Voter fraud is an incredibly rare phenomenon according to election officials of both parties? Say it ain’t so!

This is the biggest case of "nu uh, didn't happen" I've ever seen.
4m3c5s.jpg (click to show)

1. Hearsay isn't proof.

2. You sit on a throne of lies.

https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-check-election-dead-voter-claims-fc7ba254fd37059f63ea764c18c2a4cb

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/william-bradley-dead-voters-mi/

3. Wow! It turns out if you disparage mail in ballots over and over again, your political opponents end up using it overwhelmingly, which will shift the results blue. It's not like election experts have been predicting such a phenomenon for f**king weeks, you absolute moron. Red mirage ring any bells?

4. You mean the fabricated (dare I say fraudulent) claim from Project Veritas about Ilhan Omar where the guy was bribed to spew horseshit?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/16/fact-check-project-veritas-no-proof-voter-fraud-scheme-link-ilhan-omar/3584614001/

https://www.fox9.com/news/subject-of-project-veritas-voter-fraud-story-says-he-was-offered-bribe

5. You mean this BS?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/nov/04/facebook-posts/social-media-post-falsely-claims-wisconsin-found-1/

6. This claim can mean a lot of things, but I'm assuming you're talking about ballots that took a long time to process. This is entirely the fault of Republican state legislatures. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/05/trump-blames-democrats-late-counted-mail-ballots-he-should-blame-gop/

7. Because they would suppress the vote to prevent something that is astronomically rare?

8. Voter fraud is infinitesimally rare, and of the very few cases of voter fraud committed, it's NON-PARTISAN. But go with anything that fits your deluded narrative.

https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/20-015.pdf

Well, that was tiring. Nothing you said was remotely substantive or intelligent in any way. It's just the same old debunked conspiracies from facebook that are regurgitated unquestionably by dim NPC conservatives like you.

Oh f**k Timber, why the hell are you so willfully stupid?

1. Literally a five minute google search proved that the 1960 election wasn't stolen. And you can't compare an election 60 years ago to an election today. This REEKS of desperation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/08/heres-a-voter-fraud-myth-richard-daley-stole-illinois-for-john-kennedy-in-the-1960-election/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27550168?seq=1

2. These are cases of elections centuries ago. CENTURIES. Those elections literally have no bearing on the 2020 election. The desperation is showing.

3. The author in this article is just ABSOLUTELY MALDING over the election and I love every second of it. Anyway, he cited the already debunked JFK thing and then he cited the Al Franken senate campaign, which a bipartisan board of canvassers decided unanimously in favor of Franken. Additionally, this race was incredibly close by 300 or so votes. To even suggest this is remotely comparable to the 2020 election where Trump is trailing by tens of thousands of votes in multiple swing states is borderline journalistic malpractice. The next case wasn't even election fraud, but a fake corruption charge. Politicians lie all the time. That race isn't even relevant. The next case of "voter fraud" was once again, a decades old race in 1956, where the Rhode Island supreme court gave Dennis Roberts the victory, not voter fraud. And once gain, the margin was razor tight, which isn't comparable at all to the 2020 election. Say what you will about the court ruling, but it's disengenuous to say that voter fraud was at play here. Ironically enough, that's exactly what Trump's trying to do. The rest of the article was just him getting triggered over losing, except at the end with a BS claim about Wisconsin turnout. Probably a copium overdose. Sucks for him, I guess. Additionally, the entire premise that democrats cheat more than republicans is objectively wrong, because in the astronomically small number of cases of voter fraud, it was non partisan.

https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/20-015.pdf
https://www.factcheck.org/2009/01/mining-the-minnesota-recount/
https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/09/06/political-scene-cautionary-tale-about-rhode-islandrsquos-elections/113816104/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/05/fact-check-wisconsin-voter-turnout-line-past-elections/6176028002/

This seething, unhinged response was about what I expected from you: an abundance of fallacies and a lack of any meaningful substance.

1. I brushed off your sources because they were from 200 f**king years ago. Some of the stories were about black people being intimidated at the polls or armed revolts for f**ks sake . None of these elections have any relevance to the 2020 election. Nada. Zilch. And it's incredibly amusing when you lecture me about arrogantly brushing sources away with the wave of my hand, when you literally do that approximately...ALL THE F**KING TIME. How many times have you dismissed any source critical of your beliefs as "leftist" without bothering to read them? But I'm the one whose unfairly brushing off sources. More hypocrisy and projection from you.

2. Frankly I don't give a damn what Andrea Mitchell says. You paint this elaborate straw man that I must unquestionably, sheepishly believe EVERY word that that MSM anchors say and that the MSM is leftist. Both cannot be farther from the truth. My allegiance is to the truth. And the truth is that the 1960 election was not stolen. I don't care if a MSM anchor says otherwise. The facts disagree with her. If someone says that 2+2=5, I don't care if that person is a leftist, a liberal, a conservative, a fascist, a journalist, etc. THEY'RE STILL WRONG. But keep on doing false appeals to authority.

3. Your next diatribe once again paints an elaborate strawman that I said there's no evidence of voter fraud. I never said that. I said that voter fraud is astronomically rare. Of course cases of voter fraud occur, and can overturn tight local races or occasionally put a senate seat in jeopardy. But we're not talking about a local race, or a senate race. We're talking about the 2020 general election, where Joe Biden is leading by the order of tens of thousands of votes in multiple swing states. You would need a mass, coordinated, multi-state effort to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of votes. That has not happened. Not. even. close.

I believe the current dose of copium given to you may simply be inadequate at addressing your blind rage. Maybe double the dose each day and then it would help?

1. "Yes, everyone who disagrees with Bobbie the Know-It-All is 'seething, unhinged.' Not Bobbie. No, never Bobbie."

Call me crazy but...I'm pretty sure calling me a "silly twat", and someone who has my "thumb up your (my) ass, prancing around like a spastic clown high on meth" is unhinged. You've called tamer responses by me unhinged before, so stop projecting.

2. For the second time, no, I'm not saying there is no evidence of voter fraud at all. What I AM saying is that voter fraud is so astronomically rare that it will not meaningfully change the results of the 2020 election. But keep on straw manning.

3. I never brushed off any of your sources. That's your fantastical delusion. I, unlike you actually read sources, and I realized that the first two were listing contested election from 200 years ago, and thus is irrelevant to the 2020 election. This isn't an extraordinarily difficult criticism to process and understand.

4. "That's some mighty fine projection, Bobbie. Mighty fine. The only one who has said anything like this...is you."

Evidence.....?

5. "Someday, Bobbie, you'll learn how to debate like an adult, and not meltdown because someone refutes your arguments."

Genuine question: Do you hate yourself?

Because EVERY SINGLE accusation you fling at me, applies to you way more accurately. It's actually insane how often you project. You sanctimoniously lecture me about how to debate like an adult, while going on an unhinged insult-filled diatribe. You accuse me of melting down when you call me a "silly twat" and someone who has my "thumb up your (my) ass, prancing around like a spastic clown high on meth." Because you're totally cool, calm, and rational. GTFOH. Finally, it's hilarious how you think you've refuted anything, because all of your responses have been chock full of insults and devoid of substance. I have a suspicion that you may not have been taking your daily recommended copium doses. It's really important that you do.

Haha you literally said this 3 days ago with a response which was in no way unhinged.

"Calm down, Bobbie, you're sounding a little unhinged."

And now the second I say your response, where you insulted and cursed at me multiple times is unhinged, you think it's "comedy gold." And then on top of all that, you claim that my response is actually a melt down. If you went to a stand-up act and got heckled, I bet you'd claim the comedian was likewise was "melting down."

P.S: you were straw manning me :)

1. Insulting and cursing at someone in the place of actual substantive arguments means someone is unhinged. And that someone is you at this moment.

2. I never dismissed any of your sources because they don't fit my world view. That's a figment of your imagination. I read them and explained why they're irrelevant. You're dismissing my criticism.

3. Because you did strawman me.

4. The sources that I provided debunk what Andrea Mitchell said. That isn't a dismissal, it's a refutation.

5. No one denying that election fraud is real. However, it is astronomically rare, and is no where near large enough to change the outcome of the 2020 election.

6. Straw man alert!

1. So I take it you haven't read my two sources debunking what Andrea Mitchell said then.

2. Care to explain how I'm misusing the straw man fallacy?

1.Yes, I think something that has a 0.0003% to 0.0025% of happening is astronomically rare. I know I know, it's unhinged for me to say that.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

2. The Heritage Foundation data a) wasn't accurate b)happened over decades and c) even if taken at face value, it proves that voter fraud is, indeed astronomically rare. Over 3 billion votes were cast in the time period that the Heritage Foundation covered, so your source is barely convincing.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/Report_HeritageAnalysis_Final.pdf

3. Given that voter fraud is astronomically rare, I would like for Trump to concede so Biden can actually transition and receive intelligence briefings instead dragging out a futile process that'll inflame tensions within the US. Have you considered that before? Hillary Clinton did this. Mitt Romney did this. John McCain did this. Why can't Trump?

4. The 2000 election was an incredibly close election decide by hundreds of votes. It's not even remotely comparable to the 2020 election.

"Yay for fictional, fabricated numbers to "support" your point! Kudos!"

https://history.house.gov/Institution/Election-Statistics/Election-Statistics/

I mean, google is free dude.

1. Straw man alert!

2. Ironically, the Heritage Foundation database numbers supports my claim that voter fraud is an astronomically rare and over inflated phenomenon. Thank you for proving my point good sir!

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/Report_HeritageAnalysis_Final.pdf

Continuation of 3: I too, could conceivably cherry pick instances of Republicans committing outright voter fraud like in North Carolina and California, but I'm not a partisan hack.

(I could point to voter suppression tho, but that's a discussion for a later time)