Jump to content

oldmanfan

Community Member
  • Posts

    13,953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by oldmanfan

  1. Parler will be a nice echo chamber for those of the extreme right wing and/or Trump fanatics and will have no influence on the actual functioning of the country.
  2. Ok boys, let's matriculate the ball down the field!
  3. I certainly hope the new admin does this and I hope you’re right.
  4. Good conversation. Getting killed at work and will reply later today.
  5. I recognize my opinion is controversial. We’ve tried your approach and people are either too stubborn or ignorant to buy in. Case in point: I was traveling to Kentucky yesterday and pulled in for gas. I went into the Speedway to get a drink and saw about a dozen people in line, close together, no masks. I of course quickly backed out. This is a public health crisis. It demands that level of response. If you have people willfully putting others at harm then there needs to be consequences.
  6. The Congress did not verify a shakedown by Biden as you put it. The committee chaired by Sen Johnson found nothing to substantiate your claim. For all your protestations otherwise, this post simply shows you want Trump to win at any cost, including the destruction of the democratic principles on which our country was founded. When he said Article Two gives him the power to do anything he wants, I assume you agreed?
  7. Biden can’t do that. In Indiana where I live the governor has emergency powers he can use to shut the state down or put out a mask mandate. He did the latter earlier, but had no penalty for it. I think he should have had a fine for the first violation followed by a limited time in jail for the next.
  8. My concern is that this challenge will lead to a dictatorship. That the challenge will turn into something where state legislatures, because if their irrational fear of the incumbent, will seek to overturn the will of the people that elected Biden. And we can pack in the entire foundations of our country. I agree governmental agencies can screw up. But there simply is no evidence to suggest that tens of thousands of votes should be overturned, and despite the protests of the losing side none has been presented.
  9. You absolutely refuse to accept that states have methods to audit and certify results. What you are calling for is what the states do before finalizing counts. So if you don’t trust the states to do their job, who should?
  10. Then let me ask you this. Did you have the same opinion in 2016? 2012? 2008? 1960? Pick a year. We have a legal election this year with voters who voted legally, whose votes were counted, and one candidate won fairly convincingly. There have been much closer elections than this, and we did not have the fuss we see this year. The only reason we have so this year is the loser is not mature enough to accept the outcome.
  11. If you are not going to trust the state elections, many of which are run by Republicans in those that Trump lost, then what do you suggest? Recounting by who and to what purpose? We have an electoral system that has worked for centuries. Why are so many now wanting to upset the apple cart because Trump decided in advance there was no way he could lose? He lost. The vote will be finalized, certified, and we’ll move on.
  12. Let me ask you this. Knowing there are more mail ins, do you think states with higher mail in are being more careful analyzing those ballots? Logic would suggest so. Neither of us know for sure of course, but again all states have methods to validate before they finalize their submissions. I din’t Doubt there will be some errors here and there, but you would need a monumental number of individual errors or some giant systemic flaw to change results in states where the winner has tens of thousands more votes. Also, I am not sure you can say Trump’s team has more info, because at this point they have not presented any claim in court that supports that.
  13. And they will do their QC before finalizing what is reported. And there were observers for both parties present.
  14. You don’t understand research. In research you make a hypothesis to explain an observation and you then experimentally test your hypothesis. And then analyze the data obtained by appropriate statistical methodology. But here is the key thing: You are always testing the null hypothesis; I.e. that there is no effect. You are assuming an effect. That’s wrong. What you are calling to be done is exactly what the states do to validate their outcomes via audits and such. I see no resistance from anyone to do so. What people are saying is simply this: all the states have said their elections were carried out consistent with their laws and procedures, and that there is no reason to suspect the outcomes. They will validate because that is part of their procedure. And again, you are assuming there is in fact some egregious error with absolutely no data to back it up. You have a conclusion in your mind and want to bend circumstances to fit your pre-made conclusion. I hope you don’t do that for your clients. Where did I say acquiesce and submit? That’s crap and you know better. I specifically stated that the states have processes to audit and verify final results and they will do so.
  15. It is not a certainty there is a high error rate with mail in balloting. I am a research scientist with over 40 years experience in data analysis and management and as I pointed out above you are assuming an outcome and then trying to make data fit your pre-conceived conclusion. The states audit and check data before finalizing results and that is what should drive any recounts, not the upset feelings of the loser of the election.
  16. I remember guys bringing cases of Genny into the Rockpile
  17. Do you know what you are describing here? How states audit and certify their vote totals before they finalize their elections. You are committing the classic mistake I see when I review scientific manuscripts for various journals. Poor science and poor researchers decide what they want the outcome to be ahead of time, and then bend their experiments and data analysis to fit the presupposed conclusion. Here, Trump announces the only way he could lose is if the election was rigged. And now that he has lost, he and his sycophants scream that results are tainted because it violates the presupposed conclusion. The states will validate their data. If and only if during that verification issues show up, then further examination will be warranted. Doing a recount and such just because you want to make up stories about a rigged process, with absolutely no data to support it, is ridiculous.
  18. Then why have the lawyers not shown it? Why have any challenges thus far been thrown out of court? Thta is not as you put it an elementary school concept, it is the reality o the situation and folks like you refuse to come to terms with it. Every Secretary of State in charge of elections has validated their state's vote count as far as I can see. Historically the evidence of voter fraud tells us that, if present, it is extremely, extremely small. The lead Biden has is higher than the state's cutoffs for recounts, with the exception of Georgia (which will recount) and Wisconsin which allows a candidate to demand one. Why is this a problem? Several reasons. It prohibits the peaceful transition of power which is a staple of our democracy and makes us different than other countries. It is slowing down the transition making it harder for the new administration to hit the ground running on January 20th. And it places an even bigger divide between people in this country, which is the last thing we need.
  19. Because you like him.
  20. You have to have some kind of evidence to challenge in court. Where is it and why is that such a difficult concept to grasp?
  21. But with a ring of truth
  22. Because our legal system is not supposed to deal with claims with no evidence. If you were to take the "well, we think something is wrong so we're going to court" thought process being used by trump and apply that to anyone who feels butt hurt about something the legal system as we know it would cease to exist. What Trump and his supporters are doing right now is the equivalent of a frivolous lawsuit.
  23. Love your name on here, Freebird is one of my favorite songs. But Coach Tuesday is right. You can pursue legal remedies but you have to have evidence that harm has been done. And there is none. You don’t use lawsuits as a fishing expedition; judges laugh at it as the one did in Pa when the lawyer had to admit in court that there were in fact observers present. Losing an election does not mean harm has been done, it means the people used their constitutional right to select someone else.
×
×
  • Create New...