Well yes I am, because the evidence is overwhelming for both things being absolutely true.
That shields you from any difficult analysis.
What is difficult? My premise is very accurate.
Instead, it’s just circular reasoning:
No it isn't. It's factually true. Biden *IS* a nasty corrupt piece of sh*t and he always was, going all the way back to the early 1970s when this idiot piece of sh*t led the effort to shut off funding to the South Vietnamese government and thereby precipitating their overthrow and the loss of the Vietnam war.
Biden is a horrible person and he's done horrible things in his private life (like having sex with his baby sitter who is now his wife Jill), showering with his daughter, and engaging in corrupt activities his entire time in Congress.
I addressed that point, too. It’s in my post if you trouble to read it. You’ll see that my post didn’t even try to look at types of fraud.
Yes, I noticed, and it now has me wondering why I should engage in a discussion with someone who has *NOT* looked at the evidence, and who shows no inclination to do so.
I was addressing only one particular argument: the claim that the overall numbers, by themselves, are proof of fraud. They simply aren’t.
I disagree. I also do not believe the official numbers. Your problem is that you simply accept what the liars in power tell you is true. I, on the other hand, have seen how the Obama administration started lying about inflation by changing how they calculate inflation, and they did so to cover up for his incompetence and stupidity in economic matters.
They will make the numbers seem reasonable *IF* your premise is that they are honest. I do not believe that at all. Here's an example of the sort of corruption we are dealing with.
A system that allows mail-in ballots provides an opportunity for fraud. In addition, however, it provides an opportunity for people (legitimate voters!) to vote even if they’re too sick or too busy or too lazy to go to the polling place on Election Day.
The legitimate numbers that this applies to is so small that it is absolutely not worth the cost of accommodating them. The increase in danger from the vote fraud/corruption thus allowed is simply not worth the benefit of making it easier for a teeny tiny minority of people to vote.
You can’t assume that EVERY mail-in ballot was fraudulent.
On another computer, I have a link to a video of a man involved in the Arizona audit of Maricopa county. He said that in 2016, Military ballots were 1,600. In 2020 they were 9,600. He also said that in 2020, 95% of the military ballots were for Biden. He also said they weren't returned in the form required. What he had examined as "military ballots" were printed copies of ballots on 8 x 11 sheets of plain printer paper. No chain of custody, no legitimate ballots, and way way way lopsided in results.
Now I study political Demographics and I have for a very long time, and Arizona already leans Republican, and the Military also leans Republican, and heavily so. It is completely nonsensical to believe that an increase of 6 times the volume accompanied by a 95% vote for a piece of sh*t like Biden is legitimate.
It is false and corrupt on the very face of it.
If, instead, you want to go around claiming that the Democrats somehow engineered 20 million fraudulent votes, though, you won’t be persuading anyone except those already committed.
Stop it. You are trying to rephrase the problem to support your claim that everything was legitimate. The margin of the election in Arizona and Georgia was something like 11,000 votes. Just the fraudulent Military votes in Maricopa county Arizona could have made up the winning margin. In Fulton County Georgia we have *VIDEO* of them committing the vote fraud. Just Ruby Freeman alone could have produced 11,000 fake votes for Biden.
Hillary won the popular vote, but the presidency is decided by just a little vote fraud in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada.
It only required the flipping of a few hundred thousand to change the results of a fair election.
Our problem here is that you’re reading too much into my posts, with the result that you’re disagreeing with things I never said.
A revealing exchange:
Me: “I addressed that point, too. It’s in my post if you trouble to read it. You’ll see that my post didn’t even try to look at types of fraud.”
You: “Yes, I noticed, and it now has me wondering why I should engage in a discussion with someone who has *NOT* looked at the evidence, and who shows no inclination to do so.”
I think you’re assuming that I’m arguing there was no fraud. I never said that. There are many, many allegations of fraud out there. I couldn’t address all of them without writing a book – and my posts were already very long. If you look at the other posts in this thread, nobody else tries to assess all the evidence about all the allegations, either.
With my limited mental capacity (plus not having the time to write a book), I chose to address one particular argument – the claim that the overall numbers are evidence of fraud. That argument fails. That’s why I wrote that “You have to look at the specific cases.” I reject the argument that “Biden got more votes than Obama nationwide so there must have been fraud.” The obvious next step is to go on to look at specific cases, like the points you make about Maricopa County and Georgia.
Here’s the key point: You can believe that there was fraud without accepting every single allegation that anyone anywhere makes.