The Next President is...

[slackline]

2 hours ago, Guardian said:

I know someone is going to make fun of Rudy but he has a point regardless of what you think about him.

“Biden crime family” isn’t incorrect based on what has come out

Good chance a crime family will be running the country.
 

https://www.newsguardtech.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/oann.pdf

The quoted is a good example of when you can ignore something based on the source.  Not credible or reliable.  Incredibly biased and pushing an agenda.  

 

Edit to add: Oh yeah, also a fair bet that if Rudy is the source you are probably safe to completely ignore it.  What happened to that guy...?  He was the freakin' man in NYC after 9/11.  Guess the stress got to him because he is definitely not credible anymore.

Edited November 12, 2020 by slackline

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, Guardian said:

The postal worker wasn’t recanted. He was bullied by a federal agent and then someone said he reacted which he immediately came out and said he didn’t recant.

How does pay for play not equate to being a criminal. In Joe Biden’s own words he did that. And then dems later complained for what they claimed was the same thing done by trump (which proved to be a farce).

If someone commits a crime the are guilty of doing that. No amount of jail time doesn’t make them not a criminal. Hunter Biden’s laptop has plenty of info on it showing evidence crimes were committed or strengthening other instances of crimes by those in the Biden family. It doesn’t make it not true just because you refuse to believe it

In the words of Joe Biden, “come on man!”
 

By “bullied by a federal agent” you mean being reminded that making a false official statement and lying to a federal law enforcement officers are federal crimes? Sure. Do you know that happened for a fact? Of course not, you operate on hearsay. To be considered a criminal one would’ve had to have been charged, convicted by a jury or judge, or plead guilty/Alford plea. Has Biden done any of that? Of course not.

To say someone is guilty before being afforded Due Process goes against the Constitution and the judicial process of this nation. But it fits your narrative right? Is Hunter Biden’s laptop the new Hillary’s emails narrative?

[Guardian]

But what’s the point? Why as an interviewer are you pressuring him to recant (oh by the way the interviewer was a staunch democrat supporter, check his Twitter) and then tell people the guy recanted when he didn’t?

[Guardian]

Facts are facts. Hilliard broke the law. She wasn’t charged. hunter biden broke the law. And it’s not contested he took money from foreign sources for access to his dad. So what’s the problem for you?

[slackline]

2 hours ago, torqued said:

No, I am saying in this particular instance, political bias is clearly evident in the authors' attempt to make the case that a vote means more if its near higher economic activity.

"Democrats represent voters who overwhelmingly reside in the nation’s diverse economic centers, and thus tend to prioritize housing affordability, an improved social safety net, transportation infrastructure, and racial justice. Jobs in blue America also disproportionately rely on national R&D investment, technology leadership, and services exports."

"By contrast, Republicans represent an economic base situated in the nation’s struggling small towns and rural areas. Prosperity there remains out of reach for many, and the party sees no reason to consider the priorities and needs of the nation’s metropolitan centers. That is not a scenario for economic consensus or achievement. Specifically, Trump’s anti-establishment appeal suggests that a sizable portion of the country continues to feel little connection to the nation’s core economic enterprises, and chose to channel that animosity into a candidate who promised not to build up all parts of the country, but rather to vilify groups who didn’t resemble his base."

What locations have problems with housing affordability, homelessness, infrastructure, and racial justice? The same ones the authors are praising for voting blue. What bullshit.

Saying a city has more violence, crime, homelessness and racial injustice because it is democratically led is a false correlation.  Simply not accurate, but it's easy to draw that false correlation because most people won't look beyond the surface. From the article:

"Is it reasonable to connect the violence and partisanship?

In short, no.

“I don’t think there’s any data that would allow us to draw a causal conclusion here,” said David Weisburd, executive director of the Center for Evidence Based Crime Policy at George Mason University. “Somehow arguing that Democrats cause crime or something of that sort just doesn’t fit the history of crime prevention in the U.S.” 

If you interpret the claim as referring to Democratic leadership, Weisburd notes that President Bill Clinton had one of the strongest recent administrations in terms of funding the criminal justice system.

But more broadly, linking crime and votes simply doesn’t reflect how crime works. Studies have repeatedly found that urban crime is not a widespread phenomenon — like voting is — but a product of small groups of people in small areas."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/24/fact-check-linking-city-violence-democratic-politics-reach/3248102001/ 

 

Isn't it more likely that urban areas have more of these problems because they have more people?  Every single one of these problems could be due to that fact alone.

[Guardian]

Saying a city has more violence, crime, homelessness and racial injustice because it is democratically led is a false correlation.  Simply not accurate, but it's easy to draw that false correlation because most people won't look beyond the surface. From the article:

"Is it reasonable to connect the violence and partisanship?

In short, no.

“I don’t think there’s any data that would allow us to draw a causal conclusion here,” said David Weisburd, executive director of the Center for Evidence Based Crime Policy at George Mason University. “Somehow arguing that Democrats cause crime or something of that sort just doesn’t fit the history of crime prevention in the U.S.” 

If you interpret the claim as referring to Democratic leadership, Weisburd notes that President Bill Clinton had one of the strongest recent administrations in terms of funding the criminal justice system.

But more broadly, linking crime and votes simply doesn’t reflect how crime works. Studies have repeatedly found that urban crime is not a widespread phenomenon — like voting is — but a product of small groups of people in small areas."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/24/fact-check-linking-city-violence-democratic-politics-reach/3248102001/ 
 
Isn't it more likely that urban areas have more of these problems because they have more people?  Every single one of these problems could be due to that fact alone.

So a place that is governed by ideals leaning more towards one set of ideals doesn’t have results that relate directly back to those ideals?

So if a terrible set of parents raises terrible kids, it’s not their fault and doesn’t have any correlations?

I’m just having a tough time following your argument.

And at the end you ask if it could be due to something else. Doesn’t you asking the question mean that you don’t know the answer and in fact it could be what you claim it isn’t if you don’t know the answer?

[M2]

Honestly, I can't understand why any side wouldn't want to ensure the election was as fair as possible!

Biden is missing out on a perfect opportunity to demonstrate his integrity by joining the call to look at possible irregularities in the voting.   

I don't know if anyone else is followed this, but last month the SSC Tuatara hypercar set a new Guinness world-record speed of 316.11 mph, making it the fastest production car in the world.  However, several individuals noted discrepancies in the online video of the run...

And this is how the owner of SSC--Jarod Shelby (no relation to Carroll Shelby)--responded...

 This, gentlemen, is how you handle controversy! 

[gearhog]

28 minutes ago, slackline said:

Saying a city has more violence, crime, homelessness and racial injustice because it is democratically led is a false correlation.  Simply not accurate, but it's easy to draw that false correlation because most people won't look beyond the surface. From the article:

"Is it reasonable to connect the violence and partisanship?

In short, no.

“I don’t think there’s any data that would allow us to draw a causal conclusion here,” said David Weisburd, executive director of the Center for Evidence Based Crime Policy at George Mason University. “Somehow arguing that Democrats cause crime or something of that sort just doesn’t fit the history of crime prevention in the U.S.” 

If you interpret the claim as referring to Democratic leadership, Weisburd notes that President Bill Clinton had one of the strongest recent administrations in terms of funding the criminal justice system.

But more broadly, linking crime and votes simply doesn’t reflect how crime works. Studies have repeatedly found that urban crime is not a widespread phenomenon — like voting is — but a product of small groups of people in small areas."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/24/fact-check-linking-city-violence-democratic-politics-reach/3248102001/ 

 

Isn't it more likely that urban areas have more of these problems because they have more people?  Every single one of these problems could be due to that fact alone.

Can you quote where I mentioned anything about crime and violence?

You're fabricating a position, attributing it to me, and creating an argument against it just so you can feel like you won a debate.

Retarded.

 

 

[Seadogs]

6 minutes ago, M2 said:

Honestly, I can't understand why any side wouldn't want to ensure the election was as fair as possible!

Biden is missing out on a perfect opportunity to demonstrate his integrity by joining the call to look at possible irregularities in the voting.   

I don't know if anyone else is followed this, but last month the SSC Tuatara hypercar set a new Guinness world-record speed of 316.11 mph, making it the fastest production car in the world.  However, several individuals noted discrepancies in the online video of the run, so this is how the owner of SSC--Jarod Shelby (no relation to Carroll Shelby)--responded...

 This, gentlemen, is how you handle controversy! 

He is talking about cars. We are talking about in entire country's election process which doesn't need to be analyzed. Apples to oranges. /s

[slackline]

1 minute ago, Guardian said:

So a place that is governed by ideals leaning more towards one set of ideals doesn’t have results that relate directly back to those ideals?

So if a terrible set of parents raises terrible kids, it’s not their fault and doesn’t have any correlations?

I’m just having a tough time following your argument.

Apples to Oranges comparison.  The effect of a parent far outreaches the effect of say, a mayor or city council, on a population.  100% disingenuous way to ignore the point that is being made in my post.  My point is that this is a way to complex thing to simply say democrats run things, that's why they're jacked up.  There are plenty of instances where there was/is a Republican person in charge in some urban area, and things didn't magically get better.  It's easier for the right to say, "oh look, Democrats are in control of that area, and they have problems."  It's not that simple.  

 

5 minutes ago, M2 said:

Honestly, I can't understand why any side wouldn't want to ensure the election was as fair as possible!

Biden is missing out on a perfect opportunity to demonstrate his integrity by joining the call to look at possible irregularities in the voting.   

I don't know if anyone else is followed this, but last month the SSC Tuatara hypercar set a new Guinness world-record speed of 316.11 mph, making it the fastest production car in the world.  However, several individuals noted discrepancies in the online video of the run, so this is how the owner of SSC--Jarod Shelby (no relation to Carroll Shelby)--responded...

 This, gentlemen, is how you handle controversy! 

Agreed.  Isn't that what Biden is doing?  Has he once said to stop counting?  Honest question.  I don't think there's anything wrong with him proceeding as if he won while this plays out in the courts.  I don't think you can equate him saying "Trump isn't doing his legacy any favors" to "I won, stop counting, it's over."

 

Also, that car is uhhhmazing!  Saw that when it came out, super cool!

[slackline]

6 minutes ago, Seadogs said:

He is talking about cars. We are talking about in entire country's election process which doesn't need to be analyzed. Apples to oranges. /s

Dude, he's backing you.  You missed his point entirely...

 

ETA: I didn't know what /s meant.  Seadogs was entirely on top of it!  mea culpa

Edited November 12, 2020 by slackline

[Seadogs]

1 minute ago, slackline said:

Dude, he's backing you.  You missed his point entirely...

Do you know what the symbol /s stands for? 

[gearhog]

Just now, slackline said:

Dude, he's backing you.  You missed his point entirely...

Not only is his sarcasm glaringly obvious, he ended his statement with "/s".

 

[slackline]

5 minutes ago, torqued said:

Can you quote where I mentioned anything about crime and violence?

You're fabricating a position, attributing it to me, and creating an argument against it just so you can feel like you won a debate.

Retarded.

 

 

You're right.  My bad.  I read the homelessness, racial injustice, etc. and my brain automatically included crime and violence because that mantra comes from the right so often.  My point stands even about homelessness and your other points.  

My apologies for falsely attributing the crime and violence thing to you.  Relax...  I am posting nothing to "feel" like I won a debate.  This is the internet.  That aint happening...

[slackline]

3 minutes ago, Seadogs said:

Do you know what the symbol /s stands for? 

Haha, no I didn't.  My bad.Thanks for pointing it out.  

 

ETA: went back in and clarified that I am an internet newb I guess.

Edited November 12, 2020 by slackline

[Seadogs]

I really hate linking Fox. Gritting my teeth posting this. 

 

 

[Homestar]

1 hour ago, Seadogs said:

He is talking about cars. We are talking about in entire country's election process which doesn't need to be analyzed. Apples to oranges. /s

Did his competitor spend months laying the seeds of doubt about the upcoming test so that they could, on test day, cry that the test was fouled up?

If similar irregularities occurred in 2016 are you saying that we should have re-run that election too?  Or is 2020 the first time we've ever had vote irregularities?

How far are you willing to go to see Trump installed as President on January 20th?

Jeez I really wish some Air Force general would get courtmartialed so we can finally argue about something worthwhile.....

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2020/11/10/fired-two-star-research-lab-commander-charged-with-sexual-assault/

 

[DosXX]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

Honestly, I can't understand why any side wouldn't want to ensure the election was as fair as possible!

Biden is missing out on a perfect opportunity to demonstrate his integrity by joining the call to look at possible irregularities in the voting.   

Agreed, and I think most people want that. Video was great, and a calm and rational look at the voting process through the court system should absolutely be welcomed, but that's not what we're getting.The president is not only using the court system to handle claims of irregularities, he is going on Twitter and claiming with certainty that fraud has happened in the hundreds of thousands. I will agree Biden should absolutely welcome all legitimate legal challenges to exemplify integrity, but will you also agree that the president needs to stop actively undermining the democratic process by convincing millions the election will never be valid by saying things like this? 

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/a-careful-voter-fraud-review/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

A great article on the current state of fraud from a leading conservative publisher (unless you think OAN is the only valid disseminator of conservative thought left) which also addresses the 254 pages of affidavits. 

Edited November 12, 2020 by DosXX
Added tweet

[Seadogs]

11 minutes ago, DosXX said:

Agreed, and I think most people want that. Video was great, and a calm and rational look at the voting process through the court system should absolutely be welcomed, but that's not what we're getting.The president is not only using the court system to handle claims of irregularities, he is going on Twitter and claiming with certainty that fraud has happened in the hundreds of thousands. I will agree Biden should absolutely welcome all legitimate legal challenges to exemplify integrity, but will you also agree that the president needs to stop actively undermining the democratic process by convincing millions the election will never be valid by saying things like this? 

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/a-careful-voter-fraud-review/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

A great article on the current state of fraud from a leading conservative publisher (unless you think OAN is the only valid disseminator of conservative thought left) which also addresses the 254 pages of affidavits. 

Why can't he say that?

[Seadogs]

18 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Did his competitor spend months laying the seeds of doubt about the upcoming test so that they could, on test day, cry that the test was fouled up?

If similar irregularities occurred in 2016 are you saying that we should have re-run that election too?  Or is 2020 the first time we've ever had vote irregularities?

How far are you willing to go to see Trump installed as President on January 20th?

Jeez I really wish some Air Force general would get courtmartialed so we can finally argue about something worthwhile.....

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2020/11/10/fired-two-star-research-lab-commander-charged-with-sexual-assault/

 

Biden and the legacy trash media did. Saying Trump will steal the election.

 

No irregularities in 2016 for Clinton to go to the courts with.

 

You are only seeking and hearing what you want to see and hear. I can't help you with that bud. 

[Seadogs]

Step one for Trump. 

 

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/crime-courts/2020/11/12/trump-campaign-election-2020-presidential-pennsylvania-lawsuit-ballots-late-identification/stories/202011120132

[Homestar]

12 minutes ago, Seadogs said:

Biden and the legacy trash media did. Saying Trump will steal the election.

 

No irregularities in 2016 for Clinton to go to the courts with.

 

You are only seeking and hearing what you want to see and hear. I can't help you with that bud. 

Thanks guy. 

[DosXX]

4 minutes ago, Seadogs said:

Why can't he say that?

He can say what he wants, and Biden can choose not to say whatever he wants too. M2 took the liberty to suggest what Biden should do, and I am doing the same for Trump. It's creating millions of cynical citizens who will deny court decisions on this for something and has already been discredited. You can do it yourself if you have some programming knowledge.

Here is the source of data and script:

https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8O2wesk/happening-calling-every-pede-to-/

The "stolen votes" were a rounding error since the percentages were scraped to the first decimal place.  So if the true count was 49.94% the script read it as 49.9%. For a million votes that's 40,000 votes, and across multiple updates in multiple states you get to the 2.7 million number. And of course, if you do this yourself with the file you will find just as many Trump round off errors as Biden ones.

[DosXX]

1 minute ago, torqued said:

Why did the President say this? Is he making it up?

It fits his narrative.

2 minutes ago, torqued said:

The nerd writes a script that combs through the entirety of the data and finds the code embedded in the voting system that either switches Trump votes to Biden or throws them out altogether.

It's NOT code from the voting system, it's code web scraped straight from the NYT page. That is absolutely an important distinction to make. He says so himself on what I linked.

2 minutes ago, torqued said:

Now this data will need to be verified by an independent unbiased third party, but there's enough evidence to warrant further review.

I welcome it, my worry is when they come to the conclusion us nerds have nobody is going to believe it was bs because of what the President is saying so conclusively. 

[Guardian]

Regardless of the outcome going through this process is good. The justice dept and system looking into this is good. It will absolutely help strengthen the voting system for the future and it gives credibility to the process of investigations. This, regardless of who wins, is a very good thing.

Side note, see that PA court system ruled for trump and against the PA Secretary of State for overstepping her bounds?