Question for Trump Supporters Who Support the Overthrow of the US Government

[bobozou]

Also, I think the easiest rebuttal against the voting machine conspiracy theories is to simply perform a hand recount (which was done).  I don't see any point going down that path any further.

Thank you - should be an interesting starting-point

[JRM]

@JRM or others who think believe there is 'evidence of [above average] election irregularities at a large enough scale...'

Full disclosure:
1) I haven't come across evidence of this, mainly cause I consume (probably) left-leaning mainstream/tech media... and I don't even know where to begin searching for 'credible' evidence of this to form a more-balanced opinion
2) I'm genuinely interested, NOT in engaging in a debate on this (because I don't know the data intimately), but to evaluate-the-evidence (that those who believe the 'election fraud narrative' find compelling), to form my own opinion on the theory

Question:
Are there links (recognizing that they probably won't be 'mainstream') where someone can point me to both the analysis and raw data that suggests 'above average amount of election fraud'?  And to be clear, I think there's probably ALWAYS some base-level of fraud (which varies depending on geographical/historical norms) - but I'd be very appreciative to see the evidence that 'above average fraud happened at national level in 2020'

Awesome post Bobozou. I really like your self-awareness regarding your own sources, and your interest in analysis.

It would be great if JRM or others could post data with analysis so we can broaden our understanding as you suggest.

This is not at all what you asked for Bobozou, but some people might want to review the congressional record for that day. My interpretation is that no one made an accusation of wide scale fraud, but their argument was more of a matter of arguing that since so many people believe that the Trump talking points are true, we should make those people feel better by investigating them. That was the argument from those trying to disrupt the counting. The republican argument for counting was basically let's stop this charade and tell the people the truth, that you can't lie to them and then say you have to take an illegal, extra constitutional action because you lied to them.

Here's the congressional record for that day, if someone would like to debate that interpretation, please be sure to provide quotes:

https://www.congress.gov/117/crec/2021/01/06/CREC-2021-01-06.pdf

See my previous post for a couple of links.

[rkbabang]

For those of you who support Trump and think that things in the USA are so bad that we should "burn it all down", I am wondering have you considered moving to a different country, and if so, which country do you think "gets it right"?

Board members, regardless of political belief, might find the list useful even if just for vacation ideas or research purposes.

Thanks.

I'm guessing North Korea, Russia and Saudi Arabia.  AOC is not well liked in any of those countries.  Cheers!

There have been many religious sects throughout history that have fervently hated one another yet from the view of an atheist they are far more similar than they are different.  The same with government cults.  Stalin and Hitler hated each other for example.  The fact that Kim Jong-un is not a fan of AOC is meaningless.  From the anarchist point of view they are far more similar than different.

[LC]

From the anarchist point of view they are far more similar than different.

Too reductionist for my palate. Nihilism is just so boring. 

[bobozou]

@JRM

Thanks again for the links - hoping for constructive conversation (debate?) regarding some of the information in the links:

The link that I skimmed through was the Georgia-Senate-Subcommittee-Report

Let's set aside possible political motivations, and take the report at face-value;  In addition, we'll set-aside issues like 'Georgia, of all places, probably would have investigated possible cheating-that-favored-Biden'.

----------------------

One of my biggest questions/concerns is actually mentioned in the report-itself; the bottom of p8-p9 speaks to alleged voting-result-disparity (in-favor-of-Biden).  One of the quotes is literally, 100% in favor of one-side, is a statistical unlikelihood/impossibility -  I'm sympathetic to that argument. 

But, if I extrapolate that idea to the report-itself (not a specific example cited in the report), isn't the report basically a statistical unlikelihood/impossibility?  What I mean is, every example that I skimmed through (and there were numerous) seemed to be an example in-favor-of-Biden

In other words, either 1) truly, after a proper inquiry, all (100%) of evidence seems to suggest that there was 'abnormal cheating in favor of Biden' (ie, there was no evidence of cheating in other direction), OR 2) this was not a reliable unbiased inquiry... ie, this is the equivalent of me-in-excel goalseeking to justify whatever solution the power-that-be-have-already-predetermined.  OR, to use a marital-metaphor, if I was in a bad-mood, and wanted to draw up a subcommittee report where 100% of evidence suggests my spouse is incompetent?  I suspect I could (and maybe I have...)- but would that prove that my spouse was incompetent (or just prove that I'm a hack)?

So i guess, I don't see evidence that 'there was discrepancy that favored Biden over Trump', or that 'there was discrepancy above-and-beyond historical norm'

Respectfully submitted

[JRM]

In Georgia the senate judiciary committee was (is?) mostly republican.  There is a political bias there.  Same with legislatures in Arizona and Pennsylvania.

The statistical arguments don't prove anything, but they are trying to provide a compelling reason to inspect the ballots and machines more closely.  Unless any ballots can be proven to be fake, then I don't see how they can be thrown out.  I also don't know how you know which "fake or illegal" ballots were for which contestant unless they are inspected.

Here's where I'm at, one side is lying and it would be easy to figure out who is lying by allowing a non-partisan inspection of the voting machines and mail-in ballots.  That's what Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania are working towards (I believe).

[Read the Footnotes]

ReadTheFootnotes,

I'm not getting too hung up on the court cases.  I view it as not their job to fix this.  I haven't reviewed every single case, and I'm not a lawyer anyways.  My opinion doesn't mean much regarding the court cases.

I think the US is still the best game in town.  I can't complain.  I've been extremely lucky to be born in this country and have been afforded opportunities that 99% of the people on earth could only dream of.

Regarding where to start looking at evidence, I would recommend starting here:

Willian Ligon, Georgia Senate Judiciary Committee report: http://www.senatorligon.com/THE_SENATE%20JUDICIARY%20SUBCOMMITTEE_FINAL%20REPORT.PDF

Pennsylvania Senate letter to congress (the letter is embedded in this article):

https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/spl/electoral-college-certification-pennsylvania-senate-letter-20210106.html

That was really interesting. It was very interesting to compare summary of the hearing with watching the actual hearing. It is absolutely an astounding difference in my opinion. Also interesting that it seems Giuliani was present for this hearing.

The primary witness is Ryan Germany with the vast majority of the time comprised of Germany and Gabriel Sterling appearing afterwards. Germany, and Sterling of course were engaged in multiple calls that may result in criminal or civil issues for Trump and others. We will probably find out more about that in about nine days.

That definitely expanded my understanding the criminal cases that might be filed and more importantly some of the other actors involved. It helps me better understand why Trump would force the Trump-appointed AG Pak to resign.

It also makes sense why the Republican Secretary of State and his employees had to do so much to fight conspiracy theories. You can watch one of his attempts here. Interesting to note that six weeks ago, he said that someone was going to get shot because of all the lies.

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/04/953321408/georgia-election-official-dont-let-misinformation-suppress-your-own-vote

This AP article includes and annotated fact check of the phone call with the president related to these calls and claims

https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-check-donald-trump-georgia-elections-electoral-college-407d934b6649a4e4059ec28c4cb70512

I've attached an image of the "Claim vs Fact" chart that Sterling used in one of his press conferences to refute the Giuliani talking points.

[JRM]

ReadTheFootnotes,

One side is lying.  It shouldn't take too much effort to prove which side it is.  Georgia SOS claims 2 dead people voted, Giullini claims at least 800 people died in 2020 prior to the election and voted.  I want to know who is lying.  I should add, I'm open to the possibility that the Trump team is either lying or has bad info.  I want to see it all laid out in a public forum.

[cubsfan]

@JRM or others who think believe there is 'evidence of [above average] election irregularities at a large enough scale...'

Full disclosure:
1) I haven't come across evidence of this, mainly cause I consume (probably) left-leaning mainstream/tech media... and I don't even know where to begin searching for 'credible' evidence of this to form a more-balanced opinion
2) I'm genuinely interested, NOT in engaging in a debate on this (because I don't know the data intimately), but to evaluate-the-evidence (that those who believe the 'election fraud narrative' find compelling), to form my own opinion on the theory

Question:
Are there links (recognizing that they probably won't be 'mainstream') where someone can point me to both the analysis and raw data that suggests 'above average amount of election fraud'?  And to be clear, I think there's probably ALWAYS some base-level of fraud (which varies depending on geographical/historical norms) - but I'd be very appreciative to see the evidence that 'above average fraud happened at national level in 2020'

Instead of relying on the losing candidate or independent researchers to "prove" anything, I think a highly auditable and verifiable system should be in place. If my business posts financial statements rather out of line with historical figures, that's a flag and may trigger a tax or regulatory audit. And probably should. If signature verification figures or adjudication numbers spike. It seems like that is worthy of a full forensic audit. If the businesses of citizens are auditable by the state at great penalty, elections probably should have the same standard.

What a concept. +1

[rkbabang]

From the anarchist point of view they are far more similar than different.

Too reductionist for my palate. Nihilism is just so boring. 

His original argument is like retorting to someone critical of Stalin.  "You don't like Stalin?  You know who else didn't like Stalin?  Hitler that's who!"

It is just not a very good argument.  Stating that they are more similar to me than different is just a fact.  You don't have to enjoy it.