Friday, September 30, 2022

How do people get rich?

 

This cartoon was clearly not created by a conservative. 


316 comments:

1 – 200 of 316   Newer›   Newest»
Starhopper said...

Both are correct. No two people get rich the same way.

Starhopper said...

Limited, that's your best posting ever! But I don't think that's what Victor was meaning by "rich".

bmiller said...

I hate it when presidents betray the country by making personal financial deals with adversarial foreign dictators:

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/remarks/grassley-johnson-release-bank-records-tying-biden-family-to-ccp-linked-individuals-and-companies

I hate it when presidents foment foreign wars that have nothing to do with the defense of America. Especially escalating them to a nuclear Armegaddon WWIII.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/biden-warns-risk-nuclear-armageddon-highest-cuban-missile-crisis-rcna51146

I hate it when presidents lie about everything

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM3svGMR-pg

Not to mention making life miserable for all Americans.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/12/now-bidens-given-america-the-worst-inflation-in-40-years/

Demented Man Bad.

bmiller said...

A more complete list of lies

bmiller said...

Katie Hobbs, the racist, won't debate Kari Lake in AZ. Why? Is she that incompetent?

Starhopper said...

Why won't Katire Hobbs debate Kari Lake? For the same reason that any competent scientist wouldn't debate a flat-Earther, or any genuine historian debate a Holocaust denier. What's the point?

bmiller said...

You look stupider than a flat earther?

bmiller said...

But I guess it's better to remain silent than to speak and remove all doubt.

bmiller said...

BTW. Katie Hobbs admitted she discriminated against a black employee. But she's a Dem so you'll ignore that. Par for the course.

bmiller said...

Probably most voters haven't been paying attention and didn't know that. In a debate, Lake could ask Hobbs to explain....with everyone listening.

bmiller said...

Hobbs could ask about Lake about the flat earth and Holocaust. Wouldn't voters want to know if Lake believed those things?

bmiller said...

Doesn't look like Lake is afraid of defending herself. Looks like Hobbs is.

bmiller said...

BTW.

Why does anyone think it is difficult to defend the spherical shape of the earth or the holocaust? Aren't most people reasonable and rational and able to weigh the evidence? Or must they be prevented from hearing views different from ours lest others (or we) be convinced otherwise?

One Brow said...

bmiller,

Why does anyone think it is difficult to defend the spherical shape of the earth or the holocaust?

It is not, in a format where you can reply in detail to every allegation, lie, mischaracterization, etc. with a proper follow through. A debate is not such a format. One common debate tactic for creationists/flat-earthers/Holocaust deniers is the Gish gallop, where they say so many false things so quickly you don't have time to rebut them all; another is to take part of a sentence of paragraph, and blow it up (for example, Darwin's quote about the eye of the octopus). These lies take much longer to correct than time yo9u have in a debate, and the liar comes out looking well for stating dozens of uncontroverted statements.

Aren't most people reasonable and rational and able to weigh the evidence.

Possibly, but debates are not good formats for laying out evidence.

One Brow said...

By the way, bmiller, I appreciate the humor of you linking to 190 Biden lies. It must be refreshing for you to have a President tell so few in the course of a year (about the same number his predecessor managed inthe course of a week). I know you're all about the level of honesty.

bmiller said...

So Hobbs is for killing offspring anytime as long as Dr/Assasin and mother agree. The Democratic position in a nutshell.

bmiller said...

Seems Hobbs is not only an evil racist, she's also a lazy slacker.

Martin said...

So it's good to wait for the mother to be close to death before agreeing to terminate a partial miscarriage. The rightwing "Christian" position in a nutshell.

"Bring the little fetuses unto me, for they are precious to me. On this issue shalt that vote, and on this alone." - Republican Jesus

bmiller said...

Texas bans abortions at all stages of pregnancy, unless you have a life-threatening medical emergency.

Medical professionals apparently didn't think her life was in danger until she developed sepsis and then they proceeded to induce birth as well as to treat her infection. Who was providing her maternal care? Should they have known she was at risk for developing maternal sepsis? If she was being treated for infertility then yes.

Those who may be more prone to getting an infection, which can lead to sepsis, are people:

With diabetes
Who undergo invasive procedures to help them get pregnant
Who undergo invasive tests during pregnancy


BTW. There is no such thing as "a partial miscarriage" or "a little bit pregnant".

Martin said...

Big Government butting in to women's private biz. Perennially relevant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRMVJcwmF5M&ab_channel=ComedyCentral

bmiller said...

All commies want is Big Government. It's funny to watch them lie about it once one know's their nature.

bmiller said...

And they really hate Jesus. Interesting intersectionality right there.

bmiller said...

Imagine the outrage if this happened in NYC.

Limited Perspective said...

I'm not sure why my first comment disappeared.

From Crazy Star, "Why won't Katire Hobbs debate Kari Lake? For the same reason that any competent scientist wouldn't debate a flat-Earther."

I think that's their answer. They treat our ideas for the best form of governance with contempt, beyond reason, and therefore not worth the discussion. They, like all tyrants, want to rule not debate. Not much you can do with that except to press on to preserve the country from the crazies.

Starhopper said...

I stand by my comment. I've watched Kari Lake on YouTube, and it's obvious that "debating" her would be like trying to make sense out of some crazy guy wearing a tinfoil hat so that the aliens can't mess with his brain. Waste of time.

One Brow said...

Limited Perspective,
They treat our ideas for the best form of governance with contempt, beyond reason, and therefore not worth the discussion.

Do you think the best form of government involves denying any election loss and claiming conspiracies to explain being out-voted?

bmiller said...

Limited,

Do you think leftists value consistency in their positions? The answer should be obvious.

It's perfectly OK to question election results if they lose (or are about to lose...like now) but you have to be crazy to question election results if they win.

Hobbs isn't very smart, or brave, or competent but at least she knows it and so knows that will all come out if voters got to see her have to answer the same questions as Lake. Her best hope is to hide...in the bathroom, like she did when that reporter started asking her questions on the street.

One Brow said...

I just saw this on another blog. It so perfectly describes Kari Lake/bmiller:

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

― Jean-Paul Sartre

Starhopper said...

There is a HUGE difference between "questioning" the results of an election and denying them - especially after two years have passed.

The first is rational and defendable, whilst the second is tinfoil hat crazy land.

bmiller said...

You mean like Hillary and Stacy Abrams?

bmiller said...

And you with your Russia stole the 2016 election for Trump?

bmiller said...

"tinfoil hat crazy land" or what Democrats call home.

Starhopper said...

I never said, or even suggested, that Putin "stole" the 2016 election for Trump. I said (and still say), that he influenced the election, and that Trump illegally accepted such influence.

bmiller said...

If the election was not stolen, then Trump was legitimately elected. Thus the legitimate president. Yet you still think Trump should not have been president because of some crime in your tinfoil-hat-covered head.

Take off the tinfoil and see if that allows you to think clearly.

bmiller said...

Hobbs would rather cower in a bathroom than answer any campaign questions.

Starhopper said...

Trump WAS legitimately elected in 2016. I have never disputed that. However, once elected, he was also legitimately subject to impeachment and removal from office. It is to our great sorrow as a nation that we did not secure a conviction as well as two well deserved impeachments.

And he legitimately lost in 2020 to Biden in a free and fair election.

bmiller said...

So Russian influence had nothing to do with him getting elected. Funny how your story changes when it suits your purpose.

Starhopper said...

Russian election interference had EVERYTHING to do with Trump getting elected. It just wasn't a decisive factor. He would have been elected, with or without Russian interference. All Putin did was to up the margin of Trump's victory. Honestly, sometimes I wonder about your lack of reading comprehension.

bmiller said...

I can read. I just can't understand gibberish.

If Russia had EVERYTHING to do with Trump getting elected, then he could not have got elected without it. Because having EVERYTHING to do with causing something to happen kinda works that way.

Starhopper said...

Whatever. You once again, when it comes to politics, prove yourself to be impervious to reason. You evidently feel more comfortable existing within your bubble. I actually envy you. It must be nice, not having to grapple with the messiness of the Real World.

bmiller said...

BTW. Veterans for Peace guy.

Why do you support war? Instead of diplomacy?

bmiller said...

Whatever

I live in a bubble where reason applies to EVERTHING. Too bad you live in "tinfoil hat crazy land".

Come over to the light. Aluminum is bad for your health.

Starhopper said...

I do not support war. I oppose those who make war (in this case, Vladimir Putin).

Do you support Putin?

bmiller said...

No. I don't support Putin or the funding of Raytheon for the purpose of the continuation of the killing of Ukrianians and Russians.

I thought Veterans for Peace agreed with me on that at least.

bmiller said...

Fetterman. Enough said.

bmiller said...

Some people think a president secretly negotiating with a foreign power to influence an election is an impeachable offense.

Will Democrats be consistent? ��

Limited Perspective said...

"Do you think the best form of government involves denying any election loss and claiming conspiracies to explain being out-voted?"

I think questioning results is very much part of a true democracy. Let them prove to free citizens the results.

Do you think anyone who has questioned the results of an election is disqualified from running for office? Is questioning the results grounds for banning someone's opinion? (Let me introduce you to Professor Victor)

I hope you say yes, so I can give you the list of flat-earther election deniers.

bmiller said...

🤔

bmiller said...

Sorry. Emoji pertained to my previous post.

Martin said...

"I think questioning results is very much part of a true democracy. Let them prove to free citizens the results."

Of course this should be part of democracy, but in the case of the 2020 election, it's a black hole: no matter how many court cases are lost (60!), no matter how many audits and re-audits are done (the rightwing audit in AZ just confirmed Biden's win), they'll continue to insist there was widespread fraud. Kari Lake sat there in an interview and lied her head off about how there were thousands of votes in Maricopa with no chain of custody, or dead people, whatever TF she said, ALL of it false. Lies. Endless lies.

This is all just Obama's birth certificate on steroids, where they released it but not the LONG form, so he released the long form and it must be photoshopped, so they found the newspaper announcing his birth but obviously that was PLANTED, etc.

It. Is. Not. In. Good. Faith.

One Brow said...

Limited Perspective said...
"Do you think the best form of government involves denying any election loss and claiming conspiracies to explain being out-voted?"

I think questioning results is very much part of a true democracy.


How about you answer the question I asked? I have no problem with questioning a vote where the margin is a few hundred; those margins do occasionally get reversed. Questioning a margin over 10,000 is nothing but denialism. Saying that you won't accept the results before the vote is even counted is demagoguery.

So, are you integral enough to answer the question I asked? Do you think the best form of government involves denying any election loss and claiming conspiracies to explain being out-voted?

Let them prove to free citizens the results.

How much more proof do you need of the 2020 results? You can't prove anything to a person determined to disbelieve.

Do you think anyone who has questioned the results of an election is disqualified from running for office?

That depends upon the margin of the vote being questioned. For example, anyone thinking Trump won the 2020 election is too reality-deprived to be in office.

Is questioning the results grounds for banning someone's opinion?

You went straight to the fever dream. Who discussed banning opinions besides you?

I hope you say yes, so I can give you the list of flat-earther election deniers.

You mean, besides the one running for the governorship of Arizona?

bmiller said...

There is a HUGE difference between "questioning" the results of an election and denying them - especially after two years have passed.

The first is rational and defendable, whilst the second is tinfoil hat crazy land.



Kari Lake agrees with Starhopper. Except on an occasion such as this, I suspect that Starhopper will disagree with himself.

72% of Democrats still think Hillary was right and it's likely that Russia swung the election against Hillary. I agree with Starhopper that they're wrong. But the difference between me and (and the other) leftists is that I just think they are wrong not lying. It seems leftists like to call people with different opinions liars. I suspect it's projection.

Limited Perspective said...

To answer your question directly: No

I accept the results of the election. Biden is a dufus and destroying the country, but he is MY president elected by my fellow citizens and I fully accept that and live peacefully everyday with the disaster he created.

I have tried to find a clear explanation regarding the safety and security of our elections. I am unsatisfied with the explanations that I have found. But it was the 2016 election not 2020 that made start looking. I was trying to find good arguments against Dem's at the time claiming the election was hacked. I had no idea how quickly they could change when they won. It's almost some form of psychosis.

List of election deniers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoMfIkz7v6s

Too many deniers to write down, just watch the video. Twitter and Facebook began removing (banning) posts of people who claimed the 2020 election was stolen after the 1/6 riot. Look it up.

Election deniers in their own words:
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/08/21/the-democratic-party-is-full-of-election-deniers-n1622802

Goodness, Libs either live in bubble or are like goldfish and can't remember things more that few minutes ago.

Starhopper said...

If anyone can be said to have swung the 2016 election away from Clinton, that would be FBI Director Comey.

No one thinks that you, bmiller, are a liar - at least, not me. You are merely deluded and brainwashed. However, your Dear Leader, our former president, IS a pathological liar, who seems incapable of opening his mouth without lying.

bmiller said...

For those suffering memory loss. Dems claiming that "Russians hacked our elections" and "Trump is an illegitimate president"

bmiller said...

Sorry Limited. You beat me to it.

bmiller said...

Dear Leader, our CURRENT president, IS a pathological liar, who seems incapable of opening his mouth without lying.

Fixed it for you. From plagiarizism to 18-wheeler truck driver it seems his nature.
Trump's nature seems to be to exaggerate. Probably works for him when makes deals.

bmiller said...

Exaggeration. What politician hasn't?

Starhopper said...

Jimmy Carter.

bmiller said...

It's difficult to know if someone that incompetent was exaggerating or just didn't have a clue. He was a politician that exaggerated pessimism.

bmiller said...

Did the FBI and Big Tech swing the 2020 election for Biden by suppressing the Bobulinski
and Hunter laptop story?

Bobulinski thinks so.

If only 21,500 votes changed 3 states the results would have been different. I have to assume that at least voters like Victor would not have voted for Biden if he were given evidence that Biden lied and was doing secret deals worth millions (if not billions) with China.

Limited Perspective said...

Starhopper, you know Jimmy Carter is a (gasp! faint! start crying) election denier.

"Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016."

--Jimmy Carter

We know from the lunatic left that election denial is the greatest threat to our democracy. Put old Jimmy up there at the top of the threat category. Goldfish.

Starhopper said...

Amazing how bmiller and limited can turn so quickly against the most undeniably CHRISTIAN president this country has ever had (and possibly ever will). Shows you where their true interests lie. Party above God.

bmiller said...

My interest is what is true. Denying the truth is not something a Christian should do. Nor should a Christian intentionally hide the truth or deceive.

If you disagree with what was said, what exactly is it? Or is it that you don't think people should speak the truth? Party over Truth?

bmiller said...

If claiming the current president was elected illegitimately is a dangerous extremist idea that endangers democracy then why isn't it so when "the most undeniably CHRISTIAN president this country has ever had" expresses that idea? To this day. Without retraction.

bmiller said...

He must be one of those white Christian supremacists!

bmiller said...

It's my bin and I'll do what I want. Some people just want to fight.

Limited Perspective said...

Starhopper,

I have fond memories of President Carter. He was President during the bicentennial in 1976. All my teachers in 1976 were patriotic and had great respect for the country and the then president Carter. I have not turned from that sentiment.

My only point is he is an election denier. I'll let you and the lunatic left decide how important it is to be a election denier.

bmiller said...

Limited,

"All my teachers in 1976 were patriotic and had great respect for the country"

Welcome to 2022. Buckle up. You're in CA, so you are the canary in the mine. I pay attention to what happens in states where insanity is detected.

Limited Perspective said...

Correction, Carter was elected in 1976, Ford was the President on July, 4 1976.

Yea Miller, the public schools were far different before the California teacher's unions became so power hungry. But, their storm-troopers are trying to save our precious democracy by exposing (scream! curse! set your hair on fire!) election deniers. So, the unions aren't all that bad.

It wasn't until I started paying attention that I learned how bad a president Carter was, even though everyone pretty well liked him, including myself. Now that we know he is an (screech! howl! burn down the local grocery store!) election denier, we can toss him into the looney bin. Gotta keep track of Putin puppet deniers of democracy.


One Brow said...

bmiller,
Kari Lake agrees with Starhopper. Except on an occasion such as this, I suspect that Starhopper will disagree with himself.

72% of Democrats still think Hillary was right and it's likely that Russia swung the election against Hillary.


Both of these statements are true: Trump's election was fair, free, and largely without fraud; Russia intervened in the 2016 election in favor of Trump by hacking the DNC emails and releasing them to Wikileaks, by running pro-Trump propaganda websites, etc. To pretend that the people claiming Biden was elected by fraud are saying the same thing as the people who say Russia interfered is dishonest, and fools no one but those who want to be deceived.

One Brow said...

bmiller,
For those suffering memory loss. Dems claiming that ...

Find one where they say the votes themselves were fraudulent, or that the machines doing the counting were rigged, or accusing the election workers of fraud. I'll wait.

You attempted what-aboutism is pathetic and desperate.

Starhopper said...

"those who want to be deceived"

Never forget that the term "alternative facts" originated within the MAGA cult. These people are not interested in reality. They prefer their own fact-free bubble of their own devising.

Dante described this mindset perfectly, when he noted that hell was populated by those who had "lost the good of the intellect". It's been my custom to re-read the Divine Comedy once per year ever since the 1970s, and this last time around I was horrified by how much the Inferno resembled a Trump rally. "Abandon all hope, ye that enter here."

One Brow said...

Limited Perspective,
I was trying to find good arguments against Dem's at the time claiming the election was hacked.

The Democrats were talking about Russian propaganda and the hacked servers at the DNC. They never claimed the election machines were hacked.

Too many deniers to write down, just watch the video.

Many short quotes, zero context. That does make it easy to read a false equivalence into what they are saying.

Twitter and Facebook began removing (banning) posts of people who claimed the 2020 election was stolen after the 1/6 riot. Look it up.

There's a violent insurrection at the Capitol, and you're worried about what a couple of private corporations decide to host on their servers? By the way, you didn't say 'all the people', did you. Plenty of election deniers didn't have their accounts shut down because they didn't engage in various threats.

Election deniers in their own words:

Behind a paywall.

Goodness, Libs either live in bubble or are like goldfish and can't remember things more that few minutes ago.

Cons have to fall back on false equivalences to justify their sympathy for insurrection.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

You're implying that I have said things that aren't true. I've generally provided links for you to check out. What exactly are these things I've pointed out that aren't real?

One Brow said...

bmiller,
If only 21,500 votes changed 3 states the results would have been different. I have to assume that at least voters like Victor would not have voted for Biden if he were given evidence that Biden lied and was doing secret deals worth millions (if not billions) with China.

1) That 22,100 is the combined margin of Georgia and Arizona, but even if you give them to Trump, he's at 259 while Biden gets 279. There's no way to shift that few votes and get Trump elected.
2) Hunter Biden (who got millions from China) wasn't on the ballot, and there is no evidence that Joe Biden took a penny from those deals.

One Brow said...

bmiller,
My interest is what is true.

I'm sure you tell yourself that, but you twist and bend facts to support what you think should be true.

Martin said...

The difference is that Republican's own report proved that Russia put it's thumb on the scale for Trump, and that Trump welcomed the help. (True, Clinton's claims of "illegitimate president" are hyperbolic on retrospect.)

Whereas that psychopathic narcissist's claim that there were thousands or even millions of fraudulent votes has not been supported by a shred of evidence, and was thrown out and laughed at sixty times by judges, and no, not because of "lack of standing" but because there was no serious evidence for it, as Rudy himself was forced to admit when in court and not in front of the cameras.

Despite that fact, loonies like Kari Lake are only interested in power and know they can easily get it from the Republican base if they just put an "R" after their name and parrot Trump's lies about widespread fraud.

The reason our democracy is in peril is due to what may very well happen if Lake becomes governor. She will likely never certify the results of the presidential election in her state if a Democrat wins, because, as she is doing now, she'll lie and lie and lie about non-existent widespread fraud. Losing all her court cases but still refusing to certify.

AZ will go to neither candidate, and neither has enough EV to win. The election will be thrown to the House. The Republican president wins, despite losing both the popular vote AND the EV.

And that's the end of the American experiment.

In my wildest dreams I never could have invented such a stupid ending. Growing up I always imagined China or Russia invading or nuking us. But a tacky reality TV show star with a fragile ego, blindly supported by half of American citizens...? Sweet relief from nuclear fireball seems almost pleasant by comparison.

bmiller said...

Martin,

It seems all you have to offer are wild dreams.

bmiller said...

It seems lefties don't bother to read links or understand the arguments being made. Maybe when you're crazy, reasoned arguments look crazy to you.

Starhopper said...

"Maybe when you're crazy, reasoned arguments look crazy to you."

Sounds like you've been looking in the mirror, bmiller.

Limited Perspective said...

Most Democratic party members said, "the election was hacked." The lie was so influential between 35 and 50% (depending on the poll) of Democrats thought the Russians actually changed votes.

The DNC server was not the election. The DNC is a committee for campaigning and fund raising. Do you understand the difference between an election (votes) and a fundraising committee? The total nonsense you guys believe in is astounding.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

Up yonder it seems you accused me of betraying all Christians just because I told the truth about a fellow Christian. Tribe above Truth seems to be your motto.

No wonder objective reasoning seems so crazy to you. Your reasoning only involves protecting your tribe of choice.

Limited Perspective said...

BTW, does anyone even remember what was in the DNC emails? The whole story was about the hackers. I can't remember, was the DNC doing something nefarious?

bmiller said...

was the DNC doing something nefarious?

Were they breathing? :-)

bmiller said...

AZ Attorney General found that 100,000 to 200,000 ballots lacked chain of custody in the 2020 election. Signature verification lacked proper rules and oversight.

The state that was decided by ~5,000 votes.

bmiller said...

Limited,

Thanks for the PSA.

Might I add that Democrats are already getting ready to be 2022 election deniers, so once again election denial will be patriotic.

Limited Perspective said...

I did see Secretary Clinton's message to not trust the outcome of the midterm election.

Limited Perspective said...

You do have to feel kind of sorry for them being jerked around from one outrage to the next.

bmiller said...

I think they actually enjoy their outrage. They're outrage junkies.

Limited Perspective said...

"They're outrage junkies."

Thanks Miller, that's a great line. I needed a good laugh on this long Friday afternoon.

Starhopper said...

"I needed a good laugh"

Well then, we both made out today!
I've gotten my chuckles today from you guys' trapped-in-the-bubble back and forth, echo chamber e-mails.

Limited Perspective said...

Why don't you join us Star? The Democratic party provides daily amusements for us regular guys.

Limited Perspective said...

Have you seen Kamala Harris yellow school bus speech? You can't help but laugh.

Starhopper said...

Why do you confuse me with the Democrats? Is it because I love justice and the idea that no one is above the law? Or is it because I am an enemy of racism, xenophobia, misogyny, and bigotry of all sorts? Perhaps it's because I am not a conspiracy theorist? Maybe it's my acceptance of objective reality over "alternative facts"? Could it be because I take the New Testament seriously, and believe that it is our duty (both individually and corporately) to care for the widow, the orphan, the least of [Jesus'] brethren, and the "stranger in our midst" (i.e., the immigrant and the migrant). Ooh, I know! It's because I put not my trust in princes (a.k.a., Trump) and reject all Stalinist cults of personality.

Totally understandable.

Limited Perspective said...

Fair enough Star. Have a good weekend.

Starhopper said...

You too. I'll be watching my granddaughter's la crosse game tomorrow, while celebrating my newest (4th) grandchild (Joseph) born JUST YESTERDAY!!!

Limited Perspective said...

Sounds like God has blessed you with a rich life Star (the original topic here). Blessings to Joseph and victory or good sport for the granddaughter's team.

bmiller said...

Rich being the key word.

bmiller said...

Paul Pelosi was wrestling with a naked man for a hammer before being overpowered? What in the world is going on in San Fran?

And who let this guy in the Pelosi house at that hour of the night?

bmiller said...

Trump said Regan was someone he looked up to. Probably because he could think on his feet. No matter the danger.

One Brow said...

Limited Perspective,
Most Democratic party members said, "the election was hacked." The lie was so influential between 35 and 50% (depending on the poll) of Democrats thought the Russians actually changed votes.

Again, discussing propaganda, not actual changing of votes that were cast or other fraud.

The total nonsense you guys believe in is astounding.

The ahistorical tripe you are swallowing, as a justification for your own claims of fraud, is saddening.

The Democrats from circa December 2016 to circa November 2020 were election deniers.

With that many people over that much time, surely you can produce one instance of one senior party member/member of /Congress/etc. claiming voter fraud? We'll all wait. I mean, it's not like you're doing a false equivalence, right?

bmiller,
AZ Attorney General found that 100,000 to 200,000 ballots lacked chain of custody in the 2020 election.

Actually, he found that some signatures were missing on some of the transfer documents, which meant that the chain of custody could not be verified. So, "lack chain of custody verification" would be true. You're about the truth, right?

BTW, the margin in Arizona was over 11,000 votes. You're about the truth, right?

Limited Perspective said...

One Brow.

Was the 2016 election hacked?

Limited Perspective said...

Was the 2016 election illegitimate (not a legal election)?

Limited Perspective said...

Was Trump legally elected according to the constitution and your President of the United States from January 2017 to January 2020?

Martin said...

The AZ attorney general also did not find any evidence of widespread voter fraud. You see the trick Kari Lake is pulling, here. Taking the AG's finding of clumsy management and turning it into "all those votes should have been thrown out" as fraudulent. Her only purpose is to win power, and the right is now deeply invested in Trump's fragile ego and concomitant inability to admit a loss, so she has to support that narrative. She knows as long as she worships Trump as a god, and has an "R" after her name, voters will fall for it and give her power.

One of the few truths Trump has told over the years is how amazed he was at how people would just believe anything he said, even when he knew it was complete BS. "I say it and they just believe it!" He's drunk on his power to command zombies, and the zombies are all too happy to empower their demagogue.

Interesting how far back warnings about demagogues stretch in human history.

To not avail, clearly.

Martin said...

"I think they actually enjoy their outrage. They're outrage junkies."

I mean, all of us are to a degree. We worry about how our country is going to provide, not provide, oppress, etc.

Still, it's pretty funny you guys single us out when Fox News' sole purpose is to creat Satanic Panics out of thin air to scare old people:

OMG, CRT!
OMG, the CARAVAN!!!!!
OMG, DRAG SHOWS!!!
OMG, ILLEGAL ALIENS!!!!
OMG, EVERY CITY HAS BEEN BURNED TO THE GROUND BY ANTIFUH AND DA BLACKS!!!!

*puts back of hand on forehead*
*faints*

bmiller said...

OB must think he is making some sort of point again that I am lying somehow. I honestly don't how his mind works. Chain of custody just is:

Chain of custody (CoC), in legal contexts, is the chronological documentation or paper trail that records the sequence of custody, control, transfer, analysis, and disposition of materials, including physical or electronic evidence.

No signatures, and the chain of custody is broken.

Regarding AZ:
Biden got 10,457 more votes than Trump. If 5229 ballots went for Trump instead of Biden, Trump would have won AZ.

Did he say he taught math?

bmiller said...

Martin,

Chain of Custody is put in place to ensure the integrity of an election and to make sure each voter gets his vote counted for the candidate he voted for. Without CoC, there is no way to know if someone tampered with the ballots. All citizens who believe in democracy should be for that. Kari Lake, is for that. Why aren't you?

BTW. You complained that the AZ senate, the body responsible for ensuring fair elections, conducted an audit of the 2020 election. You claimed it was biased. Isn't that an attack on the institution of democracy? An attack on the duly elected officials and the citizens who voted for them? I have to think that the fact that you think Republicans can't be honest is because you know how Democrats operate and think Republicans do the same thing.

But wait. You also claimed that the AZ audit concluded that the vote count was roughly the same as the state certified count. How can you claim, at the same time, that Republicans cannot be trusted but their "biased" audit was fair?

Starhopper said...

"Was Trump legally elected according to the constitution and your President of the United States from January 2017 to January 2020?"

I realize the question was addressed to One Brow and not to me, but I'll answer it anyway.

Yes, Trump was legally and constitutionally elected in 2016 and was the legitimate president from January 2017 to January 2021.

In like manner, Joe Biden was legally and constitutionally elected in 2020, and has been our legitimate president since January 2021. (And will likely remain so until January 2029.)

Limited Perspective said...

Thank you for your direct answer to the question Star. I'm curious, have
you here at D.I. ever said otherwise? Have you ever claimed Trump was illegitimate? Have you been consistent in your statement?

Starhopper said...

Not sure. We've been talking about this walking disaster for years now, and I may have been careless at some point in my wording. But I never ever believed his election, as unfortunate for our country and the world as it was, was anything but legitimate.

That does not mean there was no Russian interference. There was in plenty, but it did not have a decisive effect on the outcome. The real thumb on the scale was Comey. If he had only kept his stupid mouth shut, we'd now be enjoying the 6th year of the Hillary Clinton presidency. To our everlasting shame and misfortune, we are not.

Limited Perspective said...

That's fair Star. I thought the country was much better off economically from 2016 to Covid than any time since the 1990s. I think the world was better off as well, with Putin invading Crimea under Obama's watch and Ukraine under Biden and everything pretty stable and peaceful under Trump with very few Americans dying for stupid wars. There were also a number of peace treaties signed between the Arabs and Israel. All in all, much better for the country and the world than under Obama or Biden.

I understand why you would be upset with Trump. I am glad you recognized he was elected lawfully under the Constitution.

Hilary would not have had trouble with Comey if she had just followed the law for handling classified information. I would have fared far worse if I did as she while I was in the Air Force. But she was running for President, so they had to go light on her. Otherwise, it's her own damn fault.

Starhopper said...

"Putin invading Crimea under Obama's watch and Ukraine under Biden and everything pretty stable and peaceful under Trump"

I think you give too much "credit" to American influence on world events. Putin annexed the Crimea and invaded Ukraine for his own reasons and on his own timetable. Who happened to be the US president had little or nothing to do with his actions.

It's like the Repubs blaming Biden for inflation or gasoline prices when these are GLOBAL, not domestic, issues.

bmiller said...

Yes. They are global problems.
Caused by Biden.

Oops. Sorry. By whoever is actually making the decisions. Not Biden.

Starhopper said...

Hmm... Looks like someone has a bad case of BDS (Biden Derangement Syndrome).

bmiller said...

I wouldn't call it derangement. He's just got age dementia.

bmiller said...

Doesn't the Pelosi home have any security? I mean if a crazy nudist can break in at 2AM who can't?

Very strange indeed.

bmiller said...

Isn't this just common sense?

Election Integrity
In 2016, over 60% of Democrats believed the election was stolen. In 2020, over 60% of Republicans believe the election was stolen. We cannot continue to have disputed elections and expect this country to survive. Ensuring election integrity in the future is incredibly simple if we simply have the political will to do it.

Arizona’s audit revealed numerous deficiencies and issues with our elections, on a scope and scale sufficient to have changed the outcome of 2020. We must address these problems immediately, or nothing else we do will matter.

First, require voter ID on all ballots. One person, one vote. There is nothing fairer than that, and – despite what the mainstream media says – voter ID requirements are overwhelmingly popular with every single Party and demographic. 75% of Americans support requiring voter ID, as do 69% of Black Americans, and 82% of other minorities. 60% of Democrats, 77% of Independents, and 89% of Republicans support voter ID. The only people who don't want to see voter ID implemented are progressive activists and the media.

Second, require pre-printed paper ballots – no printing ballots on-site at polling stations which increases the likelihood of individuals casting multiple ballots.

Third, take all equipment that uses software out of the counting process. As we have seen in recent weeks with the pipeline hack, and the meat-plant hack: if it has software, it can be hacked. Elections are simply too important to take that risk. Using analog optical scanners will be more personnel and time-consuming than using computers – so we pay for the personnel and resources we need.

Fourth, elections should be followed with regular, highly accurate audits of the results to ensure transparency and bolster public trust.

Starhopper said...

And most importantly, Fifth, ALL citizens must be required to vote (like paying your taxes). Do not exclude voters, or make it difficult to register or to vote. Make election day a national holiday. Have communities vote en masse in a holiday atmosphere. There should be penalties for not voting. Get participation as close to 100 percent as possible.

One Brow said...

Limited Perspective,
Was the 2016 election hacked?

That's a broad term. I have seen no evidence there was voter fraud or tampering with election ballots/machinery.

Was the 2016 election illegitimate (not a legal election)?

AFAICT, it was a legal election.

Was Trump legally elected according to the constitution and your President of the United States from January 2017 to January 2020?

Assuming you meant January 2021, then yes.

One Brow said...

bmiller said...
Chain of custody (CoC), in legal contexts, ...

No signatures, and the chain of custody is broken.


No, I was honestly confused on what this term meant. I thought it meant that there were unsafe or improper people handling these documents. If all it means is that some signatures are missing, then I agree chain of custody was broken, but instead state that is not evidence any of the ballots were improperly handled or tampered with.

Biden got 10,457 more votes than Trump. If 5229 ballots went for Trump instead of Biden, Trump would have won AZ.

Did he say he taught math?


Trump and Biden were not the only choices. Historically, if those votes had not gone for Biden, they would have largely gone for third-party candidates or just a refusal to choose.

Yes, I teach math well enough to recognize that there are more than two choices. You should be embarrassed about your statement.

One Brow said...

bmiller
In 2016, over 60% of Democrats believed the election was stolen.

This is a lie.

bmiller said...

This is a lie.

Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democrats believe it’s likely the 2016 election outcome was changed by Russian interference,

You use the word "lie" a lot. You should stop it.

Biden got 10,457 more votes than Trump. If 5229 ballots went for Trump instead of Biden, Trump would have won AZ.

Mr. Math teacher. I see you quoted my statement and calculation, so there should be no excuse for misunderstanding what I said. You failed the exam.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

I'm glad to see that you agree with the 4 common sense ideas to ensure voting integrity. I partially agree with your 5th idea. I think it's a good idea that election day should be a national holiday so everyone can make it out to vote. But I don't think people should be forced to vote. I can see why people would think there just is no good choice and so not choose anyone.

BTW. You've just agreed again with Kari Lake.
Funny how when people living in a bubble get some unfiltered info that they aren't told they should hate, it seems reasonable to them. Sounds like you would vote for her if she didn't have (R) behind her name.

Starhopper said...

I would never even consider voting for Ms. Lake until she unequivocally and consistently stated that Joe Biden won the 2020 election fair and square, that the election was not rigged, and that any voter fraud which may have occurred was statistically insignificant (a handful of votes out of millions cast). Any person who cannot do this is, in my view, unfit for office, since they would be divorced from objective reality.

Oh, and I did not "agree" with your 4 points, I simply did not disagree with them (except for number 4, with which I do disagree - no need for audits in elections where the margin of victory is greater than, say, 1.5 percent).

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

Well. You said you voted for this guy. So it seems election denial is only a deal=breaker for those that have (R) behind their name.

The only thing I've heard Kari Lake say is that the AZ election had enough problems to throw the results in doubt. Specifically the Chain of Custody issue that some reports say affected as many as 740,000 ballots in a race decided by ~10,000. I think ballots that lack CoC should be thrown out and the people who failed to preserve it should be held accountable. Don't know if that would have changed who won, but the point is, that according to CoC rules, no one can know for sure.

I like audits. It makes me suspicious of people who don't.

Starhopper said...

Did Biden claim the 2016 election was rigged?
Rhetorical question: the answer is no.

bmiller said...

Did Biden claim Trump won the 2016 election fair and square?
No.

bmiller said...

And that is why we should have audits.

Can't trust partisans like Starhopper to be fair.

Starhopper said...

Waste of taxpayer money, unless the result was razor thin. Otherwise, you expend a lot of effort to confirm the obvious.

bmiller said...

Are you against bank audits too?

The purpose of forensic audits is to ensure the process is followed and identify where it was not in order to fix the problems. Incompetents and crooks don't like this.

Starhopper said...

Meh. Chasing shadows. Looking for a solution to a problem that does not exist.

bmiller said...

You've just shown you cannot be fair. Now you want to make sure no one finds out who else is not fair. Democrats know their own kind.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

740,000 ballots did not have CoC in an election where one candidate got 10,000 more votes than the other. Have you been taking math lessons from OB?

bmiller said...

But I get it. You don't care if things are fair. Just as long as your side wins.

Like I said. That's why we need audits. Doubt Dems could elect a dog-catcher if all elections were audited.

Starhopper said...

"You don't care if things are fair. Just as long as your side wins."

You've been looking into the mirror again. You need to stop that. Projection is not a good look for you.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

Don't I remember you opposing the AZ audit? The margin of votes for Biden was <1.5% of the total, which today you say deserves an audit. The same was true for Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Yesterday you loudly proclaimed anyone questioning the results was a party to the "Big Lie". Today you say you support audits in states that could have swung the election for Trump if it was found election laws were not followed. Are you a "Big Liar" now?

bmiller said...

But they are private companies. It's not like the government is trying to shut down free speech.

Starhopper said...

My position on audits may indeed be amphorous, because I haven't given the subject much thought. It's just not a high priority issue with me. I do believe, however, that they are generally a waste of money and effort, and ought to be the exception rather than the rule.

bmiller said...

You should stop accusing people of "The Big Lie" then shouldn't you?

It wasn't until you heard a set of proposals without a name attached that you paused enough to listen and mostly agreed with them. You need to get out of your bubble.

bmiller said...

Biden is celebrating Halloween early.

I think he confused a large candy corn for Trump and ran away.

Starhopper said...

"You should stop accusing people of "The Big Lie" then shouldn't you?"

Not at all. To say, or even to imply, that the 2020 election was not a free and fair victory for Biden, that it was somehow "rigged", is not just to be incorrect, it is to LIE, and to lie on such a scale that it ranks up there with Holocaust denial and forgeries such as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

The term Big Lie is well deserved.

bmiller said...

Dude. You just claimed it was reasonable to question the results.

Been taking Biden's memory pills?

Starhopper said...

One can legitimately question a call at first base, but once we've seen the instant replay, the time for questioning is over. We all saw the tape within a week or so of election night. There is no longer any justification whatsoever for questioning the outcome - Trump lost, Biden won. To say anything else, one has to be either insane, a fool, a disbeliever in objective reality, or a liar. Those are the only alternatives. Which one are you, bmiller?

Starhopper said...

Oh, I guess other possibilities could include brainwashed, and/or invincibly ignorant.

bmiller said...

Hello?

I'd like to talk to the Starhopper that just agreed that close elections should be audited and it's reasonable to question them if they're not. Not the one that now thinks he is watching a baseball game.

There was only one audit preformed in 2020, the AZ Maricopa county audit. It showed that as many as 740,000 ballots may have been tampered with (why do I have to keep repeating this?). No audits were done in Georgia, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

To accuse someone of lying, you have to at least know the truth. How do you know those ballots with broken CoC were not tampered with? How do you know the elections in those other close states didn't have similar or worse problems than in Maricopa county without an audit. An audit that you claimed would be reasonable? Don't bother, the question is rhetorical. You can't.

What do we call someone who calls others liars when they don't know what the truth is?

bmiller said...

And to be technical about it.

The insane, a fool, a disbeliever in objective reality, the brainwashed and the invincibly ignorant are not lying.

What is it with lefties that they like to throw that word around? Projection?

Starhopper said...

"What do we call someone who calls others liars when they don't know what the truth is?"

A Republican (or even just a right-winger).

bmiller said...

So you've changed parties?

bmiller said...

Sorry. We don't want your type.

bmiller said...

We have standards.

Starhopper said...

"So you've changed parties?"

Actually, yes I have. I was a Republican from 1972 to approximately 1980. I was torn between the 2 parties throughout the 80s, but by 1992 I was a solid Democrat. I no longer consider myself an adherent of either party, since neither one is a good match for my personal beliefs. The Democrats disappoint me and the Republican horrify me. I pretty much vote straight Democratic as the lesser of two evils, since I absolutely refuse to not vote.

bmiller said...

I guess Republicans not tolerating insane rants was the final nail in the coffin.

Starhopper said...

Iran-Contra was when I realized that the Republican Party was not worthy of my support, but the Clinton impeachment was the straw that broke my own camel's back. I could never again take anything said by any Republican spokesperson seriously. The party was rotten to the core. Subsequent events have time and again proved that conclusion. There is no saving it.

Which is unfortunate, because this country desperately needs a conservative alternative to the Democrats, but there is at present none to be found. Certainly not today's batshit crazy Republicans.

bmiller said...

If I recall, you voted for a single Republican president. 46 years ago. Who was running against 1 of the worst presidents ever. Please.

bmiller said...

During that time Democrats became the party of death, from the party that allowed different points of view on abortion.

Starhopper said...

"If I recall, you voted for a single Republican president. 46 years ago."

I voted for Reagan in 1984, 38 years ago. I also voted for Republican presidential candidates in 2 other races, and numerous Republicans in "down ballot" races over the years. (And don't forget, I enthusiastically voted for Barry Goldwater for senator in his final campaign.) How many Democratic candidates for any office have you ever voted for?

bmiller said...

I can't remember ever voting for a Democrat. But I don't pretend that I ever liked leftist politics.

There was a time where one could respect some of their senators like Moynihan and Bird. They seemed like men of conviction and I believed them when they said they would vote to impeach Clinton if he was found to have perjured himself. He did. They didn't. Lost that respect.

Then the Dems went full on Moloch. So not just bad policies but actual, intentional evil.

Limited Perspective said...

One Brow,

Was the 2016 election hacked?

"That's a broad term"

Unfortunately you can't answer a question. What's your term for not being able to answer? "sad" You're very sad One Brow.

Starhopper said...

"You've just shown you cannot be fair."
"I can't remember ever voting for a Democrat."

Thanks for starting my day out with a good belly laugh.

And you still accuse ME of being too partisan.

One Brow said...

bmiller,
You use the word "lie" a lot. You should stop it.

When you stop typing out lies, I'll stop accurately describing your statements as lies. To be clear, most of the time I have no idea if the lie is one you originated or are just repeating in ignorance, but that doesn't change the nature of the statement.

Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democrats believe it’s likely the 2016 election outcome was changed by Russian interference,

Which is *very* different from saying it was "stolen".

It showed that as many as 740,000 ballots may have been tampered with (why do I have to keep repeating this?).

There was zero evidence of tampering. If you conduct similar audits in Texas, California, Florida, New York, etc., you'll find similarly large numbers of ballots where the chain of custody is broken, because people often skip minor steps when carrying out their duties.

What do we call someone who calls others liars when they don't know what the truth is?

Calling a statement a lie does not mean I am calling the typist a liar. As you noted, there are other possibilities. Lies are still lies when repeated by someone who does not know they are lies.


One Brow said...

Limited Perspective,
Unfortunately you can't answer a question. What's your term for not being able to answer? "sad" You're very sad One Brow.

The problem is you're asking for a specific answer to a metaphorical usage of "hacked". So, I don't know what you really mean. None of the meanings below refer to election integrity, unless you mean the electronic voting machines, and I specifically said I've seen no evidence that the machines were tampered with (as a skeptic, I'm disinclined to say my lack of knowledge is evidence something did not happen, but my guess is that the machines were not hacked).

So unless you are choose to be more precise in your question, my answer is that I don't think the election machines were tampered with, and therefore the election machines were not hacked.

hacked (Take from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/hacked)

past simple and past participle of hack

hack:

1) to cut into pieces in a rough and violent way, often without aiming exactly:
2) in football and rugby, to kick the ball away or to foul (= act against the rules) by kicking another player in the leg:
3) to get into someone else's computer system without permission in order to find out information or do something illegal:
4) to use someone else's phone system without permission, especially to listen to their spoken messages:
5) to manage to deal successfully with something:
6) to ride a horse for pleasure

One Brow said...

bmiller,
We have standards.

I'm not worried about not qualifying for membership to a group that admits Matt Gaetz, Majorie Taylor Greene, and Louie Gohmert.

Starhopper said...

Not to mention the Big Liar in Chief, our former, loser president.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

Your problem is that you can't be fair because you put your party/tribe above all else. You and your fellow leftists accuse everyone that disagrees with them of lying. You've just told me that it's reasonable to question the 2020 elections but still claim everyone that does so is lying. That goes beyond "not being fair".

I cannot vote for a candidate from the party of death. If that's partisan, then yes, my family and I stand for life.

bmiller said...

Looks like the UK is taking lessons from Garland.

bmiller said...

OB,

OK. Every statement that you disagree with is a lie. Because you know everything and everyone's intentions.

And here we thought atheists didn't believe in God.

Starhopper said...

"you put your party/tribe above all else"

This, from the person who cannot recall ever voting for a Democrat, writing about a person who's just demonstrated he's voted for both parties multiple times. Amazing, the lack of self awareness!

bmiller said...

Prosecutor:

Judge,

Just because the police did not maintain chain of custody of the murder weapon there is no evidence that what we are saying is the murder weapon has been tampered with.


Judge:

There is also no evidence that it hasn't been tampered with. Without chain of custody there is no way to ascertain whether it has or has not been tampered with. Therefore this piece of evidence is thrown out.

Ballots without CoC should not have been certified. They should have not been counted.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

I didn't ever vote for Moloch directly either. If Dems stopped supporting him, I might be persuaded to give them a second look. As it is:

Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,

I guess you must think that serving God early in life and the Devil later in life makes you an independent.

Martin said...

bmiller,

Serving the GOP is serving the Devil, as the GOP's purpose is to cut taxes for the rich, cut services for the poor, despise half of their fellow citizens, and worship guns: https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/459296-christians-cannot-serve-both-god-and-the-gop/

Now what?

bmiller said...

And just so you know.

No one but you believes you're non-partisan....and not even you when you're honest with yourself.

bmiller said...

Martin,

Good to see that you're an expert on the Devil. Must be from all your palling around with him on your mushroom trips.

bmiller said...

And BTW, the author you linked to is making the same stale mistakes that all socialists make while trying to tie socialism to Christianity. One trick ponies.

Martin said...

bmiller,

If the core message of the gospels is to love your neighbor unconditionally and give to the poor, then when I read the behavior of Bishop Myriel in the beginning of Les Miserables, it's pretty recognizably Christlike. He's sleeping on straw so that he can give his bed to the poor!

When I watch Republicans, all I see is worship of the wealthy, hatred of the lazy poors who don't pull themselves up by their bootstraps, worship of the NRA and fetuses, and hatred of their fellow citizens.

As for socialism, that just emphasizes what I said above: Republicans hate socialism because it helps the lazy non-bootstrapping poors.

I really don't see anything even remotely Christlike in the modern GOP.

bmiller said...

Democrats 2022 preserving democracy

bmiller said...

Martin,

Looks to me that you're the hater. You should get to know Christ and give up your hate.

bmiller said...

Liberals used to be for free speech. Lately they want to compel people to say things against their interests:

In National Institute of Family Life Advocates v. Becerra, a 5-4 majority of the court overturned a California statute that required anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers to inform clients where they could obtain free or inexpensive abortions — something the centers regard as homicide.

Starhopper's clan.

Starhopper said...

"No one but you believes you're non-partisan."

Not sure who this was addressed to, but in the final analysis, NO ONE is non-partisan. If you prefer potato salad to rice, that's being partisan. If you think Vaughan Williams is a better composer than Rachmaninov, you're being partisan. If you have an opinion on tax policies, well.. step up to partisanship.

bmiller said...

Not sure who this was addressed to, but in the final analysis, NO ONE is non-partisan.

Thanks for admitting it. But my point was that you put it as an overriding priority to everything else.

It's analogous to saying that rice and Rachmaninov (and their supporters) are liars because other people think they are superior to potato salad and Williams.

One Brow said...

bmiller,

OK. Every statement that you disagree with is a lie. Because you know everything and everyone's intentions.

I know the difference between "stolen" and "influenced", and the people who substituted the former for the latter were lying about what Democrats thought.

Prosecutor:

That is, a person who has to provide evidence that is beyond all reasonable doubt, because the defendant is will deprived of various rights if found guilty.

Ballots without CoC should not have been certified. They should have not been counted.

Ballots are not expected to be individually certified beyond all reasonable doubt, and since to throw away ballots deprives voters of their right to vote, there needs to be an explicit reason to doubt the authenticity of a ballot. So, it's the complete opposite expectation.

bmiller said...

OB,

When people use words in a different sense than you think they are using them, that is not them lying. It's you not knowing how to read.

Likewise with your ignorance of Chain of Custody.

Starhopper said...

I for one do not want my vote thrown out because somebody else screwed up along the way. As long as I have done everything correctly, my vote deserves to be counted, chain of custody be damned.

Limited Perspective said...

One Brow,

Earlier in the comments I wrote the Democrats claimed the 2016 election was hacked. Your response was that they were referring to the DNC being hacked. We both knew what were talking about.

When I made a distinction between an election and a fund raising committee, you now want a more specific definition of "hacked." We earlier knew what we are discussing and we both know now what we are discussing. We both know the election was not hacked. That was a lie. I understand how difficult it is for people to accept what they believed was a lie.

I feel sorry for you that you accepted the Democratic Party Russian conspiracy theory, the full-throated election denial, and and the nonsense that somehow election denial is something different from 2017-2020 than what it was in 2020-2021.

As far as calling someone a liar, you have made that accession against me. I don't know if you are a lair or not. I try not to call people a lair, because I don't know what they honestly believe when they repeat lies. I do know election denial was common among top Democratic Party elected officials and commentators. The claim the 2016 election was hacked is a lie but I am uncertain if the people who repeat that lie are themselves liars.

Limited Perspective said...

I am sympathetic to questions about the 2020 election, but I am unconvinced and accept the results. Part of the reason I am sympathetic is the Trump = Hitler position of people like Crazy Star. If I thought Hitler were coming to power in the United States, I would do all in my power to stop that, including cheat. Hitler ruling America would be worth any law breaking or even violence on my part to save the country. Democrats were demented over Trump and wouldn't surprise me if they figured out a way to cheat.

I believe the average American would be better off with Trump in office over Biden. I don't really like Trump, I agree with most of his critics (except the crazy =Hitler type) on the kind of man he is. I will not support him if he runs again but will vote for him (as if it matters in California) over dufus Joe.

Starhopper said...

Well, I for one have never made the claim that the 2016 election was "hacked". I did say (and still maintain) that it was influenced (although not decisively so) by Russian interference. Call this a "Russian conspiracy theory" if you wish - I call it a fact.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

I for one do not want my vote thrown out because somebody else screwed up along the way. As long as I have done everything correctly, my vote deserves to be counted, chain of custody be damned.

I also want my vote to be counted as long as I have done everything correctly. That is exactly what CoC is set up to ensure. Without it no one can tell if it's actually my vote that gets counted or a fraudulent ballot. Someone may have screwed up, or someone may stuffed in a bunch of fake ballots. Do you really not understand this concept?

bmiller said...

Call this a "Russian conspiracy theory" if you wish - I call it a fact.

By those standards it's a fact that the 2020 election was influenced by election fraud. Yet you whine loudly about the "Russian conspiracy theory" but not the "2020 election fraud".

Why?

Because you're hyper-partisan? Don't answer. I got it figured out.

Starhopper said...

What fraud? After 2 years of whining about non-existent election fraud, no one has yet to come forth with even the smallest shred of reputable evidence that there was any. You'd think that after all this time, someone would have come up with something, anything... but instead //crickets//. There is more evidence for a second shooter behind the grassy knoll that there is for 2020 election fraud.

bmiller said...

Here are the cases just in AZ. Bubble boy ;-)

Starhopper said...

Oh, wow. 29 cases! Out of how many million?

That's not evidence of systemic fraud. In fact, their low number is evidence that there was NOT systemic fraud in the 2020 election.

But wait, maybe there's hope for you yet. If you think that 29 fraudulent votes equate to systemic fraud, maybe just maybe we could convince you that systemic racism exists in this country by laying out the hundreds of millions of verifiable racist incidents on the books.

I can see it now... bmiller - the St. Paul of Critical Race Theory. Having seen the light, he becomes champion of CRT wherever he goes and to whomever he speaks.

bmiller said...

Starhopper,

You missed my point.

With the current arrests, the 2020 election was influenced by voter fraud as much as the 2016 election was influenced by "Russian Interference". That is, not influential in the final outcome in either race at all. Yet you complain about one, but mock people who complain about the other. This is known as hypocracy. Something Democrats seem proud of.




I didn't say there was evidence of "systemic fraud"

bmiller said...

Sorry,

This was irrelevant to my post:
I didn't say there was evidence of "systemic fraud"

It would have been a distracting quibble that I started out with but then figured out it was a quibble.

Starhopper said...

So let me see if I understand you correctly. You are now saying that that the 2020 election was fair, though perhaps marred by insignificant issues that amount to little more than a rounding error. You admit that Trump lost fair and square and Biden is the legitimately elected president?

Whew! Glad that's settled!

bmiller said...

Brazil just had an election. The results came out within a day.

Why can't the US, the most advanced nation on earth, do that? Why does it take weeks?
Something is whacky.

Starhopper said...

Unfortunately, the Trump clone down there is refusing to concede. They may yet have their own "January 6th" in Brazil. Our former president's poison is infecting the entire globe.

bmiller said...

So let me see if I understand you correctly.

No you don't understand.

I agree with you that audits should have been done in 4 states. They were only done in only 1 state. That state found that 740,000 did not follow prescribed CoC where the vote total difference was ~10,000 votes. So no one knows if those votes were legitimate or not according to that state's rules. Since the audits you and I agree should have been done in the other 3 states were not done, we can't know with assurance the results in those states we done per the rules either. Especially with such a large anomaly in the first state.

So the election was marred by significant issues.

Now can I count on you not claiming that Russia interfered with the 2016 election?
🤔

bmiller said...

refusing to concede

You mean Al Gore circa 2000?

bmiller said...

France counts in a day too.

Why can't the US do this again? Should be a law.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 316   Newer› Newest»