About time to put this thread on ignore.

Well it does give me a break from working on taxes. And my mother’s taxes.

Yeah you still have to pay taxes when you’re dead.

Number5. Is this a sign of a developing memory impairment? Geez, you can't even get the insults straight.

I called you a "paid killer", not a "baby killer". But I suppose you may have killed some babies in Vietnam, unavoidable collateral damage you know.

It is true that Lucifer said you are veteran. Are you denying that now? Do tell. We are all anxious to hear you witness to the truth!

Now that's going too far. I was against the Vietnam War back when I was a teenaged hippie but I always HATED people calling our guys "baby killers".  Or dissing the vets in any manner at all. Most of them didn't ask to go and I'm not judging a combat vet for anything whatsoever when I nor anybody at home has first clue what it's like over there, and even as a stupid idiot teenager I understood that much.

If you dig all around you can deduce from what is implied and what is not said, that the shooting was a dispute between private parties, probably gang related.  It was not a “mass shooting” in the old, correct, understanding of the word where one or more nutbuckets go postal.  The woman killed was probably just in the line of fire and some of the “children” hit were probably only technically children but actually teenaged gangsters.

I can’t believe this whole argument is boiling down to the definition of fraud.

Okay here we go.  If you want to stick to a strict definition that fraud involves deception, then Peter is right that the unlawful changes in mail in voting isn’t technically fraud. The legal definition of fraud is misrepresentation of fact, usually involving buying or selling something of value.

A vote is something of value. So if you deceive on matters of fact, that would be for example, claiming you counted x number of legitimate votes. But if some of the ballots were illegitimate (for any number of reasons) then the illegitimate ballot is a misrepresentation of the fact of a vote. And therefore your total count x is false and also a misrepresentation of fact.

However if you changed the law to allow mail in ballots and all the mail in ballots were legitimate, but you obtained more votes that way because some voters were too fucking scared of a virus or just too lazy to come vote in person, then your count of x votes is true.  The law itself may be unconstitutional, but you did not misrepresent the fact of how many votes you obtained.

So I see Peter’s point if he wants to parse apart the difference between how many actual fraudulent votes Biden got meaning the ballot itself was false, vs how many were excess mail in but otherwise legitimate ballots, then fine.

But the truth is that mail in ballots makes it much easier to commit actual fraud, that is, to use it as an opportunity to manufacture false (fraudulent) ballots.  We know for a fact this happened. It seems the debate is over whether it happened enough to change the election result.

It appears that the original post is asserting that there isn’t evidence thereof. Or at least if there was, True the Vote lost it somehow.

Those of us convinced that allowing mass mail in ballots did result in the election result being different than it would have been otherwise point to a lot of circumstantial evidence, but no smoking gun that has been properly adjudicated by a court. And also plenty of statistical anomalies, such as the bellwether counties, that strongly suggest the election result isn’t true.

On the other hand we’ve never had mass mail in ballots before and so the bellwether county aspect may be based on a premise (mostly in-person voting) that is no longer true.

The term “fraud” applies to each illegitimate mail in ballot, and only an idiot believes there were none. But whether only the false fraudulent mail in ballots were enough to turn the election, or if it also needed the extra legitimate (albeit resulting from unconstitutional law) ballots to push the result over, is a question to which none of us has the answer.

Either way, it’s wrong.

So, New York is continuing the racist policies of gun control. The gun grabbers want to put an innocent, non-violent, hard working black man in prison for two decades.  New York gun grabbers are evil, racist, sadistic assholes.

Popular vote is meaningless. Wow. To use that as an indicator of anything is counterproductive and considering many were fraudulent, even more misleading.

That there have been a few elections where the winner of the popular vote did not win the electoral college is used by the left to agitate to get rid of the EC.  To do that would violate the most basic premise of the United States which is exactly that: United States: A bunch of separate states uniting for a purpose; NOT the Empire of The District of Columbia. Each state is sovereign and under limited federal control as outlined in the Constitution and with power to elect federal officers through the EC which is designed to empower the state, not the individual citizens.

Thus we are not a direct democracy. We already partially damaged states’ powers with the 17th which we never should have done.  People need to get over the popular vote.  If you need to understand why, take a look at Texas right now asserting it’s rightful sovereignty by trying to protect her borders while the criminally reckless federal apparatus opposes those efforts. The good of the state must be considered in addition to the good of the individual and that is what the EC endeavors to address. 

If the federal government were elected by popular vote, in other words a direct democracy ignoring state boundaries, then the overwhelming numbers in a few east and west coast cities would always prevail over the needs of all the other states.  Why bother having states then?  We would be back to feudal autocracy with sparsely populated but productive flyover states enslaved to support crowded little patches of land full of decadent elite and lazy underclass neither of which have a clue how to produce food or electricity.

No. Fuck the popular vote.

So the first thing I went to look for was the actual popular vote counts as reported. It seems like Joe Biden won by over 7M votes, or 5.1%. (https://www.cookpolitical.com/2020-national-popular-vote-tracker). So it really isn't a case of an inherent level of statistical uncertainty causing the confusion here. Instead one has to find evidence for some process that would result in over 7M false votes.

We don’t need 7M false votes to fraudulently change the result. Because of the electoral system it was only a few thousand in select counties that did it.  I’m not sure what you’re getting at here.