Guest Scott

The election

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

The State Legislature is the final say in every Presidential election.

You are correct.  That said, I'm waiting to hear the concession speech from one of them before I figure the final say has been had.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  On 11/10/2020 at 12:11 PM, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

The State Legislature is the final say in every Presidential election.

 

19 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

You are correct.  That said, I'm waiting to hear the concession speech from one of them before I figure the final say has been had.  

It is my understanding that the hanging chad issue in Florida in the Bush - Gore race was settled by the supreme court of the federal - not state government.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear about voter fraud.  This is an integral element of the Washington Swamp and has been going on since my youth when I left the Republican party because of it (even in a Utah precinct that was 90% LDS at the time).    It will never happen but the following is a must to stop voter fraud.

#1. Validate all voters are registered voters that reside within whatever precinct.  The only way I know to accomplish this is to require all voters pre-register with a cutoff date with enough time for validation for each election with valid photo ID.  This would mean that "homeless" or individuals that do not reside at a known and valid residential location; cannot vote.   This may seem unconstitutional but it is a loop hole that must be closed or it is a back door for voter fraud. 

#2. Validate all votes come from a valid registered voter.  To be done this has to be linked to registration data.   If there is not a unique match to data - the vote would have to be thrown out.

#3. All ballets must be received to the precinct before any or a single vote is counted.  Once voting is started - no additional ballets can be received and included in the counting. 

#4. All of the above steps must be completely transparent - I would suggest this includes electronic (including videos) data and surveillance that can be reviewed for at least 12 years.  

 

I would remind this forum that by law ballets in the USA are secret.  This means there is no way or means to track individual ballets once received.  This means that if there is fraud after the fact - there is no way to know among the many ballets which are the invalid ballets.  The only possible resolution is to require a revote - not a recount.  

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there was fraud in Georgia.  There was an article written last week with a reporter going around with an individual responsible for collecting or completing ballots.  I disagree with the principle, but the idea is that citizens of Georgia have the opportunity to "correct" their ballot up until Friday last week.  They sent people out to find those who did not complete their ballots correctly and give them the opportunity to do so.

The reporter noted that the person assigned to do this SKIPPED doors which had flags with a blue stripe...which indicates that if the person thought it was someone who was pro-police or a conservative they would SKIP that individual.  This is bias and to me indicates blatant and outright fraud in the election.  It may not be enough to turn the vote, but at times where a small indications come out so blatantly...there's far more.  Or...in other words...where there is smoke...there is fire.

I already stated I supported Biden, but I also think that there is absolute certainty that there was voter fraud going on in Georgia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are into patterns, engineering, artificial intelligence, graphs, computer programming here is a study by Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD
They have been doing some analysis of the Michigan votes. He and others are seeing a repeating trend across multiple counties. The higher the population of Republicans the less they voted for Trump. What they say they are seeing could only be the result of manipulation by a computer 'algorithm' across these counties. 

Dr.SHIVA LIVE: MIT PhD Analysis of Michigan Votes Reveals Unfortunate Truth of U.S. Voting Systems.
Video 24:00 time marker skips to the start.

Quote

(25:00) As republicanism increases Trumps votes go down

The perfect repeating line (below) across several counties is the issue. They also see counties where they believe the algorithm was "turned off".
ddd.thumb.jpg.d3af78dc9beb0610498b00eee497423f.jpg

 

Quote

(37:00) Even if you wanted to believe that Republicans hated Trump so, so much the larger that population size were, they still wouldn't be able to hate him in such a perfect line

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

They sent people out to find those who did not complete their ballots correctly and give them the opportunity to do so.

I'm not sure which state Kayleigh McEnany is referring to, but same type of issue as you mentioned above. 7 Democrat counties given the opportunity to correct their ballots. Starts at 0:30

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep telling myself I'm going to walk away from this website, but then I see something like this and just have to share it, because I would genuinely feel terrible if anyone here thought that OAN is an actual news organization and I didn't do anything to stop them.

 

FB_IMG_1605638298173.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Godless said:

I keep telling myself I'm going to walk away from this website, but then I see something like this and just have to share it, because I would genuinely feel terrible if anyone here thought that OAN is an actual news organization and I didn't do anything to stop them.

What exactly did OAN do that we should be warned about?
Simply appears OAN reported on information provided by Congressman Louie Gohmert.
Are they not allowed to report on what the Congressman was sharing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a reminder of the site rules, to which we all agreed in order to create an account here.  Especially site rule #3 and 4.

Quote

3. Personal attacks, name calling, flaming, and judgments against other members will not be tolerated.

4. No bickering and nit-picking toward others. Realize that sometimes it is very difficult to be able to express how one feels through written words. Please be courteous and ask for a further explanation, rather then trying to attack and find holes in someone else's post.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Just a reminder of the site rules, to which we all agreed in order to create an account here.  Especially site rule #3 and 4.

 

Someone accused me of "attacking" someone. If such is true then I apologize. I believe honesty should prevail in all our dealings, whether it be in person or online. And if we perceive someone is being dishonest towards us or other members on this site, then we should dutifully explain how they were being dishonest and seek to correct it. I'd be very surprised if the site rules contradicted this. 

Im also very surprised that I'd be experiencing censorship on this site which I do believe is more conservative leaning. It looks like a ton of my posts have been removed because correction, has been perceived as "attacks". I wanted to get away from Twitter for a while, but it looks like im not safe from censorship anywhere. Very disappointing

Edited by LatterDSaint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

But an honest person who does not see Trump's crazed rantings as gospel would agree that the election is NOT contested and Biden is clearly the winner.

The assertion then becomes, if there are individuals who see the election as still 'contested' they must therefore be dishonest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NeedleinA said:

What exactly did OAN do that we should be warned about?
Simply appears OAN reported on information provided by Congressman Louie Gohmert.
Are they not allowed to report on what the Congressman was sharing?

If AOC said she had found a secret server showing that Biden had won Texas and Utah, do you think it would be prudent for a news organiztion to report on it? It's recklessly irresponsible to report such blatant misinformation (some might say lies). What journalistic value does that have? Look, I'm not saying the MSM is infallible and beyond reproach (on the contrary, CNN and NYT get a lot of heat from the left), but this is a very blantant act of platforming (and thus entertaining credibility of) a massive falsehood. You want to contest a few states, fine. I personally believe that it's a waste of time, but recounts and court contestations are perfectly legitimate vehicles for sorting out an election. 

Here's the full video, which imo goes beyond simply presenting Gohmert's insane conspiracy theory and actually tries to legitimize it. They clearly didn't have him on to laugh at him for suggesting that Trump won California, New Hampshire, and Minnesota. 

 

Edited by Godless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Godless said:

If AOC said she had found a secret server showing that Biden had won Texas and Utah, do you think it would be prudent for a news organiztion to report on it?

Of course it would. AOC is a national politician. Her rantings must be reported so that people can see exactly how big a liar she is—or, if she's telling the truth, so that we can correct whatever evil she's exposing. I can think of no situation where the media would be justified in refusing en masse to report the news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Vort said:

Of course it would. AOC is a national politician. Her rantings must be reported so that people can see exactly how big a liar she is—or, if she's telling the truth, so that we can correct whatever evil she's exposing. I can think of no situation where the media would be justified in refusing en masse to report the news.

I made an edit to my previous post. To be clear, the issue isn't so much THAT OAN reported Gohmert's story, but HOW. If you show a map that has the states I mentioned red, you'd better have some very compelling evidence to back it up. If a congressperson is trying to push false information about an election, then the story should be presented that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

The assertion then becomes, if there are individuals who see the election as still 'contested' they must therefore be dishonest?

If individuals who see the election as still "contested" *equivalent to the way that the Al Gore vs Bush election was contested* then absolutely yes they are being dishonest. 

Edited by LatterDSaint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

 

Im also very surprised that I'd be experiencing censorship on this site which I do believe is more conservative leaning. It looks like a ton of my posts have been removed because correction, has been perceived as "attacks". I wanted to get away from Twitter for a while, but it looks like im not safe from censorship anywhere. Very disappointing

Third Hour is not the Government... No one has the right to force a private party to pay for them to be heard.

Third Hour is a private party and while it allows discussions on various topics... some topics and types/tone of discussion are not accepted here.  These limits are clearly outlined site rules and you agreed to them in order to create an account here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

If individuals who see the election as still "contested" *equivalent to the way that the Al Gore vs Bush election was contested* then absolutely yes they are being dishonest. 

Maybe if you asked for clarification before before you attack someone as being dishonest...  You would find that you were completely misunderstanding the point they were making

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

Maybe if you asked for clarification before before you attack someone as being dishonest...  You would find that you were completely misunderstanding the point they were making

I have a point to make. And it is not meant to attack you. 

Part of why I feel the discourse in the United States has become so polarized is because people say things or write things irresponsibly, then when called out for their carelessness, they manipulate the context of what they said with examples such as: I didnt say that (followed by) And if I did he didnt mean that (followed by) And if I did, you didnt understand it (followed by) And if you did, it doesnt actually even matter (followed by) well you have said this right?

Why is it a bad thing to grant people the benefit of doubt that they meant exactly what they meant to say the first time around? If I am being encouraged not to do this, then what does that say about the people I am interacting with? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Godless said:

I made an edit to my previous post. To be clear, the issue isn't so much THAT OAN reported Gohmert's story, but HOW. If you show a map that has the states I mentioned red, you'd better have some very compelling evidence to back it up. If a congressperson is trying to push false information about an election, then the story should be presented that way. 

I don't disagree, but you appear to be neglecting two important points:

1. How do you know the information is false? Just because it isn't what CNN et alia are reporting? If there is one thing that everyone should agree the mainstream media has taught us, it is that we cannot take anything they say at face value.

2. Even assuming you're right, so what? How can you possibly codify such a thing without violating the First Amendment? I grew up being taught and believing that the cure for false information was true information. Today the political Left openly pushes for (what they call) misinformation to be suppressed by force of law. Surely no clear-thinking lover of liberty, whatever his or her political stripe, can possibly agree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

And another one of those pesky site rules.

Seriously, certain poster who knows who you are.  Stop digging your hole.  At this point, it looks like you're intentionally trying to provoke the mods.  

I'd love to keep you around, but you have to abide by the same rules as everyone else.

I never had an issue with any particular mod or administrator. I simply disagreed with the claim that the site rules were "clearly" outlined, since "tone of discussion" is extremely arbitrary and subjective. I stick by that because it is the truth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vort said:

I don't disagree, but you appear to be neglecting two important points:

1. How do you know the information is false? Just because it isn't what CNN et alia are reporting? If there is one thing that everyone should agree the mainstream media has taught us, it is that we cannot take anything they say at face value.

Based on some of the states that are colored red on that map, I'd say that there's an extremely high likelihood that Gohmert's information is false. You're right to be skeptical of the MSM. But when even Fox News is saying that Biden won the electoral votes, you should probably assume that Biden won the electoral votes unless compelling evidence to the contrary should arise. 

1 minute ago, Vort said:

2. Even assuming you're right, so what? How can you possibly codify such a thing without violating the First Amendment? I grew up being taught and believing that the cure for false information was true information. Today the political Left openly pushes for (what they call) misinformation to be suppressed by force of law. Surely no clear-thinking lover of liberty, whatever his or her political stripe, can possibly agree with this.

I'm not suggesting that OAN should be silenced or censored. I'm just trying to illustrate the depth of their dishonesty. Is such dishonesty illegal? Not necessarily*. But I know a lot of conservatives have been turning to them for news, possibly including some users here. I want to make sure it's clear that they're not only as untrustworthy as many of the major news organizations, but they're probably more so.

 

*There are laws against defamation and sedition, but I don't believe OAN has violated these. Yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the OAN thing, I am ignorant, and as such, probably am about to display ignorance.  I have not read their stories nor really watched their network.

From the picture posted I think I can understand what they are saying, though.  It starts small and then the drain/rabbit hole keeps getting deeper the further from the main idea you get as you try to come up with a line of reasoning as to why one company could have caused the entire election to go to Biden.  The line of reasoning would go from one point...to conjectured points as follows.

1. The electronic voting was done via a contractor, and as such, some people believe that there was some problems with how that contractor took the number of votes resulting with inaccurate results in at least one county and possibly more.

2. Because of that, the reasoning would be that this contractor got caught corrupting or changing what the actual results were in those counties. 

3.  When there is smoke there is fire, so if some may reason that if this contractor was actually changing the votes in a few counties, they actually changed them in all the other states they were in to some degree or not.

4.  They changed the votes not just in all the states, but most of the counties.

5.  They tried to be undetectable and so changed the votes just enough for close wins in many states that would have gone red instead...thinking they would not be caught...but aha...these conservatives have noticed!

6.  As such, there must be evidence out there...and what do you know...the US military has caught them...

7.  Then, for some unforeseen reason, OAN has gotten these from the military (personal interjection: how would they get that, wouldn't this be classified information???) and now we can see what the REAL numbers were and how the vote went BEFORE it was corrupted by these contractors...

At least, that's what I would foolishly and ignorantly guess is the line of reasoning that is being presented...

Edit - Is it possible?  Of course it's possible.  The biggest hole right away that I can see is how did they get the information from the US military though.  If the US military (or CIA or FBI) got it, I would think it would still be under investigation and thus classified from public eyes at this point.  Other than that, if it was public, I'd imagine there would be a much bigger scandal going on right now...if nothing else, that Fox News would be all over this.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are talking media bias then I would like to show this Studio C video... Its recent... its about a President... and it is generally silly and funny.  The only real politics about it is whatever you take into it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4Ezcsb2qFk

No real polices or agenda being put forth, just humor.   Now look just below the video to where YouTube is trying to "Fact Check", and counter "Fake News"   In this box it states "The AP has called the Presidential race for Joe Biden."   This is a true statement. The Associated Press has called the race.  But there is a problem.  Where in any of our Rule of Laws do we give the AP the power to select the president?   The answer is no where.  The Electoral Collage what makes that call.

Now the AP is making a prediction of what the vote will be, and it has reasonable reasons to expect that to happen.  But what happens if the challenges are successful?  What happens is the Rule of Law runs its course and decides that Trump wins?  People will feel betrayed, fooled, tricked... But they will not turn on the people who got it wrong aka the AP aka the media...  They will turn on the people that got it right.  aka the Judges and judicial system.

When the media is setting up to turn the population away from the rule of law we have serious problems.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.