Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…283284286288289…334

Comments

  • #8552
    trashcan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,334 ✭✭✭trashcan


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    And that tweets is basically the root of all of this. Trump simply cannot understand, or accept, that he has been beaten. Particularly by Biden. Remember at one of his rallies he said something like 'imagine being beaten by that guy!'.

    There is no evidence, but he simply 'knows' it must be fraud as otherwise, it makes no sense. He is everyone's favourite POTUS. There is all those shy Trump voters people kept talking about.

    That is why he claimed fraud on the 1st night. There is no way they could have known at that stage there was fraud, but it was the only way he could compute what was happening.

    He was claiming fraud before the election had even taken place, so at least he’s consistent I suppose.


  • #8553
    trashcan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,334 ✭✭✭trashcan


    [QUOTE=Leroy42;115428034in court they are not even alleging that fraud took place. Only in press conferences and tweets.
    .[/QUOTE]

    That is the most telling thing of all really. When push comes to shove they are not prepared to back up their nonsense.


  • #8554
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,924 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Chris_Heilong wrote: »
    I have replaced it with an 8 minute version.;)

    so tell us what the facts are? is trump aware of these facts? has he produced this evidence to a court?


  • #8555
    ollkiller
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 916 ✭✭✭ollkiller


    RickDeckard wrote: »
    Let's see what the next few days bring, tbh, f u c k Trump and Biden, but the integrity of the system must be maintained.

    Is that today's line. The integrity of the system must be maintained. You're fooling no one lad. The election was a totally normal election. And all the things you've posted have not been presented in court. Why? Because the claims are bull***t.


  • #8556
    Tchaikovsky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭Tchaikovsky


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    And that tweets is basically the root of all of this. Trump simply cannot understand, or accept, that he has been beaten. Particularly by Biden. Remember at one of his rallies he said something like 'imagine being beaten by that guy!'.

    There is no evidence, but he simply 'knows' it must be fraud as otherwise, it makes no sense. He is everyone's favourite POTUS. There is all those shy Trump voters people kept talking about.

    That is why he claimed fraud on the 1st night. There is no way they could have known at that stage there was fraud, but it was the only way he could compute what was happening.

    A consequence of him never stepping outside his safe space bubble where he's surrounded by sycophants and yes men. Reality hurts.


  • Advertisement
  • #8557
    Carfacemandog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,044 ✭✭✭Carfacemandog


    RickDeckard wrote: »
    OK so, it's 13 minute video by a well respected Academic, not bloody Alex Jones.
    After taking a check, he's far more Alex Jones than a "well respected academic".

    This gem is from yesterday, and it takes all of 5 minutes to establish that this guy is a bit of a loon, to put it mildly.



    All of 2 minutes in: "It's not even a question of holding the line. It's a question of are we going to stand by and watch this blatant theft happening right in front of our eyes? No, is the answer. I will do whatever I can to provoke resistance because I will not accept the legitimacy of an obvious f*cling crime. "

    3:30" if this goes ahead you will esse tually be living in an occupied nation, as we have been in Britain since he 'coof' as it were (Im guessing this is a reference to covid) gave Boris johnson, sucked his soul out and replaced him with whatever creature it is that we have now."

    Immediately after that they go into talking about how the election was "so obviously" a couo because Biden received more votes, and then went delving into an article from 5hw fecking Federalist that they just had to read verbatim because its "just so good".

    The sheer awkward discomfort from all in the call at 1:40 when he mentions that PA just certified Biden is fecking hilarious though! :pac:


  • #8558
    Carfacemandog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,044 ✭✭✭Carfacemandog


    trashcan wrote: »
    That is the most telling thing of all really. When push comes to shove they are not prepared to back up their nonsense.

    Which really hints towards what their ideal end goal there has to be - forcibly refuse the transfer of power but not through the courts. I think we're all aware of how forcing your will in people outside of the legal system tends to be achieved/attempted.


  • #8559
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    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.


  • #8560
    sdanseo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    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.

    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.


  • #8561
    rossie1977
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,435 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    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.

    CNN at least attempt to present themselves as a viable news station and do employ plenty of Republicans. Newsmax from what I have seen is Fox News on steroids and Fox News itself has admitted in court it's presenters are just entertainers that people shouldn't take seriously.

    Anyway who only watches CNN? At best you might browse it


  • Advertisement
  • #8562
    briany
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,029 ✭✭✭✭briany


    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.

    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.


  • #8563
    Padre_Pio
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,612 ✭✭✭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:


  • #8564
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,718 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #8565
    Padre_Pio
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,612 ✭✭✭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.


  • #8566
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭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.


  • #8567
    RickDeckard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 254 ✭✭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.


  • #8568
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,924 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #8569
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,052 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #8570
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭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.


  • #8571
    Curious_Case
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭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


  • Advertisement
  • #8572
    RickDeckard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 254 ✭✭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.


  • #8573
    timsey tiger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,768 ✭✭✭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.


  • #8574
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,924 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #8575
    everlast75
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,048 ✭✭✭✭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.

    Elect a clown... Expect a circus



  • #8576
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 914 ✭✭✭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.


  • #8577
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,924 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #8578
    extra gravy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,242 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • #8579
    RobAMerc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,863 ✭✭✭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.


  • #8580
    Eoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • #8581
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭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?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement