My bad. :blush:

I was referencing one known example.

I get you are invested in your argument but quit pretending it never happens.

1 Like

I’ve read a dozen articles on the topic. Only two of them lead with fraudulent (CBS and NBC). All of the others lead with suspicious.

While reading the articles, it quickly becomes obvious that only a portion of those suspicious forms was found to be fraudulent.

In any case, as I stated earlier, why would I care what you choose to call it. I’m familiar with the facts and I can say with certainty that it doesn’t fit neatly into your ongoing fraud narrative.

No ā– ā– ā– ā–  Sherlock.

Was I addressing that or a specific part of a reply that was addressing vote possibilities by giving a specific example where that scenario had recently happened?

1 Like

there is no ā€œnarrativeā€ only facts - fraud is orchestrated and found in the voting process

my bold. I knew you’d eventually come around.

You’ve yet to produce a single shred of evidence showing large scale voter fraud anywhere.

In another thread I mention that about 400 of the 2,500 forms were found to be fraudulent.

Not a single ballot was cast as a result of those fraudulent forms. The built-in safeguards worked as designed.

ā€œlarge scale?ā€

ā€œ The application forms were completed by paid canvassers, as part of a ā€œlarge-scale canvassing operation" dating back to June, District Attorney Heather Adams told reporters ā€

Yes, the Chinese student in Michigan. Same day registration in-person voting.

As I have stated repeatedly in multiple threads going back to 2020. With every election some number of 1 or 2 vote fraud cases are found. Some turn out to be simple mistakes, others such as the one you identified turn out to be intentional fraud and are prosecuted.

Those isolated cases aren’t evidence of widespread large scale voter fraud.

Yep! There are large-scale canvassing operations all over this country. For the most part they provide a valuable service and have nothing to do with fraudulent activity. Even with the case in question, only a small number of forms were found to be fraudulent. None of them resulted in a fraudulent vote being cast.

You’re still in Midland/Appalachian region…home of hard working independent minded people that just want to be left the ā– ā– ā– ā–  alone. :wink:

2 Likes

This is why I hate responding sometimes. Make one little comment directed to a specific sentence in a post and suddenly I’m making a big argument for something I never mentioned or responded to so others can continue their invested argument and lecture about it.

I humbly apologize if I mistook the intent of your response. I’ve been heavily engaged with a couple of members and sometimes I get carried away looking to lump everyone into the same category when responding. :blush:

as long as you realize the fraud (perpetrated by a large scale effort) exists

that’s what matters

1 Like

Yeah, I get it. No worries. :upside_down_face:

1 Like

I’m not sure where you are going with this. With any large-scale operation, some amount of fraudulent activity is bound to creep in. That kind of fraudulent activity isn’t limited to just our elections.

There are many built-in safeguards to prevent voter fraud in this country. By and large they have proven to be very effective.

yet could be enough to change the election. the whole point. presidential and senate now, in PA

1 Like

How exactly do fraudulent registration forms, being caught and thrown out, translate to something that could be enough to change the election?

i didnt say the ones caught do

True. I apologize but I’m not allowed access. That said, as an outsider that’s paying their wages with the taxes I generate, I simply provide an opinion. You’ll have to determine for yourself how valuable that is?