Ignorant Mick here, what is SURE data? And what does the comparison between that and County Data mean? By the looks of things that seems to be saying one source says x number of people voted and one says y number did and the discrepancy is therefore fraudulent ballots. But why is the SURE figure the one assumed to be accurate?Registered voters is not
Nothing of what you said debunks this:
Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)
- Thread starter Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)
- Start date
- Status
I too love unsourced charts with numbers that don't come from anywhere!!!Registered voters is not
Nothing of what you said debunks this:
Here's the actual SURE results: https://www.electionreturns.pa.gov/
Biden: 3,458,229
Trump: 3,377,674
Jorgensen: 79,380
Total: 6,915,283
And as the big disclaimer at the top says: "These vote totals do not include any votes from mail ballots received between 8 p.m. on election day and 5 p.m. the following Friday." which would explain slightly different county data.
I have no idea, lemme check.
Seems like it's the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors
Department of State | Department of State | Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
<p>Welcome to Pennsylvania Department of State's website. </p>
www.dos.pa.gov
You can buy the full set of data for $20, apparently
As for why it's supposed to be more authoritative, I dunno.
Where does this site say that it contains SURE results?
---
Are we calling lawmakers conspiracy theorists now?
https://www.pavoterservices.pa.gov/Pages/SurePortalHome.aspxI have no idea, lemme check.
Seems like it's the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors
Department of State | Department of State | Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
<p>Welcome to Pennsylvania Department of State's website. </p>
You can buy the full set of data for $20, apparently
As for why it's supposed to be more authoritative, I dunno.
Where does this site say that it contains SURE results?
---
Are we calling lawmakers conspiracy theorists now?
<pdf snip>
That's the SURE portal. Under "Election Services" click "Election Night Returns". That leads directly to the page I linked. It's not rocket science...
Republican lawmakers have embraced conspiracy theories for years now. As evidence, here's a list of prominent Republicans who expressed a genuine belief in Obama not being a US citizen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barac...onspiracy_theories#Campaigners_and_proponents
Yes, but we all know by now that there's an obvious explanation for this or that whoever got that data is just wrong, like all the other times you've punted garbage into this thread.
That's what 9/11 truthers say whenever you present them with evidence that goes against what they claim.
Here's the same statement as in the screenshots above:
PA Lawmakers: Numbers Don’t Add Up, Certification of Presidential Results Premature and In Error
PA Lawmakers: Numbers Don’t Add Up, Certification of Presidential Results Premature and In Error
www.repdiamond.com
One would think that these lawmakers would be able to get accurate numbers, right?
Cool, thanks
The hallmark of a 9/11 truther is to make wild accusations they can't back up with reasonable evidence in the first place. Again, I recommend you review your contributions to this thread.
Why would we just assume that? Why would we assume they are acting in good faith, and presenting the issue fairly, in depth, and without political bias?
Okay, let's not assume that.
Let's also not assume that the officials running the elections are trustworthy.
Let's not assume that the Judges are trustworthy.
Let's not assume that the voting data is trustworthy.
Let's not assume that anything about this election is trustworthy.
Wanna do that?
Or is it just Republicans who can't be assumed to be trustworthy, and you have a double standard?
I don't trust any party that has a deliberate strategy of fuelling distrust of an election to reliably tell me whether that election was safe.
In much the same way, I don't trust North Korean propaganda about how it is a happy, peaceful, successful country united under the tender care of its benevolent, intelligent, supreme leader. Are you going to question my judgement on that, too?
I don't trust any party that has a deliberate strategy of lying to the public and saying that the election was "safe and secure" as a way of preemptively fact-checking the fraud that they'd commit. I guess we're at an impasse.
See, just making accusations does nobody any good. You say they're "fueling distrust", I say they're saying the same things about the shortcomings of mail-in ballots as both parties have been saying for decades. I say "lying" and you say, I dunno, that nobody ever said that mail-in ballots have always been secure and nobody ever said a word about them until now? Which can easily been disproven? I don't know what you'll say, but you probably won't agree.
Last edited:
You don't go to Trump for news. You go to Trump for foaming-at-the-mouth stupidity and tantrums.
This truly might be the smartest thing you've said all thread. And yes I did remove the 'double standard' bullshit because its just that, bullshit. Democrats on the whole probably shouldn't be trusted. Republicans on the other hand can't be trusted. One party I'm going to look into if the facts line up with what they're saying, the other its simply obvious they never will.
One side lies when its politically convenient, the other its politics is to lie. I wouldn't trust a Republican to tell me the day of the week - and even if they by chance told me the correct day, its more believable that they don't know the actual day and thought they were lying than to think they were telling the truth in the first place.
And before you say that's prejudice, no its not. I'm not pre-judging, I'm simply judging. Republicans are the party of lies and false realities and have been my entire life, and I don't see them changing any time soon, especially under Trump.
I think that sentiment fails to properly judge what sort of a society China is. China and a lot of dictatorships like it may not be democracies but there is still some social contract between the government and the population. On some level the population is aware that they are living under dictatorships and that their rights are slowly chipped away. They accept this partially out of fear but more importantly they accept their limited rights under the promise of higher living standards. Putin isn't popular because the Russians are so impressed with his dictatorial traits but because under his rule their living standards were raised and the post soviet chaos seemed to end. The same is true for Erdogan who is also given a pass because his early rule saw a lot of economic growth and with Jinping its the same story.
Even these dictatorship or semi dictatorship are beholden to the people in their own ways. Jinping gets away with a lot of what he does because he promises the population prosperity and order. To a large extend he even delivers on it, even if at the expense of their freedom. Him knowingly creating a virus and unleashing it on his own population explicitly breaks that promises and this affects the legitimacy of his autocracy.
Seems like a thought-terminating cliche.
"Republicans can't be trusted"
"why?"
"Because they're all evil!"
Are you fucking insane? You do not vomit people’s ballots up for all and sundry to see. No, this is an idiotic idea and if I ever read a dumber one I will be shocked.
So you'd rather the ballots just be secrets that are only verified by a handpicked few and you just have to take their word on it that the results are what they say they are?
Sounds like you just want to make it easier to steal elections.
No they're not evil, they're just no trust worthy, and they're politics, increasingly under Trump have proven that. Its not a matter of faith, its history. Democrats couldn't have gotten away with "Alternative Facts". Fuck Republicans didn't even believe a black man could be born in America and not a Muslim, and Trump was at the forefront of the Birther movement.
Imagine what you would say if Biden, the day after inauguration says it was sunny, when in truth it was raining. And just think if any of his supporters would agree with him, despite the evidence. They wouldn't, because even though the Democrats do lie, its not a cult. Faith in the dear leader isn't part of it, whereas in the GOP its the central aspect.
"Republicans can't be trusted because they forgot what the weather was on a certain day!"
Yeah, you've convinced me.
No ballot in Australia has a name or signature on it that I have cast in the sixteen years I have been voting. The Australian Electoral Commission employees count the votes and members of the public (who are not already employees of the Australian Public Service) are allowed to be scrutineers.
And not once has any election in my living memory turned into the banana republic level fucking embarrassment your president and a load of grifting hacks have managed to turn this one into. Donald Trump won 2016 legally and honestly. Donald Trump lost 2020 legally and honestly.
I mean, the opposite is true. If you can doxx people like this, you have the power ro manipulate millionsSo you'd rather the ballots just be secrets that are only verified by a handpicked few and you just have to take their word on it that the results are what they say they are?
Sounds like you just want to make it easier to steal elections.
- Status