache wrote: »

Far too many people these days are informing themselves about world events by watching stupid youtube videos and we're starting to see a garbage-in garbage-out process playing out in here as a result.

Agree. Also people taking the word of some rando on Twitter who got 7 likes for his post and then posting the link as if this rando is some sort of sage.

Curious_Case

It's very simple

Trump lost and he knows he lost

All the hoopla is just him desperately hoping against hope that he can cause enough trouble to salvage something from the situation

I want a list of his believers so I can sell them magic beans

RickDeckard

Leroy42 wrote: »

Oh, stop feeling sorry for yourself.

You made some claims, people challenged you on them and you were not able to provide anything even close to evidence. At one point you even stated that they must be working on something and we will have to wait and see?

You claimed the election was stolen from Trump. That is quite a serious and important claim. That you had nothing but a few Youtube video pieces to back up your claim and failed to deal with any of the quite obvious questions is not because people are picking on you or that you have annoyed anyone.

It is because you have tried to claim something and now feel silly because even you acknowledge that you have been duped into believing known liars.[/QUOTE


Dude Im just not part of your Hivemind. ****ing sorry for myself? gtfo

I dont feel silly, I have an open mind, and something is not right here.
Every single reply has been an Ad Hominin reply.

None of you experts have tackled any of the points I listed earlier, just implied Im a gullible mug who bases his world view of youtube.

timsey tiger

RickDeckard wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Oh, stop feeling sorry for yourself.

You made some claims, people challenged you on them and you were not able to provide anything even close to evidence. At one point you even stated that they must be working on something and we will have to wait and see?

You claimed the election was stolen from Trump. That is quite a serious and important claim. That you had nothing but a few Youtube video pieces to back up your claim and failed to deal with any of the quite obvious questions is not because people are picking on you or that you have annoyed anyone.

It is because you have tried to claim something and now feel silly because even you acknowledge that you have been duped into believing known liars.[/QUOTE


Dude Im just not part of your Hivemind. ****ing sorry for myself? gtfo

I dont feel silly, I have an open mind, and something is not right here.
Every single reply has been an Ad Hominin reply.

None of you experts have tackled any of the points I listed earlier, just implied Im a gullible mug who bases his world view of youtube.

You have my pity.

ohnonotgmail

RickDeckard wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Oh, stop feeling sorry for yourself.

You made some claims, people challenged you on them and you were not able to provide anything even close to evidence. At one point you even stated that they must be working on something and we will have to wait and see?

You claimed the election was stolen from Trump. That is quite a serious and important claim. That you had nothing but a few Youtube video pieces to back up your claim and failed to deal with any of the quite obvious questions is not because people are picking on you or that you have annoyed anyone.

It is because you have tried to claim something and now feel silly because even you acknowledge that you have been duped into believing known liars.[/QUOTE


Dude Im just not part of your Hivemind. ****ing sorry for myself? gtfo

I dont feel silly, I have an open mind, and something is not right here.
Every single reply has been an Ad Hominin reply.

None of you experts have tackled any of the points I listed earlier, just implied Im a gullible mug who bases his world view of youtube.

you have already been told that they have either been raised in court and dismissed by a judge or not raised in court at all because there is nothing to them. you haven't introduced anything new.

everlast75

I think Trump et al have a major issue.

They want a particular outcome to be true and are reverse engineering the facts, i.e. what needs to be a fact in order for Trump to win.

Okay - ballots have to be made up. Let's allege that.

There was a computer hack. Let's allege that.

Ballots were incorrectly accepted. Let's allege that.

And so forth.

The problem is that when you allege those things to have happened, you have to prove them in a Court with evidence.

You can spout all sorts of things, but no one is going to take you seriously if the court cases you are bringing are being unceremoniously dumped by each and every judge.

What is left is so uncomfortable for them, that Biden won, they keep searching for non-existent facts to try make what they want to be true, true.

nolivesmatter

Curious_Case wrote: »

It's very simple

Trump lost and he knows he lost

All the hoopla is just him desperately hoping against hope that he can cause enough trouble to salvage something from the situation

Yep, that's basically it. I'd add that half the hoopla has been from Trump and his legal team claiming fraud without demonstrating any evidence as yet, while the other half has been the hyperbolic claims of Trump "threatening democracy".

On a side note the fact that several thousand new ballots were found during some recounts suggests the process needs to be tightened up a little in places.

ohnonotgmail

everlast75 wrote: »

I think Trump et al have a major issue.

They want a particular outcome to be true and are reverse engineering the facts, i.e. what needs to be a fact in order for Trump to win.

Okay - ballots have to be made up. Let's allege that.

There was a computer hack. Let's allege that.

Ballots were incorrectly accepted. Let's allege that.

And so forth.

The problem is that when you allege those things to have happened, you have to prove them in a Court with evidence.

You can spout all sorts of things, but no one is going to take you seriously if the court cases you are bringing are being unceremoniously dumped by each and every judge.

What is left is so uncomfortable for them, that Biden won, they keep searching for non-existent facts to try make what they want to be true, true.

what is worrying for me is that trump is making all kinds of accusations of fraud publicly but when it comes time to appear in court his lawyers (rudy included) have been very clear with judges that they are not alleging fraud. Despite this they ignore this contradiction and still parrot what he says publicly.

extra gravy

RickDeckard wrote: »

Christ, I sure upset you bunch anyway.

Upset? No. Bored of yet another poster making outlandish claims without any evidence to back them up? Probably.

RobAMerc

I havent checked in on this thread in a few days so I dont know if it was covered, but gosh yer man Anthony Blinken's speech really struck home to me the difference between this and the last administration.

For anyone interested - here is a link to it.

Eoin

It's funny how the MAGA heads embrace how much Trump pisses off so many people (sorry, I mean "owns the libs"), yet also can't understand that there's a chance he wasn't the most popular candidate.

robinph

nolivesmatter wrote: »

On a side note the fact that several thousand new ballots were found during some recounts suggests the process needs to be tightened up a little in places.

Possibly, but it varies as to if the effort of doing so is worth the result.

For Georgia the result was close, they had an automated recount, found some more votes and added them to the totals but it wasn't actually enough to change the result and no recount with that difference has ever found enough extra votes to change the result.

Is it worth holding a recount in California though just to find an extra thousand votes one way or the other when the difference between the candidates is in the millions?

The systems are already in place to find missing votes, but whilst every vote counts, do we really need to know if Biden won by 5999999 or 6000000 in California?

prinzeugen

everlast75 wrote: »

They want a particular outcome to be true and are reverse engineering the facts, i.e. what needs to be a fact in order for Trump to win.

That's how the majority of conspiracy theories work and cult leaders have done the same.
Start with the conclusion and work backwards.
They look for signs in everything that they can use to "prove" that the conclusion is coming/true.

valoren

Eoin wrote: »

It's funny how the MAGA heads embrace how much Trump pisses off so many people (sorry, I mean "owns the libs"), yet also can't understand that there's a chance he wasn't the most popular candidate.

For me it's cognitive dissonance/sunk cost in his support base.

The cognitive dissonance is the idea of his base firmly believing that Trump is the best choice for President. A strongman, who tells it like it is, who sticks it to the Libs, who is unapologetic and is a bullying stable genius. Never mind any nuance, intellectualism, fitness for office or actual political policy or vision. He provokes and antagonizes people they loathe and they adore him for it with a cult like fervor. However that mindset is then disrupted by the election. There is no landslide. 80 million votes for Sleepy Joe. Their man get's rejected by ballot. Come January 20th, he, and his antics, are gone. It's here that Trump's years of fomenting anger and suspicion of the Fake News from the mainstream media pays it's dividends. They are already defined as liars. So when they project the other guy as the winner, then, they are simply lying again. More people voted for the other guy who was posited as the anti-thesis of their Strong Man leader. Therein lies the dissonance. If Trump was such a great President then a second term would surely be a formality? Keep America Great? What's going on here?

Those same media outlets, as they did for Trump in 2016, project Biden as the winner. To resolve that dissonance his base support have two options. They can believe that perhaps Trump is not all he's cracked up to be? Perhaps his Presidency, particularly the shambolic Covid response, has resulted in turning people off him? That the idea of having a President with no political experience campaigning on populist ideas was experimental and that experiment failed? They can believe that the election was absolutely secure and that the people had spoken and democracy was at play.

Or; They can continue to retain their belief in Trump as a great, nay the greatest, President by believing that the election was rigged, that there was mass electoral fraud, that the Democrats have committed treason, that millions of dead people still on the registrars "voted" or *insert whatever conspiracy theory is flavor of the week here*. They become zealous and unflinching in that belief as they will not have to face the discomfiting experience of admitting they are/were wrong and accept that their guy lost fair and square.

nolivesmatter

robinph wrote: »

Possibly, but it varies as to if the effort of doing so is worth the result.

For Georgia the result was close, they had an automated recount, found some more votes and added them to the totals but it wasn't actually enough to change the result and no recount with that difference has ever found enough extra votes to change the result.

Is it worth holding a recount in California though just to find an extra thousand votes one way or the other when the difference between the candidates is in the millions?

The systems are already in place to find missing votes, but whilst every vote counts, do we really need to know if Biden won by 5999999 or 6000000 in California?

I get what you're saying. Using Georgia as the example you could argue that the fact that the missing ballots were added in the recount demonstrates the robustness of the process at work. On the other hand how do we know now that nothing else was missing. There'll always be some level of error when people are involved, I just think boxes of ballots shouldn't be getting overlooked like that.

briany

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what is worrying for me is that trump is making all kinds of accusations of fraud publicly but when it comes time to appear in court his lawyers (rudy included) have been very clear with judges that they are not alleging fraud. Despite this they ignore this contradiction and still parrot what he says publicly.

The whole Trump movement is pretty much based on the following phrase, "I have no actual evidence of what I'm alleging, but doesn't this one thing, taken out of context, look awful fishy? Why not draw your own conclusions?"

~Rebel~

RickDeckard wrote: »

The main points

100's of sworn affidavits from private citizens have been filed alleging voting irregularities.
Basic ID checks not done.
Massive, statistical irregularities observed, Biden getting 100% of vote counts in some areas.
Massive amounts of votes appearing at 4 AM, for Biden only.
Unsealed Voting machines with incorrect serial numbers appearing.
Many USB storage keys missing from Voting machines.
Dominion Voting machines proven hackable, malware already found.
Hundreds of thousands more votes returned than sent out
The dead Voting.
Day by day more is coming out.
Media blackouts non this

But, I'm a shill, tin foil hatter, what ever you want to call me, I'm just pointing out that this all smells. I hope I'm wrong.

This is a collection of mostly (if not all) debunked nonsense. Most of it debunked within days or even hours of first appearing.

But more than that, ask yourself why this is their approach. You say that they can't prove any of this because they're building a case - but if they were serious... I mean really serious... they'd have shut the fuck up, picked one issue and gone away to properly dive into it, and put together the evidence for one solid meaningful case. But instead they stick to this crazy nonsensical scattershot approach where they just throw loads of nonsense out there day after day with absolutely nothing to back it up. What they're doing is for maximum short term media attention. It has no chance of accomplishing legal success, but does rile up their base. Which is its purpose.

Serious lawyers, assembling a real case that they actually believed in, wouldn't be spending all their team screaming about a diverse collection of conspiracy theories at anyone that will listen.

RickDeckard

~Rebel~ wrote: »

This is a collection of mostly (if not all) debunked nonsense. Most of it debunked within days or even hours of first appearing.

But more than that, ask yourself why this is their approach. You say that they can't prove any of this because they're building a case - but if they were serious... I mean really serious... they'd have shut the fuck up, picked one issue and gone away to properly dive into it, and put together the evidence for one solid meaningful case. But instead they stick to this crazy nonsensical scattershot approach where they just throw loads of nonsense out there day after day with absolutely nothing to back it up. What they're doing is for maximum short term media attention. It has no chance of accomplishing legal success, but does rile up their base. Which is its purpose.

Serious lawyers, assembling a real case that they actually believed in, wouldn't be spending all their team screaming about a diverse collection of conspiracy theories at anyone that will listen.

thanks so much for reposting this, people need to see it. Still Ataack the messenger. F U c K Trump. I Dont care. The system itself must be seen to work.

TheRepentent

RickDeckard wrote: »

thanks so much for reposting this, people need to see it. Still Ataack the messenger. F U c K Trump. I Dont care. The system itself must be seen to work.

:pac::pac:

RickDeckard

I must admit .that destroyed me personally, those emojies do so much harm, and really make a point.

Buford T Justice

So what gives?

Trump and Guliani are spouting venom about rigged elections and massive voter fraud on tv, but not in a court of law because y'know, you'd end up in Jail if you have no evidence. Clearly It certainly looks as if they're not going to win, and the decision won't be overturned.

Aside from keeping a hold of the redneck base that he has, or collecting revenue for his debts, what have they to gain by the continuance of peddling this bullshit?

Buford T Justice

In other news, the gig is up. Guliani did a sterling job and it's all about to be overturned anytime soon

Disclaimer, it's newsmax so you may not wan to waste your valuable seconds

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1331701166737125376

Beholders

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what is worrying for me is that trump is making all kinds of accusations of fraud publicly but when it comes time to appear in court his lawyers (rudy included) have been very clear with judges that they are not alleging fraud. Despite this they ignore this contradiction and still parrot what he says publicly.

Do you know at this point that is bothering me, is that people belief yes/no is the answer they have being looking for, but in fairness it never has been or should be the answer. Yes I'm right of left, sorry I just love saying that, it actually means I need to learn how to drive.

They should vote with their heart and respect and basically that. If the school bully doesn't like it, well then take it up with all of us.

On a side note I have always thought politics are like 8 year olds in the play ground. Not just this but every time they mention or agree on any thing. Me and my gang could agree on it better, that is 8 year olds, red hang gang rocks:D. See the point is I don't care but I still want to have a pint with you guys.