Donald finally admits he lost 2020 election

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

And NO ONE cares what you believe even less, Canuck.

A lot of the success is never reported on your FOS LIES.

What's apparent to you is OFTEN prove FALSE.

The lesson is all you got is BULLSHIT.

Well...not no one. I do have relatives down there who listen to me. That's a few votes at least.

There was zero success Dumpling.

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

to produce this "evidence", he needs to have full access to every ballot. To get the access that he wants, he needs proof other than unfavorable results. 

Both Parties have observers at the recounts. 

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Well...not no one. I do have relatives down there who listen to me. That's a few votes at least.

Well MAYBE that's what they tell you, but you still have ZERO evidence of how they voted.

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

There was zero success Dumpling.

Your IGNORANCE about any occurring doesn't prove your case.

Be INFORMED:

 

What Has Biden Accomplished? Look at These 10 Metrics ...

Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com › graphics › 2024-opinion-...

 

 

 

 

Mar 7, 2024 — As Biden and his presumptive opponent, Donald Trump, take their message to voters ahead of the November election, Bloomberg Opinion columnists ...

 

30 Things Joe Biden Did as President You Might Have ...

Politico

https://www.politico.com › magazine › 2024/02/02 › jo...

 

 

 

 

Feb 2, 2024 — Drone armies, expanded overtime pay and over-the-counter birth control pills are just some of the new things Biden has ushered in as ...

 

[impartialobserver]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Both Parties have observers at the recounts. 

That is not enough, not even close. Lets get this clear, I do not believe that widespread voter fraud happened. Just laying out the legal realities for someone. 

[Deluge]

15 minutes ago, robosmith said:

As USUAL, what you "know" is FALSE. And my evidence free opinion refutes your evidence free opinion.

You have no evidence neither do you have a valid opinion - that's why it's best that you simply stfu.  

[CrakHoBarbie]

35 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

to produce this "evidence", he needs to have full access to every ballot. To get the access that he wants, he needs proof other than unfavorable results. 

The people who carried out tge multiple recounts and forensic audits had full access to all ballot data.

Even with full access, no evidence of voter fraud (large enough to of made a difference) viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law was ever found.

Keep in mind, Donald warned of voter fraud before the 2016 election,  and never stopped with his unsubstantiated claims of voter faud.

[impartialobserver]

5 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

The people who carried out tge multiple recounts and forensic audits had full access to all ballot data.

Even with full access, no evidence of voter fraud (large enough to of made a difference) viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law was ever found.

Keep in mind, Donald warned of voter fraud before the 2016 election,  and never stopped with his unsubstantiated claims of voter faud.

for the umpteenth time.. Yes, the various counties, cities, and such had access. That is not the point. For Trump's campaign to be fully satisfied that the counts provided by the counties are legit.. they need to see every single ballot. Its one of those situations where you tell me that the balance is $100 but I want to see every transaction for myself.. 

For reasons too many to list.. that is not going to happen. MAGA types complain that this is secretive and such but they fail to see that the laws that prohibit such access date back to the 1950's in most states. 

Edited September 6 by impartialobserver

[myata]

21 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

So, let's recap:

For the last four years Donald and his moronic sycophants have taken every opportunity to insist the election was stolen.

This would be the post-reality world. And it's not over yet by any measure. We still have to decide: should it be the new normal now, from here and to where, who could tell?

[CrakHoBarbie]

16 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

 For Trump's campaign to be fully satisfied that the counts provided by the counties are legit.. they need to see every single ballot.  

Trumps "campaign " were the ones who initiated all the recounts and forensic audits.  All of those recounts found squat.

Thus, Donald has failed to present any evidence of voter fraud ( big enough to of made a difference) viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. 

Donald took his shot....

Donald failed.

Now he needs to go to prison for trying to circumvent democracy. 

[robosmith]

55 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

That is not enough, not even close. Lets get this clear, I do not believe that widespread voter fraud happened. Just laying out the legal realities for someone. 

Why isn't it enough? They have independent observers verifying the counts. No disputes were filed IINM.

Trump would have to allege that his OWN PARTY was defrauding him and AFAIK, he never did.

51 minutes ago, Deluge said:

You have no evidence neither do you have a valid opinion - that's why it's best that you simply stfu.  

You FIRST. Sorry but your BULLSHIT demands mean NOTHING.

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Trumps "campaign " were the ones who initiated all the recounts and forensic audits.  All of those recounts found squat.

Thus, Donald has failed to present any evidence of voter fraud ( big enough to of made a difference) viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. 

Donald took his shot....

Donald failed.

Now he needs to go to prison for trying to circumvent democracy. 

Yes, the recounts were done because of him. However, he and his team did not do the recounts nor were they present during the recounts. They do not trust the results found by someone else. Look, i am with you on this one.  Just explaining the legal realities involved. The reason that I have access to the voter registration in NV (read only access) is to verify information that I get from UI claims.

[robosmith]

24 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

for the umpteenth time.. Yes, the various counties, cities, and such had access.

NOT just the city/county officials, but Party observers, too.

How could Trump campaign officials having DIRECT access to ballots, legitimately show fraud that VERIFIED vote counts cannot?

IF they are NOT very closely supervised, it certainly introduces the possibility of THEM tampering with ballots.

Those laws were passed for GOOD REASON.

 

[impartialobserver]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Why isn't it enough? They have independent observers verifying the counts. No disputes were filed IINM.

lets take an example, for county x in state x, Trump claims that 1.200 dead people filed ballots. The only way to definitively, 100% prove that this is not the case for them is to see every single ballot and validate each one. They do not accept the results of these recounts because in their delusions.. they think that it is some cabal working against them. I have worked with an election denier... they will not accept the results unless they see every single ballot. 

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

NOT just the city/county officials, but Party observers, too.

How could Trump campaign officials having DIRECT access to ballots, legitimately show fraud that VERIFIED vote counts cannot?

IF they are NOT very closely supervised, it certainly introduces the possibility of THEM tampering with ballots.

Those laws were passed for GOOD REASON.

 

But they do not DIRECT access to every ballot... state laws prohibit this unless you can demonstrate fraud.. Its a bit of a catch 22

[robosmith]

Just now, impartialobserver said:

lets take an example, for county x in state x, Trump claims that 1.200 dead people filed ballots. The only way to definitively, 100% prove that this is not the case for them is to see every single ballot and validate each one. They do not accept the results of these recounts because in their delusions.. they think that it is some cabal working against them. I have worked with an election denier... they will not accept the results unless they see every single ballot. 

Seeing the ballot does NOT identify said dead person did or did not vote. Ballots have identities stripped.

There are LOTS of claims of dead people fraudulently voting, but they're usually LIES based on someone dying AFTER voting.

[CrakHoBarbie]

2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

They do not trust the results found by someone else. 

" by someone else"?

You mean results found by the partisan companies (cyber ninjas) the right hired?

Look, they've had four years to dissect every nook and cranny of the 2020 election. They and their partisan cronies found nothing. 

And now, donalds admitted twice on record that he "lost the election by a whisker ".

Leads one to wonder, which is it?

Was the election stolen from him, as he's claimed forever.

Or, did he lose "by a whisker "?

[impartialobserver]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Seeing the ballot does NOT identify said dead person did or did not vote. Ballots have identities stripped.

There are LOTS of claims of dead people fraudulently voting, but they're usually LIES based on someone dying AFTER voting.

I agree that they are lying but they are ways to show that person x who voted on august 1, 2024 in x city is currently alive. The laws in place prohibit folks from digging this deep. 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

" by someone else"?

You mean results found by the partisan companies (cyber ninjas) the right hired?

Look, they've had four years to dissect every nook and cranny of the 2020 election. They and their partisan cronies found nothing. 

And now, donalds admitted twice on record that he "lost the election by a whisker ".

Leads one to wonder, which is it?

Was the election stolen from him, as he's claimed forever.

Or, did he lose "by a whisker "?

hint.. they did not have as much access as you think. they saw rolled up totals but did not see every single ballot and the information about the voter. I agree that he lost. 

[robosmith]

11 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

But they do not DIRECT access to every ballot... state laws prohibit this unless you can demonstrate fraud.. Its a bit of a catch 22

You didn't answer the question:

Quote

How could Trump campaign officials having DIRECT access to ballots, legitimately show fraud that VERIFIED vote counts cannot?

 

[robosmith]

7 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

I agree that they are lying but they are ways to show that person x who voted on august 1, 2024 in x city is currently alive. The laws in place prohibit folks from digging this deep. 

I think you miswrote ^this. "Currently alive" does not show he was dead when he voted.

[impartialobserver]

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You didn't answer the question:

 

If Trump officials did have DIRECT and COMPLETE access to every single ballot and all information on the voter.. they could verify the existence of said voter against a multitude of other databases such as social security, drivers license, post office. My point in all of this is they do not have this level of access.. hence their claims can't be truly validated. 

Edited September 6 by impartialobserver

[robosmith]

7 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

hint.. they did not have as much access as you think. they saw rolled up totals but did not see every single ballot and the information about the voter. I agree that he lost. 

Voter's IDs are supposed to be stripped from the ballot AFTER the voter's identity is verified.

Ballot access would never theoretically identify the individual voter.

[impartialobserver]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Voter's IDs are supposed to be stripped from the ballot AFTER the voter's identity is verified.

Ballot access would never theoretically identify the individual voter.

It would be complex but there is a way to identify the voter.. Just because you program something to remove it does not mean it vanishes. We do the same with unemployment insurance claim data. This is why the most ardent Conservatives want to move completely to paper ballots. 

Edited September 6 by impartialobserver

[robosmith]

6 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

It would be complex but there is a way to identify the voter.. Just because you program something to remove it does not mean it vanishes. We do the same with unemployment insurance claim data. This is why the most ardent Conservatives want to move completely to paper ballots. 

I walk into the polling place and sign my name next to it on the roll and am issued a paper ballot.

Are you saying that a poll worker then writes the ballot ID number on the roll next to my name?

I've never seen that happen, but I will pay particular attention to that possibility next time I vote.

[impartialobserver]

care to guess why I do not believe in voter fraud? Here's how.. we did a web scraping where we got every counties presidential election results in 2012, 2016, and 2020. We made a table out of it (long data with counties on the right and the dem vs. rep split in the columns to the right). Almost every county that went Red in 2012 AND 2016 went red again in 2020. Hmm.. so most counties followed a pattern. the claims made by MAGA types is that these continuum got broken. Red counties suddenly went blue. Spare everyone the details but found this to not be the case except for .2% of counties. It just happens that GA had 3 of these counties. What happened in most states is that the counties that went blue by 5% (just an example) in 2012 and 2016 went blue by 8% in 2020...

[Deluge]

50 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You FIRST. Sorry but your BULLSHIT demands mean NOTHING.

Who's demanding? I'm just giving you sound advice. 

You're an ldiot, and it's best that you just shut your face.