Conservatives and voting/election bills

[homersapien 11,440]

23 hours ago, pensacolatiger said:

Bachelors in EE, Masters in IE.

I don't believe that for a second.

[pensacolatiger 313]

I’ll take that as a compliment.  Maybe I outworked my limited IQ potential to achieve two engineering degrees😁

 

Or maybe you’re making the mistake of assuming inferior intelligence is the only possible reason someone could disagree with your opinion?  

[pensacolatiger 313]

On 1/31/2022 at 3:24 PM, CoffeeTiger said:

https://www.berkshireeagle.com/news/local/williams-prof-disavows-own-finding-of-mishandled-gop-ballots/article_9cfd4228-2e03-11eb-b2ac-bb9c8b2bfa7f.html

 

Exactly, So no proof or evidence of anything. Just a self admitted Conservative mathematician who made a 'deduction' based on a small, flawed survey that itself was based on data provided to him by the Trump administration. And even if you accept this guys analysis,  A lot of people along side him have said there "May" have been fraudulent ballots....follow up investigations and recounts have found no evidence that they are correct.

 

Now how about that Arizona business you claimed? 

 

 

Because these vote drops didn't happen the way you say or think . You just don't understand how votes are counted, processed, and reported. This is like Facebook meme level stuff. 

 

 

But he did...

It was the most participated election in US history. 

Donald Trump 2020 got the 2nd most votes in US history, 11mill more than he got in 2016 and also more than Obama. 

 

 

Actually, the statistical analysis is a stronger piece of evidence than anything the state of PA has submitted as rebuttal.  Until an actual audit is performed…….lol, your mind is set anyway.  If you believe Biden received 81M legitimate votes, there’s nothing else to discuss with you

[pensacolatiger 313]

Forgot to add this…..

 

https://rumble.com/vtt0is-confirmed-25000-counterfeit-ballots-included-in-az-audit-count.html

[SaltyTiger 7,859]

On 1/31/2022 at 2:38 PM, pensacolatiger said:

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/related/proposals/ajr120

We understand there was a resolution. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,169]

7 hours ago, pensacolatiger said:

Actually, the statistical analysis is a stronger piece of evidence than anything the state of PA has submitted as rebuttal.  Until an actual audit is performed…….lol,

Well, like I showed you the very guy who did that ‘statistical analysis’ says his findings don’t show or prove fraud like you are claiming it does.

audits and recounts have been performed. You just won’t accept the findings. 

 

7 hours ago, pensacolatiger said:

 

your mind is set anyway.  If you believe Biden received 81M legitimate votes, there’s nothing else to discuss with you

Yeah, it’s not easy to discuss things with people when you have no actual argument. 
 

Even the most crazy, hardcore Republicans in this forum won’t come right out and say “the election was fraudulent or stolen” because they know they can’t back it up.
 

You are incredible though…it’s like finding an actual, honest ‘flat earth’ believer.  I don’t know if you are being genuinely honest or it you’re trolling here. 

 

 

[pensacolatiger 313]

11 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Well, like I showed you the very guy who did that ‘statistical analysis’ says his findings don’t show or prove fraud like you are claiming it does.

audits and recounts have been performed. You just won’t accept the findings. 

 

Yeah, it’s not easy to discuss things with people when you have no actual argument. 
 

Even the most crazy, hardcore Republicans in this forum won’t come right out and say “the election was fraudulent or stolen” because they know they can’t back it up.
 

You are incredible though…it’s like finding an actual, honest ‘flat earth’ believer.  I don’t know if you are being genuinely honest or it you’re trolling here. 

 

 

You’re amazing, never change.  It’s like you’ve mainlined cnn/npr for 12 months and been shielded from all data or reality.  I’d ask if you voted for the worst president in US history, but it’s clear, you’d flaunt it.  Because cnn/npr told you things are better now.

 

Dont watch the new D’Souza documentary, there’s too much in it that your mind would have to develop alternate realities for, it could be dangerous for you.  

[homersapien 11,440]

20 hours ago, pensacolatiger said:

I’ll take that as a compliment.  Maybe I outworked my limited IQ potential to achieve two engineering degrees😁

 

Or maybe you’re making the mistake of assuming inferior intelligence is the only possible reason someone could disagree with your opinion?  

All possibly true. 

Or maybe your one of those engineers - the one who resides out on the far end of the bell curve. 

 

Edited February 2, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,440]

1 hour ago, pensacolatiger said:

You’re amazing, never change.  It’s like you’ve mainlined cnn/npr for 12 months and been shielded from all data or reality.  I’d ask if you voted for the worst president in US history, but it’s clear, you’d flaunt it.  Because cnn/npr told you things are better now.

 

Dont watch the new D’Souza documentary, there’s too much in it that your mind would have to develop alternate realities for, it could be dangerous for you.  

So - just to be clear - you're actually buying into Trump's contention that he actually won the election?

Edited February 2, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,440]

1 hour ago, pensacolatiger said:

You’re amazing, never change.  It’s like you’ve mainlined cnn/npr for 12 months and been shielded from all data or reality.  I’d ask if you voted for the worst president in US history, but it’s clear, you’d flaunt it.  Because cnn/npr told you things are better now.

 

Dont watch the new D’Souza documentary, there’s too much in it that your mind would have to develop alternate realities for, it could be dangerous for you.  

So you think there's data/stastical evidence available to prove Trump won the election if only the liberal media like CNN/NPR would recognize it?

Your not helping your case.  That's crazy. 

And then top it off by referencing Dinesh D'ouza?? 

(But you certainly nailed the "alternate realities" part.)

Edited February 2, 2022 by homersapien

[CoffeeTiger 5,169]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

So you think there's data/stastical evidence available to prove Trump won the election if only the liberal media like CNN/NPR would recognize it?

Your not helping your case.  That's crazy. 

And then top it off by referencing Dinesh D'ouza?? 

(But you certainly nailed the "alternate realities" part.)

 

Look at the links he gives to "prove" his points. He links to poorly written, unsourced Rumble articles and then wants to dismiss people for getting info from NPR? 

 

This dude's completely off the rails. 

[pensacolatiger 313]

I don’t have to reply now, homer is so geared up he’s answering his own questions.🤣

 

one thing I do find interesting, I claimed there is evidence of fraud.  I also pointed to the painfully obvious assertion that in no universe does this effin potato get 81M votes.  This country has a good supply of morons, but it’s not that far gone.  Did trump win?  Who knows?  But there’s more evidence of fraud than not.  If “muh cnn/npr” doesn’t allow you to have an open mind about that, that’s ok.  My day is equally pleasant.

[pensacolatiger 313]

“Poorly written” and “coffeetiger”, I had a feeling you might be wearing a little beret w/ tight rolled pants whilst angrily chastising evil capitalists that prevent you from making a decent living w/ your English degree.  This board is so effin awesome, I had no idea I could find people so entertaining.

[SaltyTiger 7,859]

22 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

Did trump win?  Who knows?  But there’s more evidence of fraud than not

Homer asked you to show it. What I saw was bull shet. Understand that I usually disagree with Brother Homer and Coffee. You are embarrassing.

[pensacolatiger 313]

12 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Homer asked you to show it. What I saw was bull shet. Understand that I usually disagree with Brother Homer and Coffee. You are embarrassing.

If “there’s no evidence of widespread fraud” is easier for you to believe than all of the loose ends that have been surfacing, I don’t know what else could be said to you.  
 

You’re embarrassed of someone you don’t know?  Kind of weird, maybe think of me less?  I think the three of you should stay away from political discussions for awhile, seems to make you upset and have weird feelings for people you don’t know

[SaltyTiger 7,859]

4 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

If “there’s no evidence of widespread fraud” is easier for you to believe than all of the loose ends that have been surfacing, I don’t know what else could be said to you.  
 

You’re embarrassed of someone you don’t know?  Kind of weird, maybe think of me less?  I think the three of you should stay away from political discussions for awhile, seems to make you upset and have weird feelings for people you don’t know

Ok, embarrassing a bad choice of words. Just know I asked you question and you posted a resolution that was never voted on per AP fact check. Trying to help you out. Carry on.

[pensacolatiger 313]

I understand your point.  The fact check thing makes it sound like it’s dead in the water.  But as you stated, it was a resolution and there’s a strong collection of state lawmakers that desire to see it through.  See Wisconsin’s recent decision to sign on to the convention of the states proposal for a reference of their current state of mind.