Zone1 Evidence vs Proof

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The Left's position is, if there's no proof then it didn't happen, case closed nothing to see here, STFU

No, that is the position of literally everyone on the planet who is not in the Trump cult, at this point.

 

[Pellinore]

You know what it comes down to? The Left's position is, if there's no proof then it didn't happen, case closed nothing to see here, STFU. Kinda like when OJ Simpson was found not guilty, that meant he didn't do it. No, what that meant was they couldn't prove his guilt in a court of law, but a lotta people still believe to this day that he was guilty. Same deal with the 2020 election, there WAS evidence but not enough proof that Trump shoulda won.

My position is, maybe Trump shoulda won but maybe not. We'll never really know the truth, but Biden is the prez and we accept that should move on. BUT - with so many accusations and allegations numbering over a thousand and polls indicating that almost half the people had doubts about the integrity of that election, it made sense to investigate those claims. Since it's so hard to convict anyone of election fraud, it's not hard to understand why there were so few arrests and court cases BUT that does not mean there was no fraud. As a nation how can we not address such a lack of trust? When enough people say there's a problem here, what does it say about our support for the 1st Amendment when the democrats try to squelch any and all questions and doubts? They talk about a threat to democracy, well there you are. Instead of saying okay let's check it out, the Left says STFU. We are compared to flat earthers and told we are conspiracy theorists. Yeah, that'll really help the situation, won't it?

Well, it *is* a theory, by definition unproven, about a conspiracy, soooo ...

And:
- It is based on someone's idea of something that might have happened, although much more feasible alternatives exist;
- Its supporters insist it has mountains of evidence, but diligent and reliable investigation (which there has been) reveals that close to none of that 'evidence' is reliable or substantive;
- It often relies on the proof of a negative (aka "Prove they didn't do it," a logical impossibility) to disprove; and
- It appeals only to people who hated the subject already.

Those are all qualities of a classic conspiracy theory.

 

[candycorn]

You know what it comes down to? The Left's position is, if there's no proof then it didn't happen, case closed nothing to see here, STFU. Kinda like when OJ Simpson was found not guilty, that meant he didn't do it. No, what that meant was they couldn't prove his guilt in a court of law, but a lotta people still believe to this day that he was guilty. Same deal with the 2020 election, there WAS evidence but not enough proof that Trump shoulda won.

Well, it's nothing like the OJ case.

For one thing the OJ case was decided in one court room in one county in one state.

What you're suggesting was that what, 7 different elections in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada--all places where Trump and the GOP filed lawsuits--had tainted elections:

The Right can show numerous instances of questionable actions or decisions and all sorts of statistics that indicate the possibility or even probability of wrong-doing,

Only one of the suits was upheld; the rest were dismissed or denied.

Lets take a look at one example:

The suit was dismissed. The PA Supreme Court said:

You're welcome to argue that they were wrong....but they ruled.

My position is, maybe Trump shoulda won but maybe not. We'll never really know the truth, but Biden is the prez and we accept that should move on.

No. We know the truth. Trump lost.

BUT - with so many accusations and allegations numbering over a thousand and polls indicating that almost half the people had doubts about the integrity of that election, it made sense to investigate those claims.

And they were investigated. And as you saw above, the courts ruled.

Since it's so hard to convict anyone of election fraud, it's not hard to understand why there were so few arrests and court cases BUT that does not mean there was no fraud.

No, there have been numerous convictions for election fraud. Look at the Heritage Foundation (I think that is the name); they have instances going back decades.

As a nation how can we not address such a lack of trust?

Easy. Get over it. Your candidate lost.

When enough people say there's a problem here, what does it say about our support for the 1st Amendment when the democrats try to squelch any and all questions and doubts?

Clearly since you're here still pulling at the same harp strings, there is no first amendment issue taking place.

They talk about a threat to democracy, well there you are. Instead of saying okay let's check it out, the Left says STFU. We are compared to flat earthers and told we are conspiracy theorists. Yeah, that'll really help the situation, won't it?

Okay... please tell us how in 7 different battle ground states, "the left" was able to pull off this massive yet completely undetectable theft of 7 state elections, likely dozens of county elections, thousands of precinct contests....

And then have the GOP pick up 7 seats in the House in 2020 and take the House in 2022...

Also, please weigh in on why with 8,000 losers on election night, only one loser still is screaming election fraud. Wouldn't the other losers be screaming it as well?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

GolfingG221222-#14 Golfing Gator “I spent many years on a Christian forum that had a large number of Flat Earthers. This was the same basic argument they used to defend their position the earth is flat.”
^
^
task0778221222-#15 task0778 Whether the earth was flat was a question of science, easily disproved by hard facts. Whether the 2020 election was fraudulent and was sufficient enough to change the outcome is a matter of opinion and politics that cannot be proved/disproved at all. Your attempt to equate the 2 issues is bullshit.

NFBW: We do have truth, law and our Constitutional system of DECIDING elections. Our votes are counted on a certain timeline that has no flat earth option. Every candidate for President should know the planet earth revolves around the sun and that when he or she loses, they have until mid-December, or about six weeks following the election to challenge the loss in any state before each state is required to certify the electors and do so.

Trump lost sixty challenges in court rooms in six states during the time allowed by the Constitution to produce evidence of fraud..

He failed.

When I say we have truth, law and our Constitutional system It means as Americans we give up certain rights when we give our consent to be governed, it means we accept the results of elections when our side loses and when disputes arise we accept the court’s decision as final. That is the truce belief the earth is round, not flat. Technically a sphere.

AFTER THE ELECTION IS CERTIFIED BY EVERY STATE as it was in DECEMBER 2020 your statement is as false as it is futile. Whether the 2020 election was fraudulent and was sufficient enough to change the outcome ceased to be a matter of opinion and politics. It became a matter of law.

If the losers truly believe they have solid evidence the incoming administration stole the election - the courts are still available- to make the case - Not to change the resident in the White House, but to set the record straight for whatever Justice against those who committed election crimes when the innocent can be proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law.

ENF2212122048

 

[Votto]

Democrats are not Marxists----nor are Republicans Fascists~

Both parties do have more than their share of ignorant, knee-jerking puppets who can be counted on to demonize their opposition.

I think we all know where YOU fit in eh?

 

[Leo123]

The problem I have with this is twofold. You can’t order an investigation based on “belief”, it should be based on there being enough evidence to support investigating. To date, nothing has come close. The fact that the DoJ was specifically tasked with investigating any claims of fraud, and couldn’t substantiate any is telling.

In terms of the fraud claims made, many were found without merit because the couldn’t be substantiated or they were a normal part of the process that the poll watcher didn’t understand or they were based on select snippets of video out of context. Further investigation wouldn’t change “belief” if the Trump DoJ couldn’t, because they would just find another reason to doubt the results if it didn’t go their way as long as the president they supported continues to claim fraud.

The second issue is trust in our electoral system. If people have lost trust in it, even if baseless, we have a problem.

They investigated Trump because of a belief.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Democrats are not Marxists----nor are Republicans Fascists~

Both parties do have more than their share of ignorant, knee-jerking puppets who can be counted on to demonize their opposition.

I think we all know where YOU fit in eh?

Not all democrats are Marxist but all Marxist are democrats.

 

[Faun]

Not all democrats are Marxist but all Marxist are democrats.

So Karl Marx was a Democrat, was he, dumbfuck?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They investigated Trump because of a belief.

Lie.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So Karl Marx was a Democrat, was he, dumbfuck?

Karl Marx is dead but Marxism lives in the democrat party dumbfuck. Name another party Marxist associate with fang fang

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Not all democrats are Marxist but all Marxist are democrats.

Wrong. Marxism is 100% opposed to Democracy. In all its forms.

 

[Faun]

Karl Marx is dead but Marxism lives in the democrat party dumbfuck. Name another party Marxist associate with fang fang

And you called Karl Marx a Democrat. Yes, you really are as dumb as you appear.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Wrong. Marxism is 100% opposed to Democracy. In all its forms.

Ok what party do American Marxist affiliate with? It sure in hell ain't the Republican party.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And you called Karl Marx a Democrat. Yes, you really are as dumb as you appear.

Quote the post fang fang

 

[Faun]

Quote the post fang fang

Aww, retard doesn't remember saying all Marxists are Democrats.

 

[badbob85037]

Not to mention the outright lies and misrepresentations presented. The recounts, followed by the audits..followed by more audits. Every time nothing substantial was found..all your side said was "dig deeper' It is all just a shitstorm ginned up by Trump. He manufactured the election fraud narrative BEFORE the election. All the Trumpkins bought it..were looking for it and found it..in their own febrile imaginations and in their angst.

Ballot drops that never happened...normal procedures during a count--some boxes with verified ballots under a table, where they were put, while the precinct workers took a break.
On and on and on. "Suspicious' halts in the count..as workers take a break. A large swing in the vote..as mail-in ballots were counted later..much of which was actually mandated by the laws Republicans put in place. Lawyers have been sanctioned for their lies and machinations, and yet, still the idiots persist. Disbarment looming...and still they persist.Lawsuits totaling millions--with a very good chance of winning, alleging defamation and outright lies. Provable lies. Easily provable lies. Still the idiots persist. No Krakon. No evidence..no nothing but ginned up B.S. and still the idiots persist. Now we have copycats like Kari Lake..who pursue the same futile course... and still the idiots persist.
Disbar Trump’s Lawyers Who Tried to Steal the Election | Washington Monthly

Rudy Giuliani violated ethics rules by pushing Trump’s election lies, review finds

Trump’s former lawyer could be disbarred, have law licence suspended or be formally censured

news.yahoo.com

Federal judge sanctions Trump attorneys for spreading false election fraud claims

It is the latest instance of the former president’s allies being penalized for their roles in spreading conspiracies about the 2020 vote.

www.nbcnews.com

Perhaps the greatest harm Trump has done is his deliberate destruction of Americans trust in their electoral system. He did that with malice aforethought...out of nothing but pique brought on by his loss. It's unforgivable..and I think history will judge Trump harshly--not that he cares.
The Red wave that wasn't and the poor showing by the election denier crowd does give me hope--that not everyone is fooled into thinking that the Democrats somehow have engaged in this huge conspiracy...to cheat the poor Repubs out of their wins. It's absurd..and still..the idiots persist~

Look if you want to believe there was no voting fraud believe it

Well that was pretty convoluted..allow me to help..absent PROOF--you have nothing. The Democrats need not prove themselves the winners..on the face of it they won. It is up to the election deniers to prove their allegations..not present ambiguous, twisty anecdotal stories based on feelings and obscure, if not totally made up stories. That is why all the courts turned their backs.
For contrast, in the Gore/Bush debacle..there was proof..and it went to the SCOTUS almost instantly. I might add that Gore could have continued..most felt he had a case..but he chose, for the good of the country, to concede. I literally can't imagine Trump doing such a thing, can you?

Yes, if you have no proof of wrongdoing... the election is valid. Open and shut. Although I do appreciate the rhetorical lengths you went to..to assert otherwise.
Basically, it takes a lot more than belief, to spend the treasure, time and goodwill to assuage the feeling of losers.

Our govt. is not totalitarian and only a fool would so assert.

In a world turned up side down, government is no longer for the people. Full of ones for their own riches and full of only well being and comfort. The Constitution is only something to undermine. Of course government is corrupt and evil, as 90% of us all. All you can do is worry about your own and try to keep your head above water and stop thinking you are from some place that is free from these end times.

 

[forkup]

What bothers me the most about this whole election fraud thing is that some people on both sides confuse evidence with proof. The vast majority of election fraud allegations were not dismissed based on evidence but on standing or jurisdiction. It wasn't that those cases had no merit, but there's little or no precedence or statute for a judge to base his/her ruling on, plus the basis for a lawsuit is the harm that was done to somebody. The Right can show numerous instances of questionable actions or decisions and all sorts of statistics that indicate the possibility or even probability of wrong-doing, but the problem is that real proof of fraud that resulted in the wrong person being elected or that actual harm was done hasn't been presented.

Which does not mean that there was no election fraud or that the right/correct person was elected (or not), and that is where the Left comes in. Absence of proof does not validate the election and does not mean all those allegations were false. So many on the Left hold the position that since the Right has no proof that the wrong person was elected then the election was valid and we should ignore the allegations and accept the result without further ado. Move on, nothing to see here. This despite the fact that a huge number of Americans doubted then and doubt now that elections in this country are legitimate. We won, you didn't so STFU. But any election that is believed to be suspicious ought to be scrupulously investigated, and the failure to do so is a clear indicator of a totalitarian gov't that is afraid of losing power. And if we cannot trust our election processes then we cannot trust our elected officials either and that is dangerous IMHO for our democratically elected republic.

Plenty of them ruled on merit to the point that they found it so wanting they were comfortable dismissing it without a full hearing.

 

[Mac1958]

What bothers me the most about this whole election fraud thing is that some people on both sides confuse evidence with proof.

First, there is one very important step that comes before evidence: "Reports".

Day after day after day here, we are treated to "reports" from sources like Fox, Breitbart, Gateway Pundit, NewsMax and MANY MORE -- on ANY NUMBER of stories -- about "reports" of "evidence" that sound pretty damning for the Democrats. No doubt about it. Is a report evidence? No.

Unfortunately, the posters who start those threads don't question that story in any way, nor do the posters who just believe it because they saw it here. Apparently, not one of these posters has wondered for even one (1) moment about the validity of the report, or if there is another side of the story.

Can this happen from either end of the spectrum? Sure. But there is only one side of the spectrum who refuses to believe an election they lost wasn't rigged, that the government isn't set up against them, and that the courts aren't corrupt, even when headed by a Trump judge.

So that side of the spectrum has an excuse for every failure, AND they're quickly eroding faith and trust in our most important institutions. Somehow that side doesn't understand the damage it is causing with its "reports".

 

[sparky]

But any election that is believed to be suspicious ought to be scrupulously investigated, and the failure to do so is a clear indicator of a totalitarian gov't that is afraid of losing power

The Warren Commish, 9/11 commish, and now the Jan6th commish all have one commonality

~S~

 

[MarcATL]

What bothers me the most about this whole election fraud thing is that some people on both sides confuse evidence with proof. The vast majority of election fraud allegations were not dismissed based on evidence but on standing or jurisdiction. It wasn't that those cases had no merit, but there's little or no precedence or statute for a judge to base his/her ruling on, plus the basis for a lawsuit is the harm that was done to somebody. The Right can show numerous instances of questionable actions or decisions and all sorts of statistics that indicate the possibility or even probability of wrong-doing, but the problem is that real proof of fraud that resulted in the wrong person being elected or that actual harm was done hasn't been presented.

Which does not mean that there was no election fraud or that the right/correct person was elected (or not), and that is where the Left comes in. Absence of proof does not validate the election and does not mean all those allegations were false. So many on the Left hold the position that since the Right has no proof that the wrong person was elected then the election was valid and we should ignore the allegations and accept the result without further ado. Move on, nothing to see here. This despite the fact that a huge number of Americans doubted then and doubt now that elections in this country are legitimate. We won, you didn't so STFU. But any election that is believed to be suspicious ought to be scrupulously investigated, and the failure to do so is a clear indicator of a totalitarian gov't that is afraid of losing power. And if we cannot trust our election processes then we cannot trust our elected officials either and that is dangerous IMHO for our democratically elected republic.

Was there any electoral funny business in Florida during Bush v Gore?