Election fraud, how would we know?

The same way it was clear when Democrats stole elections in the past (consider Daley in Chicago, or Tammany Hall in New York). You would audit the list of who voted and see errors, You would see widely different results in places where Democrats count the votes and Republicans do. There would be inconsistencies.
Note that in Georgia, a state under Republican control, the audits showed no errors. What the results throughout the country showed is that many core Republicans (affluent, business-oriented, often suburban and in no way deplorable) supported the ticket (the Republicans won most Senate races, gained in the House and did well in the state legislatures) BUT DID NOT SUPPORT TRUMP. This suggests Trump lost not due to fraud, but because he ignored a major part of his base,

So, TVP, is apparently of the opinion that the judges in over 60 cases, including judges Trump appointed, Bill Barr, Lindsay Graham, the guy who was at Homeland Security, Republican Governors, and Secretary of States, including numerous others who in many cases were strong supporters of Trump, apparently all get their info from “Mainstream Media.”

The only media that lied about this election was right-wing media. What you call the MSM did not lie about the election.

The real question is how would Trump supporters ever know when Trump is lying.
The answer is they never would and they don’t care. He lies and lies and lies and they believe every single word that he says. He lied at least 100 times in his speech on Jan 6th.

They believe that he is the sole arbiter of truth and he is all knowing, all seeing and all truthful.
There are no facts . Nor is there any need for evidence. Nobody can tell him he is wrong.

Everyone from election workers right up to the Attorney General of the US are part of the cabal and the steal because everyone who disagrees with him is automatically a liar and fraud.

That TVOP even entertains the idea that an election can be stolen and that the media would simply go along with it shows just how far trumps repeated lies have inserted themselves into the Republican party.

Would Chris Cuomo and Rachel Maddow show any of the damning information that supports a stolen election? THE ANSWER IS 100% YES, YES, YES.

@Quayboardwarrior and @everyone
The question is not what evidence would demonstrate fraud. And the question clearly is not whether or not there was any fraud in this case.

The question, and a very well noted one, is: Being that the information we receive, or are allowed to receive, is being so massively stifled, censored, misconstrued – and that those who even dare ask to give it a fair assessment as to their legitimacy, face intimidation and their livelihoods and rights obstructed (all fact) – thus, “THEORETICALLY”, “Election fraud, how would we know?

Ver well said jackk. It is very sad how so many here just can’t get out of their heads the lies they have been fed. Really, not worth arguing with TVP, Health, Syag and a few others. They will never actually address anything of substance and just keep on repeating nonsense and falsehood.

Lindsay Graham, a vocal Trump supporter said last Wednesday that the election was not stolen and if you think otherwise there is simply no way he can convince you because you believe lies.

There has to come a point where people recognize the difference between truth and fiction. Instead we have attacks on “liberals” on some theoretical election fraud, when in actuality we saw a concerted effort by conservative media, Trump, Cruz, and others to actually steal an election and then go on to incite a riot. There really is no conversation to be had here. The folks persisting with the lies will respond with more lies and accusations. That is just the way it goes when people get caught up in lies.

“Really, not worth arguing with TVP, Health, Syag and a few others. ”

Oh cut the garbage. You really are just a parrot, i knew to expect a post from you right after mine, my stalking friend. i was not talking about  election fraud I was talking about *both* sides being inflexible. It was a unifying comment, something you don’t seem to have much of a clue about so sorry for you .

Good life advice for you- If it’s not worth arguing then don’t.

Umm, that was the first line. The next one had my name in it. Probably just a typo 🙄

@akuperma , @emes nisht sheker , @jackk
שבעה דברים בגולם ושבעה בחכם. חכם … שואל כענין … וחלופיהן בגולם – אבות ה:ז
[There are] seven things [characteristic] in a man of imperfectly developed mind, and seven in a wise man: a wise man … *asks in accordance with the subject-matter* … and the reverse of these [are characteristic] in a man of imperfectly developed mind. Avos 5:7 (Sancino’s translation)

Now, if you have managed to read this far, and have been able to understand the quote above, then hear this: You are fools. This discussion has ZERO to do with whether or not this election was rigged or not, nothing to do with fraud or not, it’s not about proof or evidence or what happened last month.

Rather, the question being asked is…
Being that most media is left-leaning (fact), and being that currently we are witnessing never-before-seen levels of media and tech companies exercising their abilities to suppress those with dissenting opinions (fact) (whether that’s right, wrong or dangerous, or not), and despite, obviously, that individuals can still get their voices heard to varying degrees, but that is nothing compared to mass media bombarding your various devices with opposing sentiment (fact)… thus, “THEORETICALLY” how would the masses be expected to receive a fair account something which is not favoured by said media company.

If it makes you happier, you can imagine that everyone agrees with you that the elections were 100% squeaky clean, and that no-one smells a fish here, and even that everyone is with you that nobody “believes that [Trump] is the sole arbiter of truth and he is all knowing, all seeing and all truthful.”, and if you want, you can even imagine that the question switches the words “Rep.” for “Dem.”.

It is a THEORETICAL question.

Now, if you have anything of value to answer or add to this discussion, then please go right ahead. But don’t talk about the integrity of the election, nor your opinions of Trump nor those who side with him – that’s not the discussion. You fools.

@Shady >> how would the masses be expected to receive a fair account

I think you are asking a fair question and this question is behind the confused mass of protest. We had a complicated event with lots of rule changes comparing with usual elections + information blocks. Thus, it is impossible to prove – and impossible to reject – any hypothesis. With that, everyone is following their own biases and the society can not agree with anything.

I think these events help us understand “moris ayn” better. Public policies should be conducted in a way that assures people of integrity, rather than using “caveat emptor” approach – where the opposite side needs to prove misbehavior.

@emes_nisht_sheker
“If you can bear to hear the words you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools…”

People have a chazkus kashrus even goyim there is masiach lefi tumo and mirtas being cought as Rav Moshe says on chalav stam.

RE -“You are innocent until proven guilty. The election is honest until proven otherwise. Hamotzi mechavero alav horeyo.”

You actually have to read other Topics!
I posted a lot of proof in them.

Emes: I do not know whether there was “massive voter fraud” or not. I wasn’t there, as in all the places that there are issues being raised. I also understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty. But YOU also must understand that the fact that voter fraud cannot be proven (if that is the case) does not mean it didn’t happen. It just means that we can’t act on it. We can compare it to the OJ trial. OJ was aquitted on murder, but in a subsequent civil trial was found guilty of depriving the victims of civil rights.Well, did he kill them or not? the point is that there is a level of proof needed to to have soomething be found guilty in a court of law, but not having reached that level, does not mean that it didn’t happen. As such, anyone is free to believe what he wants, but not to act on it in a harmful way. So, you choose to believe that there was no fraud, and all the claims of people that say they saw fraud are lies. And you can believe that OJ did not kill his wife. the thing is, your startng point is that there was no fraud so you can believe the media, and you know there was no fraud because the media said so, unless you have a direct source of information that bypasses the media. Remember, no proof does not mean it didn’t happen.(also does not mean it did happen)
R’ E. Mirsas means that they fear the consequences of their actions. I don’t think that in this climate the Democrats fear any consequences, the same as they accused President Trump for the last four years.

correct. robots elect Biden.

yawn

So you are assuming that when the MSM responds that there is no proof, or that there proof is not valid, the MSM is telling the truth. Perhaps they are, but why should I believe them? This is not a court of law, that I need burden of proof. I would assume, given the last four years of Trump bashing, that that the MSM would not support anything that is pro Trump. The MSM need to earn the trust of the public before we can assume that they will have honest reporting with regard to Trump, and the whole Conservative Republican wing. The idea that the media is unbiased has not been true for as long as I can remember.

If tbe fraud is big enough to make a difference in the election we know there was fraud.

RE -“Health, kol haposel posel bemumo posel as quoted by you on another thread applies to you”

Very Mature reply!
Oh Btw, if you actually read my posts on other Topics, you’d see I quoted articles that prove Fraud.
It wasn’t my Proofs.
If you have any contrary Proofs, by all means, go over there and Argue.
IMHO, you have nothing.
But keep on living in your Little Dream World!

Edited

Health, how many times must we tell you I don’t have to prove no fraud? In any case it did not affect the result of the electiions as Biden won with an enormous margin. Even with Georgia and Arizona or Wisconsin deducted he still won. Michigan and Pennsylvania difference is too big.

If the Dems were politically smart, which they rarely are, they would get out front of the voting security issue and try to enact some legit type minimum standards for voter certification and ballot security. This can be done without “suppressing” legitimate voters. Ideally, we should move all elections online as several states have been doing for years but I doubt there are the votes for a federal mandate given that constitutionally, states really control the nuts and bolts of how elections are conducted.

Why would we assume there was only fraud on one side of the aisle? And why weren’t the fraudulent ballots democrat across the board? And why would republicans certify election results that didn’t favor their candidate? And why would republican appointed judges (many by DT)throw out any case presented to them? It all doesn’t make any sense to me?

I personally don’t trust any media, right or left. There is no unbiased media, as I said before. To use the expression, anything I read in any form of media I take with a grain of salt (or the whole saltshaker). The fact that the election was not overturned does not mean that fraud wasn’t there. I personally subscribe to the school of thought that elections are “too big to fail”. Once you overturn one election, there will be doubt cast on any election, past, present, and future. Sort of like when a policeman is caught falsifying evidence. It casts doubt on all his previous cases. Threfore, unless the fraud was so widespread and evident that all parties agree that it happened, the courts should throw the cases out even with the flimsiest of excuses. I believe that in many of the court cases in this election, that is exactly what happened, amnd while I may not be happy with the overall election situation, this is a case that for the greater long term good, we have to ignore the irregularities. If a court were to actually hear the evidence at an open trial, it could not ignore the evidence. So in many cases, based on what I am seeing in the media, the courts threw the case out (refused to take the case) so as not to have to deal with the terrifying possibility of overturning an election. Sort of the courts way of pleading the fifth.

eddiee – so the courts were not brave enough to actually look at the evidence? Is this the same evidence that lawyers refused to present in court because they were afraid they would lose their law licenses or is this secret evidence that no one knows about? There were over 60 cases lost. Don’t be ridiculous that all these judges were afraid to hear these cases. At least one poster here is happy with your justification (really a lie) as it lets her go on believing fraud without having to reconcile anything that shows this claim is based on thing air.

eddiee – I don’t know about you (I assume you get your info from partisan right-wing media), but myself I actually read some of the court decisions, I don’t rely on the media like apparently you seem to think everyone does.

If you actually read some of the court’s opinions, it would perhaps straighten you out. The reason why the right was able to persist with this lie, is they managed to convince all their followers to not look at the sources.

And to be clear, what you call the Mainstream Media did not lie about the election or court cases, only conservative media lied about it. In some of the court cases, lawyers representing Trump’s side, actually refused to present actual evidence of fraud despite publicly claiming there was evidence. When you look at other cases were evidence was presented and it was torn apart as being worthless, you would understand why most of what was called evidence by those you apparently believe was not worth the paper it was written on.

I saw a clip of bill barr clarifying that he did NOT say that there was no election fraud, he just said that the election wasn’t rigged. He even went on to say that there could very well have been fraud but that he was speaking purely in regard to the nationwide mechanical hardware system, seperate from what individual counties did on their own. I heard him say this shortly after his words went viral, being used to imply it was a fair election. I don’t understand why it’s been disregarded, why honest people would be afraid of claims like this. I do think that the cover ups have made me more suspicious than the disclosures.