Cont: Trump et al continued “2020 election” conspiracy theories

Status
Not open for further replies.
quadraginta said:
Nixon was a Never Trumper RINO. He probably had an apartment in the basement of Comet Ping Pong, too.

It must be true. I read it on the Internet.
Click to expand...

Nixon was unquestionably a Never Trumper--during his entire political career he did not once support Donald Trump's presidency.
 
SezMe said:
Tuberbille (the Senator-elect who does not know the three branches of the federal government!!) talks tough in that first link but wait till Moscow Mitch has a friendly chat with him: "You know that committee assignment you really want?", MItch asks, "I'd give it to you now but it depends on a certain vote on Jan. 6th. Ya catch my drift, there, Senator-elect?"
Click to expand...

Nah--Mitch trying to have it both ways.

"I would never try to interfere with the legitimate election process. But some of the fellas, they're a little unruly ya know? Can't quite be sure what they'll do."
 
MRC_Hans said:
Insane, of course, but ... what exactly would they expect to achieve? Do they think MORE people would vote for Trump the second time?

Hans
Click to expand...

The election I saw our military run in Afghanistan was a dumpster fire. I'm not sure why he thinks the military would be any better stopping election fraud than the people who ran the first election. It was rampant and under their noses.
 
Trump tweets

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump https://washex.am/3nwaBCe. A great report by Peter. Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election.

Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!
 
Craig4 said:
The election I saw our military run in Afghanistan was a dumpster fire. I'm not sure why he thinks the military would be any better stopping election fraud than the people who ran the first election. It was rampant and under their noses.
Click to expand...

What is your evidence for this?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump tweets

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump https://washex.am/3nwaBCe. A great report by Peter. Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election.

Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!
Click to expand...

36 pages! Wow that proves it, I mean if it had 32 pages I’d say there could have been some doubt but 36?! No way.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump tweets

Peter Navarro releases 36-page report alleging election fraud 'more than sufficient' to swing victory to Trump https://washex.am/3nwaBCe. A great report by Peter. Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election.

Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!
Click to expand...

Lemme guess, filled with the same sort of BS stats that treat mail in ballots as the same population as in-person voting and the 2016 election as the same as the 2020 election?
 
Going through this Navarro text (I know, but it's raining), it looks more like an exercise in "How to get examples of all logical fallacies in a 36 page text, and illustrate them with lies."

I like this one.
On page 4, he writes:
At the same time, the Trump-Pence ticket had substantial and seemingly insurmountable leads in
Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. If these leads held, these four key battleground
states would propel President Trump to a decisive 294 to 244 victory in the Electoral College.
Shortly after midnight, however, as a flood of mail-in and absentee ballots began entering the
count, the Trump red tide of victory began turning Joe Biden blue. As these mail-in and absentee
ballots were tabulated, the President’s large leads in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and
Wisconsin simply vanished into thin Biden leads.
Click to expand...
So the argument is: "Trump led at first, so he should have won these 4 states."
But he continues with:
There was an equally interesting story unfolding in Arizona and Nevada. While Joe Biden was
ahead in these two additional battleground states on election night – by just over 30,000 votes in
Nevada and less than 150,000 votes in Arizona – internal Trump Campaign polls predicted the
President would close these gaps once all the votes were counted. Of course, this never happened.
Click to expand...
So the arguments here is: "Biden led at first, but we had polls that showed Trump would close the gaps once all the votes were counted, so Trump should have won these states too."

Notice the "once all the votes were counted" condition, which for some mysterious reason only appears in the second part.

https://bannonswarroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf
 
bonzombiekitty said:
Lemme guess, filled with the same sort of BS stats that treat mail in ballots as the same population as in-person voting and the 2016 election as the same as the 2020 election?
Click to expand...

The first "statistical anomaly" he mentions is (page 24) :
In the 2020 presidential race, Joe Biden received a disproportionately high percentage of the mail-in and absentee ballots.
Click to expand...
Indeed beats me how that is possible. It's almost as if someone had encouraged the Trump voters not to use mail-in ballots.
 
Last edited:
Delphic Oracle said:
Naval flight terminology where the LSO (landing signal operator) is requesting if the pilot can see the "ball" in the Optical Landing System (there's more to it, yes).

More colloquially it refers to "committing to a course of action at a make-or-break moment."
Click to expand...

Yes your explanation makes more sense in the context. I stand corrected!
 
Captain_Swoop said:
A great report by Peter. Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election.
Click to expand...

This sort of thing has come up a few times, and it stil drives me wild. I'm perfectly willing to be corrected by wiser minds, but the sort of thing they are talking about is not 'statistically impossible' at all. Almost nothing is 'statistically impossible'. Improbable, certainly, but not impossible.

They possibly mean 'mathematically impossible' which is a whole different thing. (also also unproven, but hey, let's not sweat the details)
 
Trump Tweets

He didn’t win the Election. He lost all 6 Swing States, by a lot. They then dumped hundreds of thousands of votes in each one, and got caught. Now Republican politicians have to fight so that their great victory is not stolen. Don’t be weak fools!
 
Firestone said:
So the argument is: "Trump led at first, so he should have won these 4 states."
Click to expand...

I know you all know this, but just to be clear: Trump never "led" in those states. He never had more votes than Biden (because Biden had the lead in all the mail-in votes, which came in before election day, and so he always had more votes than Trump).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom