80 Million
-
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 16:44 last edited by
@Larry said in 80 Million:
Think maybe you ought to wait until they finish before talking about a report?
The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity was started in Jan 2017 and disbanded in Jan 2018. They were supposed to produce a report, they didn't produce a report.
-
@Jolly @Larry It is always difficult when something goes against something you believe in very strongly, or have a lot of belief in. It is difficult for the mind to “rationalize” it. And because of personal bias, the mind does not want to accept the outcome or thinks there must be some reason that caused this to happen.
It happened in 2016. Hillary Clinton supporters could not understand how President Trump could have won. “It is it possible. Everyone I talked to supported her. Why don’t other people see and understand what I see? There must have been something else!”
It happens often when a family member commits a crime. “There is no way that they did. I know them. Something else MUST have happened. They did not shoplift the clothes from the store!!”
So, a conspiracy theory is determined that somehow fits the crime details. There was an international crime ring that just happened to be in the store at the same time. They drugged the shopper, slipped the clothes into their bag, and left them with no memory of this occurring. They also managed to avoid the security cameras, and left no trace of themselves in the store. But, this is the way it HAD to happen. Because they just KNOW.
Isn’t there a famous detective (Sherlock Holmes?) who said that the easiest answer is usually the most obvious one. (Or maybe vice versa)
I get that you (and millions others) are disappointed that President Trump is not reelected. But to try and back fit that the Democrats did this in this state, did a second thing in another state, did a third thing in another state, all the while knowing that these were the states to do it, while ignoring these states is just too wild for me.
The reason President elect Biden won Is that more people legally voted for him than for President Trump. Same as in 2016, when more people legally voted for President Trump over Hillary Clinton.
If, in 2024 President Trump decides to run again, and he wins more votes than the Democrat person, then he will be declared president.
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 16:47 last edited by xenon@taiwan_girl said in 80 Million:
Isn’t there a famous detective (Sherlock Holmes?) who said that the easiest answer is usually the most obvious one. (Or maybe vice versa)
The easiest answer is that there's a multi-state conspiracy involving low-level poll workers. At some point we'll find their secret communications or meeting spots. Right?
This year they decided to give the Presidency to the Dems, but split congress. They're a fair-minded conspiratorial bunch.
-
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 16:48 last edited by
How does one float a razor?
-
@Jolly @Larry It is always difficult when something goes against something you believe in very strongly, or have a lot of belief in. It is difficult for the mind to “rationalize” it. And because of personal bias, the mind does not want to accept the outcome or thinks there must be some reason that caused this to happen.
It happened in 2016. Hillary Clinton supporters could not understand how President Trump could have won. “It is it possible. Everyone I talked to supported her. Why don’t other people see and understand what I see? There must have been something else!”
It happens often when a family member commits a crime. “There is no way that they did. I know them. Something else MUST have happened. They did not shoplift the clothes from the store!!”
So, a conspiracy theory is determined that somehow fits the crime details. There was an international crime ring that just happened to be in the store at the same time. They drugged the shopper, slipped the clothes into their bag, and left them with no memory of this occurring. They also managed to avoid the security cameras, and left no trace of themselves in the store. But, this is the way it HAD to happen. Because they just KNOW.
Isn’t there a famous detective (Sherlock Holmes?) who said that the easiest answer is usually the most obvious one. (Or maybe vice versa)
I get that you (and millions others) are disappointed that President Trump is not reelected. But to try and back fit that the Democrats did this in this state, did a second thing in another state, did a third thing in another state, all the while knowing that these were the states to do it, while ignoring these states is just too wild for me.
The reason President elect Biden won Is that more people legally voted for him than for President Trump. Same as in 2016, when more people legally voted for President Trump over Hillary Clinton.
If, in 2024 President Trump decides to run again, and he wins more votes than the Democrat person, then he will be declared president.
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 16:53 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in 80 Million:
@Jolly @Larry It is always difficult when something goes against something you believe in very strongly, or have a lot of belief in. It is difficult for the mind to “rationalize” it. And because of personal bias, the mind does not want to accept the outcome or thinks there must be some reason that caused this to happen.
It happened in 2016. Hillary Clinton supporters could not understand how President Trump could have won. “It is it possible. Everyone I talked to supported her. Why don’t other people see and understand what I see? There must have been something else!”
It happens often when a family member commits a crime. “There is no way that they did. I know them. Something else MUST have happened. They did not shoplift the clothes from the store!!”
So, a conspiracy theory is determined that somehow fits the crime details. There was an international crime ring that just happened to be in the store at the same time. They drugged the shopper, slipped the clothes into their bag, and left them with no memory of this occurring. They also managed to avoid the security cameras, and left no trace of themselves in the store. But, this is the way it HAD to happen. Because they just KNOW.
Isn’t there a famous detective (Sherlock Holmes?) who said that the easiest answer is usually the most obvious one. (Or maybe vice versa)
I get that you (and millions others) are disappointed that President Trump is not reelected. But to try and back fit that the Democrats did this in this state, did a second thing in another state, did a third thing in another state, all the while knowing that these were the states to do it, while ignoring these states is just too wild for me.
The reason President elect Biden won Is that more people legally voted for him than for President Trump. Same as in 2016, when more people legally voted for President Trump over Hillary Clinton.
If, in 2024 President Trump decides to run again, and he wins more votes than the Democrat person, then he will be declared president.
The really sad part of your post is that you seem incapable of seeing that you are rationalizing your own personal bias, and then citing false assumptions as fact, and basically telling us "I'm right and you are wrong, get over it and give up. And no I won't open my mind to the possibility that I'm wrong because I'm not wrong - So there"..
"The reason that 'President elect Biden won is that more people legally voted for him" is a tortured string of bull shit. First, Biden is not the President elect. He may very well be president elect in the future, but right now he is not. So stop demanding that we call him that when it's not the case, and stop talking down to us because we won't give in to your bull shit. Second, as of this moment, Biden has not won anything. He very well be declared the winner in the future, but right now he has not won anything. So stop demanding that we call him the winner when that is not the case, and stop talking down to us because we won't give in to your bull shit. Third, the entire reason for what's going on right now is that it is very doubtful that his vote count is all legal votes. YOU don't get to tell us his vote count is all legal because YOU don't know that for a fact any more than we know it wasn't. That's why they are investigating. So do NOT talk down to me and tell me or anyone else that a man who hasn't been declared the winner whose vote count is being investigated is the winner based on legal votes. You don't know that, you can't prove that, so stop with the condescending "You guys just give up, I'm right you're wrong" bull shit.
-
How does one float a razor?
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 16:57 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in 80 Million:
How does one float a razor?
LOL. Occam's Razor refers to a concept in philosophy referred to as a razor. I learned what that was (from a post of Jon's IIRC) but have since forgotten what it is.
-
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 17:00 last edited by
Most philosophers I know have big freaking bushy beards, so their inability to shave is only matched by their inability to hold down a proper job.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in 80 Million:
How does one float a razor?
LOL. Occam's Razor refers to a concept in philosophy referred to as a razor. I learned what that was (from a post of Jon's IIRC) but have since forgotten what it is.
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 17:45 last edited byIn philosophy, a razor is a principle or rule of thumb that allows one to eliminate ("shave off") unlikely explanations for a phenomenon, or avoid unnecessary actions.[1]
Razors include:
Occam's razor: Simpler explanations are more likely to be correct; avoid unnecessary or improbable assumptions.
Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.[2]
Hitchens's razor: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
Hume's guillotine: What ought to be cannot be deduced from what is. "If the cause, assigned for any effect, be not sufficient to produce it, we must either reject that cause, or add to it such qualities as will give it a just proportion to the effect."[3][4]
Newton's flaming laser sword: If something cannot be settled by experiment or observation, then it is not worthy of debate.[5]
Sagan standard: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Popper's falsifiability principle: For a theory to be considered scientific, it must be falsifiable.[6]
Grice's razor: As a principle of parsimony, conversational implications are to be preferred over semantic context for linguistic explanations.[7][8] -
In philosophy, a razor is a principle or rule of thumb that allows one to eliminate ("shave off") unlikely explanations for a phenomenon, or avoid unnecessary actions.[1]
Razors include:
Occam's razor: Simpler explanations are more likely to be correct; avoid unnecessary or improbable assumptions.
Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.[2]
Hitchens's razor: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
Hume's guillotine: What ought to be cannot be deduced from what is. "If the cause, assigned for any effect, be not sufficient to produce it, we must either reject that cause, or add to it such qualities as will give it a just proportion to the effect."[3][4]
Newton's flaming laser sword: If something cannot be settled by experiment or observation, then it is not worthy of debate.[5]
Sagan standard: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Popper's falsifiability principle: For a theory to be considered scientific, it must be falsifiable.[6]
Grice's razor: As a principle of parsimony, conversational implications are to be preferred over semantic context for linguistic explanations.[7][8]wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 17:50 last edited by@bachophile said in 80 Million:
Grice's razor: As a principle of parsimony, conversational implications are to be preferred over semantic context for linguistic explanations.
Somewhat ironically, I don't understand any of that.
-
@bachophile said in 80 Million:
Grice's razor: As a principle of parsimony, conversational implications are to be preferred over semantic context for linguistic explanations.
Somewhat ironically, I don't understand any of that.
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 18:24 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes Address what the speaker actually meant, instead of addressing the literal meaning of what they actually said
-
wrote on 19 Nov 2020, 18:40 last edited by
Well, why didn't he just bloody say so?
-
@taiwan_girl said in 80 Million:
@Jolly @Larry It is always difficult when something goes against something you believe in very strongly, or have a lot of belief in. It is difficult for the mind to “rationalize” it. And because of personal bias, the mind does not want to accept the outcome or thinks there must be some reason that caused this to happen.
It happened in 2016. Hillary Clinton supporters could not understand how President Trump could have won. “It is it possible. Everyone I talked to supported her. Why don’t other people see and understand what I see? There must have been something else!”
It happens often when a family member commits a crime. “There is no way that they did. I know them. Something else MUST have happened. They did not shoplift the clothes from the store!!”
So, a conspiracy theory is determined that somehow fits the crime details. There was an international crime ring that just happened to be in the store at the same time. They drugged the shopper, slipped the clothes into their bag, and left them with no memory of this occurring. They also managed to avoid the security cameras, and left no trace of themselves in the store. But, this is the way it HAD to happen. Because they just KNOW.
Isn’t there a famous detective (Sherlock Holmes?) who said that the easiest answer is usually the most obvious one. (Or maybe vice versa)
I get that you (and millions others) are disappointed that President Trump is not reelected. But to try and back fit that the Democrats did this in this state, did a second thing in another state, did a third thing in another state, all the while knowing that these were the states to do it, while ignoring these states is just too wild for me.
The reason President elect Biden won Is that more people legally voted for him than for President Trump. Same as in 2016, when more people legally voted for President Trump over Hillary Clinton.
If, in 2024 President Trump decides to run again, and he wins more votes than the Democrat person, then he will be declared president.
The really sad part of your post is that you seem incapable of seeing that you are rationalizing your own personal bias, and then citing false assumptions as fact, and basically telling us "I'm right and you are wrong, get over it and give up. And no I won't open my mind to the possibility that I'm wrong because I'm not wrong - So there"..
"The reason that 'President elect Biden won is that more people legally voted for him" is a tortured string of bull shit. First, Biden is not the President elect. He may very well be president elect in the future, but right now he is not. So stop demanding that we call him that when it's not the case, and stop talking down to us because we won't give in to your bull shit. Second, as of this moment, Biden has not won anything. He very well be declared the winner in the future, but right now he has not won anything. So stop demanding that we call him the winner when that is not the case, and stop talking down to us because we won't give in to your bull shit. Third, the entire reason for what's going on right now is that it is very doubtful that his vote count is all legal votes. YOU don't get to tell us his vote count is all legal because YOU don't know that for a fact any more than we know it wasn't. That's why they are investigating. So do NOT talk down to me and tell me or anyone else that a man who hasn't been declared the winner whose vote count is being investigated is the winner based on legal votes. You don't know that, you can't prove that, so stop with the condescending "You guys just give up, I'm right you're wrong" bull shit.
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 04:55 last edited by@Larry said in 80 Million:
@taiwan_girl said in 80 Million:
@Jolly @Larry It is always difficult when something goes against something you believe in very strongly, or have a lot of belief in. It is difficult for the mind to “rationalize” it. And because of personal bias, the mind does not want to accept the outcome or thinks there must be some reason that caused this to happen.
It happened in 2016. Hillary Clinton supporters could not understand how President Trump could have won. “It is it possible. Everyone I talked to supported her. Why don’t other people see and understand what I see? There must have been something else!”
It happens often when a family member commits a crime. “There is no way that they did. I know them. Something else MUST have happened. They did not shoplift the clothes from the store!!”
So, a conspiracy theory is determined that somehow fits the crime details. There was an international crime ring that just happened to be in the store at the same time. They drugged the shopper, slipped the clothes into their bag, and left them with no memory of this occurring. They also managed to avoid the security cameras, and left no trace of themselves in the store. But, this is the way it HAD to happen. Because they just KNOW.
Isn’t there a famous detective (Sherlock Holmes?) who said that the easiest answer is usually the most obvious one. (Or maybe vice versa)
I get that you (and millions others) are disappointed that President Trump is not reelected. But to try and back fit that the Democrats did this in this state, did a second thing in another state, did a third thing in another state, all the while knowing that these were the states to do it, while ignoring these states is just too wild for me.
The reason President elect Biden won Is that more people legally voted for him than for President Trump. Same as in 2016, when more people legally voted for President Trump over Hillary Clinton.
If, in 2024 President Trump decides to run again, and he wins more votes than the Democrat person, then he will be declared president.
The really sad part of your post is that you seem incapable of seeing that you are rationalizing your own personal bias, and then citing false assumptions as fact, and basically telling us "I'm right and you are wrong, get over it and give up. And no I won't open my mind to the possibility that I'm wrong because I'm not wrong - So there"..
"The reason that 'President elect Biden won is that more people legally voted for him" is a tortured string of bull shit. First, Biden is not the President elect. He may very well be president elect in the future, but right now he is not. So stop demanding that we call him that when it's not the case, and stop talking down to us because we won't give in to your bull shit. Second, as of this moment, Biden has not won anything. He very well be declared the winner in the future, but right now he has not won anything. So stop demanding that we call him the winner when that is not the case, and stop talking down to us because we won't give in to your bull shit. Third, the entire reason for what's going on right now is that it is very doubtful that his vote count is all legal votes. YOU don't get to tell us his vote count is all legal because YOU don't know that for a fact any more than we know it wasn't. That's why they are investigating. So do NOT talk down to me and tell me or anyone else that a man who hasn't been declared the winner whose vote count is being investigated is the winner based on legal votes. You don't know that, you can't prove that, so stop with the condescending "You guys just give up, I'm right you're wrong" bull shit.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, seldom is the animal an aardvark. Trump is slaughtering Biden in Pennsylvania and ahead in other states, all of which halt counting at the same time. I guess Trump's total number of votes screwed up Dominion's algorithms and more votes had to be manufactured. At about 4am, things were fixed, so counting resumed and Trump speedily lost.
Easy-peasy, lemon-squeezy...
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 05:29 last edited by
Making the fraud so obvious that anyone can see it, but don't leave a single shred of evidence behind.
What a plan.
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 05:44 last edited by Jolly
Solution?
Don't do voting on machines tied to the internet. Don't do mail-in ballots. Don't count votes unless observers are present. Don't let people register the day of an election.
If you don't want people to think you are running a rigged election, don't give the appearance of a rigged election....
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 13:04 last edited by taiwan_girl
-
Solution?
Don't do voting on machines tied to the internet. Don't do mail-in ballots. Don't count votes unless observers are present. Don't let people register the day of an election.
If you don't want people to think you are running a rigged election, don't give the appearance of a rigged election....
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 13:49 last edited by Doctor Phibes@Jolly said in 80 Million:
If you don't want people to think you are running a rigged election, don't give the appearance of a rigged election....
Similarly, if you don't want people to say your President is a cockwomble, don't elect a cockwomble as President.
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 16:29 last edited by
That's your opinion. A free and fair election is not an opinion, it is a requirement.
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 16:41 last edited by
@Jolly said in 80 Million:
That's your opinion. A free and fair election is not an opinion, it is a requirement.
I’m not optimistic that a good conversation is possible. When I was young election was one day for the most part. This year it began months earlier and the variety of methods to vote approximated a smorgasbord.
It seems like we are okay on a several month window before Election Day to vote but demand that the decision made the day after. Something seems off with that but I can’t say exactly why.
How we vote, how we count, how we validate are all NEW questions. A debate now in that context is worth going through what we are going through. As far as who actually won this time I already expressed my thoughts the morning after the election.
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 16:46 last edited by
@Jolly said in 80 Million:
That's your opinion. A free and fair election is not an opinion, it is a requirement.
Significant voter fraud is very much your opinion, unless you can present some hard evidence.
I've got multiple examples of President Trump sounding like a cockwomble.
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 16:54 last edited by
There's quite a bit of hard evidence. The question is whether it swayed the election, or not.
Of course, I thought you may have already been aware of the pitfalls of postal voting.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/11/10/britains-sordid-history-mail-in-voting-fraud/
-
wrote on 20 Nov 2020, 17:04 last edited by
Sordid history? Hardly. This was very much a one-off, in a local council election.