Trump supporters...please show class. Don't be sore losers...

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, snafu said:

 

What you describe are a large part of the complaints (I also added an edit to my post while you were responding).  

People focus solely on fraud, but there’s a lot more that goes into it. A lot of human error.   Including whether state laws were properly followed. You may be fluent in research.  Do you ever think “system 1.0” is ever as good as it should be?  It is easy to see that this particular election in certain places (places that have historically voted in person) is very different. 

 

Now I agree that if the Trump team had proof they’d (1) better get on with showing it, and (2) better have really solid proof.  And if they do and he loses like it is probable, then fine.  They’ve got more information than you or me, and they’ve got the right to present their proof. I’d add that if there was widespread irregularity, then they have an obligation to bring it to light for the sake of future elections.

 

 

 

Let me ask you this.  Knowing there are more mail ins, do you think states with higher mail in are being more careful analyzing those ballots?  Logic would suggest so.  Neither of us know for sure of course, but again all states have methods to validate before they finalize their submissions.  I din’t Doubt there will be some errors here and there, but you would need a monumental number of individual errors or some giant systemic flaw to change results in states where the winner has tens of thousands more votes.

 

Also,  I am not sure you can say Trump’s team has more info, because at this point they have not presented any claim in court that supports that.

[shoshin]

7 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Now I agree that if the Trump team had proof they’d (1) better get on with showing it, and (2) better have really solid proof.  And if they do and he loses like it is probable, then fine.  They’ve got more information than you or me, and they’ve got the right to present their proof. I’d add that if there was widespread irregularity, then they have an obligation to bring it to light for the sake of future elections.

 

 

Then why aren't showing it in court with a hot and pressing urgency to do so?

[oldmanfan]

Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Perhaps it’s semantics, but unless I’m misreading you, you’re advocating for ‘trust the state’ . 
 

If a candidate doesn’t trust the state, and you’re suggestion is to forgo aggressive action in search of the truth, it boils down to acquiesce and submit.  You are absolutely correct—those were my words describing what I see as your position, not yours.  
 

I stand by the characterization, but apologies if you felt I was quoting you verbatim. 

If you are not going to trust the state elections, many of which are run by Republicans in those that Trump lost, then what do you suggest?  Recounting by who and to what purpose?

 

We have an electoral system that has worked for centuries.  Why are so many now wanting to upset the apple cart because Trump decided in advance there was no way he could lose?  He lost.  The vote will be finalized, certified, and we’ll move on.

[snafu]

8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Let me ask you this.  Knowing there are more mail ins, do you think states with higher mail in are being more careful analyzing those ballots?  Logic would suggest so.  Neither of us know for sure of course, but again all states have methods to validate before they finalize their submissions.  I din’t Doubt there will be some errors here and there, but you would need a monumental number of individual errors or some giant systemic flaw to change results in states where the winner has tens of thousands more votes.

 

Also,  I am not sure you can say Trump’s team has more info, because at this point they have not presented any claim in court that supports that.

 

I don’t know how monumental it would need to be. If the mai-in rate is 5x the normal rate (that’s just a made up number) then you’d expect 5x the normal amount of bad ballots.  If the sheer volume and time crunch made for hasty analysis, then perhaps it may have been higher.  

 

As for evidence, I presume that will come — though part of the challenge is to throw out every PA ballot received after 8:00 on Election Day.  If that’s successful, then what need is there to analyze or present findings? My post referred to human error, system failure, AND failure to adhere to State laws. 

 

In my mind, this has little to do with Trump. It could be the other way around, and I would let the challenge go on. As was stated earlier, what’s the harm in it if it turns out that everything is up-and-up?  The reverse is: who benefits if something went wrong and it isn’t found out?  Not you and me. Not now, not in the future.

 

 

[jrober38]

11 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Then why aren't showing it in court with a hot and pressing urgency to do so?

 

They have no evidence. All of their lawsuits have been laughed out of court.

 

Their angle today is to avoid the courts (where they'll lose) and try their case in the court of public opinion. The right wing is claiming that because the election suffered from wide scale fraud (again, no proof) that the election results in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Georgia need to be thrown out completely. The state legislatures in each state need to refuse to certify the results because of rampant fraud (no evidence) and toss the results out entirely.

 

Under that scenario, no one reaches 270, and the US House of Reps chooses the next president based off a delegates system in which the majority of Reps in each state determines who chooses the delegate. In that scenario the GOP holds  28-22 advantage.

 

If Trump heads out and starts holding rallies next week, this is what they'll be pursuing. The end of democracy. Throwing out legit election results solely based off them not liking the outcome and they'll essentially be trying to install Trump as a dictator, in power against the will of the people. 

[oldmanfan]

20 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

I don’t know how monumental it would need to be. If the mai-in rate is 5x the normal rate (that’s just a made up number) then you’d expect 5x the normal amount of bad ballots.  If the sheer volume and time crunch made for hasty analysis, then perhaps it may have been higher.  

 

As for evidence, I presume that will come — though part of the challenge is to throw out every PA ballot received after 8:00 on Election Day.  If that’s successful, then what need is there to analyze or present findings? My post referred to human error, system failure, AND failure to adhere to State laws. 

 

In my mind, this has little to do with Trump. It could be the other way around, and I would let the challenge go on. As was stated earlier, what’s the harm in it if it turns out that everything is up-and-up?  The reverse is: who benefits if something went wrong and it isn’t found out?  Not you and me. Not now, not in the future.

 

 

Then let me ask you this.  Did you have the same opinion in 2016?  2012? 2008?  1960?  Pick a year.  We have a legal election this year with voters who voted legally, whose votes were counted, and one candidate won fairly convincingly.

 

There have been much closer elections than this, and we did not have the fuss we see this year.  The only reason we have so this year is the loser is not mature enough to accept the outcome.

Edited November 12, 2020 by oldmanfan

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

You don’t understand research.  In research you make a hypothesis to explain an observation and you then experimentally test your hypothesis.  And then analyze the data obtained by appropriate statistical methodology.  But here is the key thing:  You are always testing the null hypothesis; I.e. that there is no effect.  You are assuming an effect.  That’s wrong.

 

What you are calling to be done is exactly what the states do to validate their outcomes via audits and such.  I see no resistance from anyone to do so.  What people are saying is simply this:  all the states have said their elections were carried out consistent with their laws and procedures, and that there is no reason to suspect the outcomes.  They will validate because that is part of their procedure.  

 

And again, you are assuming there is in fact some egregious error with absolutely no data to back it up.  You have a conclusion in your mind and want to bend circumstances to fit your pre-made conclusion.  I hope you don’t do that for your clients.

Where did I say acquiesce and submit?  That’s crap and you know better.  I specifically stated that the states have processes to audit and verify final results and they will do so.  

 

 

I do understand.  Maybe you are not as familiar with business and system process implementation as its not really the wheelhouse of data scientists.  Any new process has errors consistent with failure to conform to system specifications.   I've never seen a system or process work at 100% to conformance to specifications on day one.  If you have then you're the first. 

 

This entire mass mail in ballot (we've had some form of limited absentee and mail in ballots before) is new and quickly defined.   Let's look at PA. The vote stands at 49.7% for Biden and 49.1% for Trump.  You're going to suggest the error rate here either by unintentional or intentional counting is less than 1%?  I call BS on that.  

 

We can agree to disagree.  You can claim the higher ground all you want, and also suggest the state did its job correctly.  But you have no more proof of this than I do unless you were present and observing the activity.  As a scientist you should have an innate skepticism.  And these people managing and acting in the process are not machines or logical instructions.   This is not a controlled research environment.   This is a process with a lot of moving parts.  A lot of opportunities for errors.  People have motivations and skills that we have no ability to assess or quantify.  You're assuming they did their job to the letter and intent of the process.  But affidits and sworn statements along with video evidence and documented instances of process violations should be enough to require a credible recount where the margin of victory is .6%.  This margin seems well within a reasonable threshold to order a recount without hesitation and without any actions to contest the count.  That seems like a reasonable thing in the world's greatest democracy.  .

 

Like I said at the beginning.  Why be afraid of a recount?  If it confirms the original outcome then case closed and we move on.  If not then we need to apply pressure and put more scrutiny on the players and actors in the process.  Let's cut to the chase here too.  The fear among the resistance to a recount is a recount might alter the outcome they desire.     

 

 

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I do understand.  Maybe you are not as familiar with business and system process implementation as its not really the wheelhouse of data scientists.  Any new process has errors consistent with failure to conform to system specifications.   I've never seen a system or process work at 100% to conformance to specifications on day one.  If you have then you're the first. 

 

This entire mass mail in ballot (we've had some form of limited absentee and mail in ballots before) is new and quickly defined.   Let's look at PA. The vote stands at 49.7% for Biden and 49.1% for Trump.  You're going to suggest the error rate here either by unintentional or intentional counting is less than 1%?  I call BS on that.  

 

We can agree to disagree.  You can claim the higher ground all you want, and also suggest the state did its job correctly.  But you have no more proof of this than I do unless you were present and observing the activity.  As a scientist you should have an innate skepticism.  And these people managing and acting in the process are not machines or logical instructions.   This is not a controlled research environment.   This is a process with a lot of moving parts.  A lot of opportunities for errors.  People have motivations and skills that we have no ability to assess or quantify.  You're assuming they did their job to the letter and intent of the process.  But affidits and sworn statements along with video evidence and documented instances of process violations should be enough to require a credible recount where the margin of victory is .6%.  This margin seems well within a reasonable threshold to order a recount without hesitation and without any actions to contest the count.  That seems like a reasonable thing in the world's greatest democracy.  .

 

Like I said at the beginning.  Why be afraid of a recount?  If it confirms the original outcome then case closed and we move on.  If not then we need to apply pressure and put more scrutiny on the players and actors in the process.  Let's cut to the chase here too.  The fear among the resistance to a recount is a recount might alter the outcome they desire.     

 

 

You absolutely refuse to accept that states have methods to audit and certify results.  What you are calling for is what the states do before finalizing counts.  

 

So if you don’t trust the states to do their job, who should?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

If you are not going to trust the state elections, many of which are run by Republicans in those that Trump lost, then what do you suggest?  Recounting by who and to what purpose?

 

We have an electoral system that has worked for centuries.  Why are so many now wanting to upset the apple cart because Trump decided in advance there was no way he could lose?  He lost.  The vote will be finalized, certified, and we’ll move on.

I enjoy reading your thoughts, you’re rational and dialed in for a geezer. 
 

I suggest we allow the candidate to pursue legal options where they see evidence of fraud or problems with votes counted.  

 

I’m not advocating for upsetting any apple cart, I’m actually advocating for ensuring the apple cart is roadworthy, tuned up and that apples were dropped or thrown off the cart along certain stretches of road, we pick em up and/or take them back from the people who grabbed em. 
 

I remain uncertain as to what exactly upsets you about the process DJT is following.  Are you suggesting what he’s doing is illegal?  Unconstitutional?  Should this issue make it to the Supreme Court—are you concerned the justices will overturn a lawfully decided election?  
 

In you prior post, you used the term logic to describe the/a process a state might follow with mail in votes.  I’ve worked with and around the state of NY for 36 years, and logical is a term I’d rarely use with regard to the mechanisms in our particular state.  Off the top of my head:

 

 

 A friend in the waste management business contracted with the state to do a large hazmat cleanup near the Mohawk River on an emergency basis. The agreed upon fee was $450k +/-.   When the work was completed, the logical folks at the state dodged and delayed payment by approximately 13 months, forcing this small family owned company to the brink of financial ruin. 

 

An employee had withholding issues for childcare.  I was required to withhold and submit monies he claimed were not due because the state was always about 90 days behind the curve on processing his contribution (I believed him, but that irrelevant).  I withheld as ordered under threat of substantial penalty, received a letter 90 days later threatening me further with civil penalty. When I inquired and provided proof of payment, I was told payment was credited to his personal account because I had not used a business check with a name like “McDonalds or Burger King”.

 

During the early days of the pandemic, the Governor orders that landlords across the state discontinue attempts to collect rent and or evictions.  He says “as for the landlords, trust us, we’ll take care of you down the road”.  Still waiting, though property and school tax are due to the king, I’m sorry, government under threat of civil penalty and worse. 
 

The former governor of the State of NY was run out of office when it was discovered he was engaging in solicitation of prostitution, and perhaps wire fraud and interstate trafficking.  No criminal action was filed. 
 

Two extraordinarily powerful state senators-Joe Bruno and Sheldon Silver, both ousted from office in shame over corruption and influence peddling.  Andrew Cuomo’s right hand man was arrested on similar charges.  A former head of the states crown jewel, SUNY Poly, used his influence and position of authority in a bid-rigging scheme. 
 

The former AG of the state, a kick ass law and order type, well he gets booted because it turns out he had a major cocaine problem and liked to bash his women around as foreplay.  On a local radio show, the capital beat reporter from the local paper says that the cocaine issue was well-known for quite a while.  That leaves me wondering why the local newspaper, an institution for truth and justice chose not to run a story about the law and order guy purchasing and consuming illegal drugs. 
 

A friend of mine owns a business in a nearby city, buys a building with the intent to restore it and improve the neighborhood.  Local building inspector comes by, tells him he doesn’t like the brand new, in the plans submitted to the city sheetrock job in the main office and says it needs to be removed and replaced.  Cost will be around $5k.  Inspector continues, though by the way, I know your business is _______ , and I have an issue that maybe you can help with.  What if I came by Saturday and you helped me out and we leave the office as it is?”.

 

It is a well-known and established fact that NYS is awash in corruption and graft.  It’s not a D or R thing exclusively, but it surely is a D thing. I have a friend who is the former head of a very large state agency , is politically connected and has spoken at length with me about these issues. 
 

Logic has nothing to do with it.  People are people, corruption is a thing, and I believe 100% that you absolutely, positively with certainty cannot trust that people did the right thing.  
 

 

 

. 

[jrober38]

3 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I do understand.  Maybe you are not as familiar with business and system process implementation as its not really the wheelhouse of data scientists.  Any new process has errors consistent with failure to conform to system specifications.   I've never seen a system or process work at 100% to conformance to specifications on day one.  If you have then you're the first. 

 

This entire mass mail in ballot (we've had some form of limited absentee and mail in ballots before) is new and quickly defined.   Let's look at PA. The vote stands at 49.7% for Biden and 49.1% for Trump.  You're going to suggest the error rate here either by unintentional or intentional counting is less than 1%?  I call BS on that.  

 

We can agree to disagree.  You can claim the higher ground all you want, and also suggest the state did its job correctly.  But you have no more proof of this than I do unless you were present and observing the activity.  As a scientist you should have an innate skepticism.  And these people managing and acting in the process are not machines or logical instructions.   This is not a controlled research environment.   This is a process with a lot of moving parts.  A lot of opportunities for errors.  People have motivations and skills that we have no ability to assess or quantify.  You're assuming they did their job to the letter and intent of the process.  But affidits and sworn statements along with video evidence and documented instances of process violations should be enough to require a credible recount where the margin of victory is .6%.  This margin seems well within a reasonable threshold to order a recount without hesitation and without any actions to contest the count.  That seems like a reasonable thing in the world's greatest democracy.  .

 

Like I said at the beginning.  Why be afraid of a recount?  If it confirms the original outcome then case closed and we move on.  If not then we need to apply pressure and put more scrutiny on the players and actors in the process.  Let's cut to the chase here too.  The fear among the resistance to a recount is a recount might alter the outcome they desire.     

 

 

 

This isn't really true.

 

There are multiple people watching the counting of mail in or absentee ballots, and for each ballot that gets counted there are adjudicators from both sides to make sure ballots are being counted correctly and that improper ballots are discarded. On top of that, there are poll watchers surveying the count to make sure it's run properly. 

 

No one is afraid of recounts. On average recounts move a state level vote about 200 votes one way or the other. Biden's lead across the swing states is far beyond the level of a recount changing any of the outcomes. 

The issue is that the Trump administration is not allowing Biden's team to begin the transition of power in the middle of a pandemic, with cases, hospitalizations and deaths spiking across the country again. 

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I enjoy reading your thoughts, you’re rational and dialed in for a geezer. 
 

I suggest we allow the candidate to pursue legal options where they see evidence of fraud or problems with votes counted.  

 

I’m not advocating for upsetting any apple cart, I’m actually advocating for ensuring the apple cart is roadworthy, tuned up and that apples were dropped or thrown off the cart along certain stretches of road, we pick em up and/or take them back from the people who grabbed em. 
 

I remain uncertain as to what exactly upsets you about the process DJT is following.  Are you suggesting what he’s doing is illegal?  Unconstitutional?  Should this issue make it to the Supreme Court—are you concerned the justices will overturn a lawfully decided election?  
 

In you prior post, you used the term logic to describe the/a process a state might follow with mail in votes.  I’ve worked with and around the state of NY for 36 years, and logical is a term I’d rarely use with regard to the mechanisms in our particular state.  Off the top of my head:

 

 

 A friend in the waste management business contracted with the state to do a large hazmat cleanup near the Mohawk River on an emergency basis. The agreed upon fee was $450k +/-.   When the work was completed, the logical folks at the state dodged and delayed payment by approximately 13 months, forcing this small family owned company to the brink of financial ruin. 

 

An employee had withholding issues for childcare.  I was required to withhold and submit monies he claimed were not due because the state was always about 90 days behind the curve on processing his contribution (I believed him, but that irrelevant).  I withheld as ordered under threat of substantial penalty, received a letter 90 days later threatening me further with civil penalty. When I inquired and provided proof of payment, I was told payment was credited to his personal account because I had not used a business check with a name like “McDonalds or Burger King”.

 

During the early days of the pandemic, the Governor orders that landlords across the state discontinue attempts to collect rent and or evictions.  He says “as for the landlords, trust us, we’ll take care of you down the road”.  Still waiting, though property and school tax are due to the king, I’m sorry, government under threat of civil penalty and worse. 
 

The former governor of the State of NY was run out of office when it was discovered he was engaging in solicitation of prostitution, and perhaps wire fraud and interstate trafficking.  No criminal action was filed. 
 

Two extraordinarily powerful state senators-Joe Bruno and Sheldon Silver, both ousted from office in shame over corruption and influence peddling.  Andrew Cuomo’s right hand man was arrested on similar charges.  A former head of the states crown jewel, SUNY Poly, used his influence and position of authority in a bid-rigging scheme. 
 

The former AG of the state, a kick ass law and order type, well he gets booted because it turns out he had a major cocaine problem and liked to bash his women around as foreplay.  On a local radio show, the capital beat reporter from the local paper says that the cocaine issue was well-known for quite a while.  That leaves me wondering why the local newspaper, an institution for truth and justice chose not to run a story about the law and order guy purchasing and consuming illegal drugs. 
 

A friend of mine owns a business in a nearby city, buys a building with the intent to restore it and improve the neighborhood.  Local building inspector comes by, tells him he doesn’t like the brand new, in the plans submitted to the city sheetrock job in the main office and says it needs to be removed and replaced.  Cost will be around $5k.  Inspector continues, though by the way, I know your business is _______ , and I have an issue that maybe you can help with.  What if I came by Saturday and you helped me out and we leave the office as it is?”.

 

It is a well-known and established fact that NYS is awash in corruption and graft.  It’s not a D or R thing exclusively, but it surely is a D thing. I have a friend who is the former head of a very large state agency , is politically connected and has spoken at length with me about these issues. 
 

Logic has nothing to do with it.  People are people, corruption is a thing, and I believe 100% that you absolutely, positively with certainty cannot trust that people did the right thing.  
 

 

 

. 

My concern is that this challenge will lead to a dictatorship.  That the challenge will turn into something where state legislatures, because if their irrational fear of the incumbent, will seek to overturn the will of the people that elected Biden.  And we can pack in the entire foundations of our country.

 

I agree governmental agencies can screw up.  But there simply is no evidence to suggest that tens of thousands of votes should be overturned, and despite the protests of the losing side none has been presented.

[jrober38]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My concern is that this challenge will lead to a dictatorship.  That the challenge will turn into something where state legislatures, because if their irrational fear of the incumbent, will seek to overturn the will of the people that elected Biden.  And we can pack in the entire foundations of our country.

 

I agree governmental agencies can screw up.  But there simply is no evidence to suggest that tens of thousands of votes should be overturned, and despite the protests of the losing side none has been presented.

 

Exactly, Trump and the far right are beginning to yell and scream about having legit election results thrown out because they don't like the outcome. They scream about widespread fraud but have yet to show a shred of proof to support their claims. 

 

If he's successful, the US as we know it will cease to exist and will become a dictatorship, because at that point why would there even be an elections in the future? Just forego the democratic process entirely because god forbid the result isn't what the dictator wanted them to be. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My concern is that this challenge will lead to a dictatorship.  That the challenge will turn into something where state legislatures, because if their irrational fear of the incumbent, will seek to overturn the will of the people that elected Biden.  And we can pack in the entire foundations of our country.

 

I agree governmental agencies can screw up.  But there simply is no evidence to suggest that tens of thousands of votes should be overturned, and despite the protests of the losing side none has been presented.

Well if it’s just about your feelings, acknowledged, but we’re wasting time here.  If the will of the people is made clear to everyone, Biden will be president. Then, unfortunately, the opposition party sets about destroying him and his family.  It’s the game and we have to give him credit, he has played it well. 
 

I’m not suggesting that the people in government “screw up”, I’m pointing to evidence of corruption, of people in power doing the things powerful people do, and one of the most glaring reasons I personally reject your Easter Bunny vision of our process. 
 

I can’t believe I forgot a couple other biggies.  

Obama rat-&$#@ing bond holders of GM, creating a presidential class of winners and losers and destroying the lives of folks who propped up the company while enriching others. 
 

The Congress impeaching a President for attempting to shakedown the Ukrainian government in hearsay evidence and what someone says they think they heard from a friend of a friend.  The Congress validating a VP shaking down a foreign ally and bragging about it to the assembled masses, on tape. 

Many of us on the other side of this debate feel exactly the same as you do about dynasties and power hungry f$#@sticks and people who want to tell the world who might be black and who is not.  Your feelings are no more valid than ours.  Again, the day before the election, modern dem leadership was shrieking about not conceding the election if it went south. 
 

I’m happy to acknowledge the election was crystal clean and no meanies were involved if that proves to be the case.  Until then, let’s see what happens. 

 

17 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Exactly, Trump and the far right are beginning to yell and scream about having legit election results thrown out because they don't like the outcome. They scream about widespread fraud but have yet to show a shred of proof to support their claims. 

 

If he's successful, the US as we know it will cease to exist and will become a dictatorship, because at that point why would there even be an elections in the future? Just forego the democratic process entirely because god forbid the result isn't what the dictator wanted them to be. 

There’s no one screaming because a legit election took place. No one. If Trump prevails at the SC, will you concede the battle was worth it? 

[jrober38]

11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

There’s no one screaming because a legit election took place. No one. If Trump prevails at the SC, will you concede the battle was worth it? 

 

He's not going to get to the Supreme Court. That's why he keeps screaming garbage on Twitter. 

For that to happen, he needs to actually win a court case at a lower level, which has yet to happen.

 

Until they come up with some actual fraud, particularly on a level that could overturn the result, this will never get anywhere close to the SC.

Edited November 12, 2020 by jrober38

[oldmanfan]

8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Well if it’s just about your feelings, acknowledged, but we’re wasting time here.  If the will of the people is made clear to everyone, Biden will be president. Then, unfortunately, the opposition party sets about destroying him and his family.  It’s the game and we have to give him credit, he has played it well. 
 

I’m not suggesting that the people in government “screw up”, I’m pointing to evidence of corruption, of people in power doing the things powerful people do, and one of the most glaring reasons I personally reject your Easter Bunny vision of our process. 
 

I can’t believe I forgot a couple other biggies.  

Obama rat-&$#@ing bond holders of GM, creating a presidential class of winners and losers and destroying the lives of folks who propped up the company while enriching others. 
 

The Congress impeaching a President for attempting to shakedown the Ukrainian government in hearsay evidence and what someone says they think they heard from a friend of a friend.  The Congress validating a VP shaking down a foreign ally and bragging about it to the assembled masses, on tape. 

Many of us on the other side of this debate feel exactly the same as you do about dynasties and power hungry f$#@sticks and people who want to tell the world who might be black and who is not.  Your feelings are no more valid than ours.  Again, the day before the election, modern dem leadership was shrieking about not conceding the election if it went south. 
 

I’m happy to acknowledge the election was crystal clean and no meanies were involved if that proves to be the case.  Until then, let’s see what happens. 

 

There’s no one screaming because a legit election took place. No one. If Trump prevails at the SC, will you concede the battle was worth it? 

The Congress did not verify a shakedown by Biden as you put it.  The committee chaired by Sen Johnson found nothing to substantiate your claim.  For all your protestations otherwise, this post simply shows you want Trump to win at any cost, including the destruction of the democratic principles on which our country was founded.

 

When he said Article Two gives him the power to do anything he wants, I assume you agreed?

[TBBills]

3 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Well, first tell me how I'm wrong don't just say I'm wrong and leave it at that.  That doesn't qualify as a rebuttal.  Here's where I'm coming from on this.  First I don't care who won let's get that straight right away.  

 

I have about 25 years experience managing and participating in development and roll-outs of business and technical projects and processes on an enterprise scale.  As well as several years experience in my current job managing a data analytics organization.  I know business and technical systems and statistics and analytics.  I've worked in the public sector in state government and in the private sector for both large and small companies.  In the private sector some of my clients have been government agencies and organizations.  I know from experience and facts that no matter how good and thorough you are there are always quality and performance issues when rolling out a process or an application.  I know from facts there is no process that exists that has a zero error rate.  I'm well versed in process and quality principals like 6-sigma.  So when it comes to processes and data and statistics I can claim expert status.       

 

So here's the thing.  Every process has a positive error rate.  Some might be close to zero like defense or aerospace applications or medical procedures but they are not zero.  So there is no process defined by humans that has a zero error rate.  And throw in the facts the mail in ballot was quickly defined and deployed using the COVID outbreak as justification.  And then throw in the fact it was designed and deployed by non-scientific government organization(s) and I can say with confidence the error rate is high.  How high?  My educated guess is between 12 and 15 percent.  But everyone that knows close to nothing about processes and statistics can go on believing the error rate is zero or near zero.  Its their fundamental right to be ill-informed and oblivious to reality.  Its their right to cheer on a potentially incorrect result.   

 

So it comes down to this.  Its a 100% certainty this mail in ballot process has a high error rate.  High enough to alter the result?  I don't know, nobody knows.  But if there's nothing to hide then why worry about a recount?  Why all the protests about having a recount?  If it doesn't matter and won't alter the result then let the Trump campaign spend the funds to bankroll the recounts.  If its a waste of time its their time not yours.  What do you care?  You're so sure its all legitimate so there's nothing to lose, right?  If everything is on the up-and-up then why isn't the Biden camp endorsing and encouraging these recounts?  After all, that will put to rest all claims of impropriety and the country can move forward knowing the results were fair.  It all seems like a small price to pay in order to achieve some degree of unity.

 

To summarize the Biden campaign and the DNC (and the MSM that suppresses any questioning of the result) have a lot of smart people working for them.  They know the same things I do and more about the details of the count and what went down in several key states.  They know its BS.  They know there's a high number of invalid votes/data records that passed the quality test of the process because the process was not functioning to spec or the users (the vote counters) did not perform their function correctly.  They are all lying out of simple self-interest.  They have no concern for the legitimacy of the voting process only the results.  And anyone that thinks the result is more important than the process of democracy is traveling down a dangerous path.  If you disagree with me you should re-think your position.  You should be careful what you wish for.

It was all answered in the post after mine. Also the part of people wanting evidence is b.c the Trump party themselves say they HAVE evidence which hurts your argument even more on saying "Need to recount to find evidence" 

 

 

They will recount but you NEED evidence to make a claim saying fraud, you cannot go by hearsay. Which is why the past 3 days the courts have been shutting down any of Trump's lawyers attempts on saying fraud.

Edited November 12, 2020 by TBBills

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

He's not going to get to the Supreme Court. That's why he keeps screaming garbage on Twitter. 

For that to happen, he needs to actually win a court case at a lower level, which has yet to happen.

 

Until they come up with some actual fraud, particularly on a level that could overturn the result, this will never get anywhere close to the SC.

And you may be right, but you’re claiming something is decided that isn’t decided, and suggesting people want to overturn a legitimate and uncontested election when we both know that not to be true.  I’m just taking the let’s pretend game out. 
 

If Trump prevails and picks up EC votes in large enough numbers to win re-election, you will accept it, yes? 
If the matter ends up at the SC and Trump prevails, you will accept it, yes?  We can assume you will if it’s a 9-0 victory, as would I, but let’s assume it’s a party line vote. 
 

I will accept that the will of the people should it play out in either of the above scenarios. 

[shoshin]

3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

And you may be right, but you’re claiming something is decided that isn’t decided, and suggesting people want to overturn a legitimate and uncontested election when we both know that not to be true.  I’m just taking the let’s pretend game out. 
 

If Trump prevails and picks up EC votes in large enough numbers to win re-election, you will accept it, yes? 

 

Yes. The evidence so far is nil. 

 

3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

If the matter ends up at the SC and Trump prevails, you will accept it, yes?  We can assume you will if it’s a 9-0 victory, as would I, but let’s assume it’s a party line vote. 
 

I will accept that the will of the people should it play out in either of the above scenarios. 

 

What would happen with the Supreme Court? There's no case pending anywhere that would overturn a single state, let alone an election. Many states will certify their results in the next 10 days. Tick tock to find tens of thousands of fraudulent votes. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

16 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

The Congress did not verify a shakedown by Biden as you put it.  The committee chaired by Sen Johnson found nothing to substantiate your claim.  For all your protestations otherwise, this post simply shows you want Trump to win at any cost, including the destruction of the democratic principles on which our country was founded.

 

When he said Article Two gives him the power to do anything he wants, I assume you agreed?

You sir, are wrong, and the attempt to vilify me is uncalled for.  I’ve said multiple times what I think will happen, who will prevail and who will lose, and that pursuing legal remedy is the American way just like it was in Gore Bush.

 

The tent pole of your response in opposition is that you’re worried.  I’m no less worried, and that’s why legal remedy is such an important aspect of our republic. 
 

I am not at all about DJT winning at all costs, I never have been. While I’m concerned about a Biden ticket, green new deals, a move away from energy independence, defunding the police and elevating criminals to martyr status, I have long recognized that my fellow citizens may have no such concern.  I’ve been prepared for this for 4 years, and am prepared to weather the coming storm.  I have no interest in unity under the terms dictated, but that’s my right as an American.  It’s not unlike the fact that my fellow citizens may well vote for a candidate intent on substantially increasing my tax burden while reducing theirs.  I’m a patriot, I gladly pay my taxes but for those who pitch some perverted of the ever increasing fair share, that isn’t unity, that’s a shakedown. 
 

One of the challenges in Washington is the level of influence peddling and nepotism present.  Again, in normal times, I think pretty much everyone knows this.  Suddenly however, we’ve got the cleanest government in fathers history of fa-Evah.   My thought is that if you went down the list of senators involved in the hearing, a minimum of 80% have undertaken similar projects for friends and family and run the risk of mutually assured destruction should one or the other is targeted.  
 

See, I’m a realist.  I don’t think Biden did anything that we haven’t done throughout the history of the country.  I’d think McConnell, Graham, Romney, Feinstein and the rest run similar deals.  I think Presidents do this sort of thing all the time, we shape nations in the image we want and $$$$ is the key.  
 

I think the difference was Trump.  He’s not been in Washington for 15, 20, 40 years and has no skin in that game.  So, a second political witch-hunt that goes nowhere is launched, believers in fairy tales and the innate goodness of politicians like yourself look at something like this and say “Well, what Trump did was wrong because nothing happened to Biden”.  
 

I only judged what I saw inconjuction with the impeachment that was undertaken that went nowhere. Meanwhile, more independent leaning folks hear about phony charges and impeachment, serial rapists and Russian treason.  
 

I’ll ask differently.  With what you saw Biden doing, in conjunction with his sons interests in the country, troubling on any level to you?  In conjunction with that question, given the Senate’s decision to disregard the impeachment vote as a political ploy, was the impeachment debacle good for unit and harmony? 
 

Btw, was Obama’s decision to incinerate the personal wealth of GM Bondholders an act of Presidential decorum or the act of someone with dictatorial aspirations?  I’m well aware you may not be an Obama supporter, but wondering your thoughts. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

25 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Yes. The evidence so far is nil. 

 

 

What would happen with the Supreme Court? There's no case pending anywhere that would overturn a single state, let alone an election. Many states will certify their results in the next 10 days. Tick tock to find tens of thousands of fraudulent votes. 

Prior to Gore Bush there was no hanging chad. 
 

I’m going to assume you would accept the results in this admittedly fanciful discussion.  I’m assuming that’s the case because you previously acknowledged your willingness to accept the outcome if Trump prevails.  That is honorable and you should be commended.