But when they don’t do this, you of course will forget you said this and accept their conclusions anyway.
Knock it off. Nobody cares what you think of him. It’s a non issue.
I hope the entire Republican party adopts this line of thought, and that they repeat this on the campaign trails and in front of every camera. It will win them many voters. 
So what do we do now?
A) Assume the data is false and move on?
B) Verify the data is true or false? And if it’s true, tally the actual number of Biden vs.Trump votes? If they are false, send the people who did this to prison?
C) Something else?
Which would you do?
[quote=“altair1013, post:100, topic:239630, full:true”]
Remains to be seen. The legal definition of the voter roll may not be what is in this particular file. A registration that is legitimate and filed in paper but not yet data-entered into a computer may well be considered to be “on the voter rolls”
This claim needs to be spelled out definitively that “Nov 7th file” is the authoritative and complete legal definition of the voter role in that date.
This is why press conferences from politicians with partial information are problematic. Drawing a conclusion that these are bogus votes is premature without confirmation that the “file” she referenced is legally binding to the election vs an intermediate accounting process internal to a more expansive meaning of “voter roll”.
I’d point and laugh at the MAGA zeolots clinging to the thought that the election was stolen.
Given they are secret votes how would one know who they voted for?
I can call out anyone for their hypocrisy at any time, just as anyone can call me out for the same.
It’s important to remember things like this as it speaks to objectivity.
[quote=“Snowfinch, post:105, topic:239630”]
I don’t think so. I think this has already been confirmed by the audit.
There is an unfounded assumption here.
4 Likes
Is it a secret what the unfounded assumption is?
Can you point me to that. All I have seen is this statement:
“We have also seen some interesting things related to the voter rolls,” Logan said. “So, for example, we have 11,326 people that did not show up on a November 7th version of the voter rolls, and after votes were cast, but then appeared on the December 4th voter rolls.”
“Just to be clear, they show as voted this past election,” he added. “But they were not on the November 7th version of the file, but they did show up on the December 4th version.”
This is not a statement from the audit.
This is not “confirmation” that these are bogus votes.
Do you have additional information to point me at? I’m happy to be educated further.
Nope. It is a pretty blatant unfounded assumption.
3 Likes
Uh oh. I think hell has frozen over.
[quote=“altair1013, post:109, topic:239630, full:true”]
Where can I have a look at that confirmed info?
Said so from the start.
1 Like
On this we can agree.
Politicians pre-spinning the results counts as confirmed information now.
1 Like
What would you righties say if Dems in states Trump is contesting hired a group called the Power Rangers, who have never audited an election to conduct an audit. When the finished and said everything was kosher, would u believe them?
2 Likes
I really don’t care what the DNC is saying about it. I will wait for the results and the substantiating evidence.
Then I want to see who and how they are going to be fact checked on their findings.
