Trump has thousands of attorneys ready for post-election legal fight

[PRB]

The claim is that the witness signature on mail in ballots were not verified. The sheer volume saw to that. It wasn't about fraud, it was the lack of oversight.

But they were counted? That's the main question.

 

[PRB]

Your Pedo Won,,so it's OK..

Gotcha

I didn't say anything was OK. but at least I'm not a felon and liar like you.

 

[pcosmar]

I didn't say anything was OK. but at least I'm not a felon and liar like you.

Well good for you.

In 378 U.S. counties, voter registration rates exceed 100% of the adult population, meaning there are more voter registrations on file than the total voting-age population, according to a new analysis by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a..._inaccurate_voter_registrations__142089.html#!

 

[PRB]

Well good for you.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a..._inaccurate_voter_registrations__142089.html#!

"voter registration rates exceed 100% of the adult population"

1. adult doesn't mean eligible (you have to discount felons and foreigners)
2. still no evidence that there's more votes than voters NONE.
3. this is not a new source, it's the same Judicial Watch "study"

 

[Invisible Man]

"voter registration rates exceed 100% of the adult population"

1. adult doesn't mean eligible (you have to discount felons and foreigners)

That works against you. Since the number of registered voters in some places exceeds the number of adults living there, then it must exceed the number of eligible voters by even more than that.

 

[pcosmar]

That works against you. Since the number of registered voters in some places exceeds the number of adults living there, then it must exceed the number of eligible voters by even more than that.

And it still does not address "Ghost" Voters..

The Dead can at least be accounted for.. Ghost Voters never existed in the Real World.

but there seem to be a lot of them.

 

[PRB]

And it still does not address "Ghost" Voters..

The Dead can at least be accounted for.. Ghost Voters never existed in the Real World.

but there seem to be a lot of them.

where do you see a lot of them?

 

[PRB]

That works against you. Since the number of registered voters in some places exceeds the number of adults living there, then it must exceed the number of eligible voters by even more than that.

for that to be meaningful, first you have to assume the residents count is accurate.

but also, how many registered people voted but shouldn't be? I bet you can't tell me. because dead people and moved people don't vote in any meaningful numbers.

 

[Invisible Man]

for that to be meaningful, first you have to assume the residents count is accurate.

No you don't. You only have to assume that it's accurate to within a margin of error that's less than the difference between it and the number of registered voters.

We haven't discussed each and every state and county. But Alaska has been used as an example, and it's been shown irrefutably that this is the case for at least that state.

 

[PRB]

No you don't. You only have to assume that it's accurate to within a margin of error that's less than the difference between it and the number of registered voters.

Sure, I'll take that. Which is still unproven.

 

[Invisible Man]

Sure, I'll take that. Which is still unproven.

It's proven. I showed you the proof. You just chose not to look at it. You being unaware of something (in this case by choice) is not the same as its nonexistence.

If you see any way to avoid the conclusion that Alaska has more registered voters than eligible voters, then please show that using the data from Alaska's own website.

 

[PRB]

If you see any way to avoid the conclusion that Alaska has more registered voters than eligible voters, then please show that using the data from Alaska's own website.

Why should I assume Alaska's website is reliable? We can agree they're not reliable.

You're stretching from "Alaska's website doesn't have good data" to "therefore muh fraud and Trump won"

 

[Invisible Man]

Why should I assume Alaska's website is reliable? We can agree they're not reliable.

I'm not asking you to assume that. I'm asking you to dig into the actual details and provide support for the dogmatic claims your making. Have you looked at their data?

A minute ago you agreed that they only need to be accurate to within a margin that's less than the difference between the numbers of eligible voters and registered voters. That's a huge margin. We're not talking about some subjective touchy feely evaluation of reliable versus unreliable. We're talking about actual numbers.

So again, if you look at that data and see a way to squeeze an extra 50,000+ people into Alaska's estimate of the number of people over 18 in the state, then please show it. If you think we can agree that they're liable to be off by anything close to that amount, then you're wrong, we can't agree on that.

If you don't want to bother looking at the proof that's been provided to you, then the claim that they have more registered voters than eligible voters stands proven, and you should stop saying it hasn't been just because you assume the numbers could be off by a little bit.

 

[pcosmar]

I'm not asking you to assume that. I'm asking you to dig into the actual details and provide support for the dogmatic claims your making. Have you looked at their data?

A minute ago you agreed that they only need to be accurate to within a margin that's less than the difference between the numbers of eligible voters and registered voters. That's a huge margin. We're not talking about some subjective touchy feely evaluation of reliable versus unreliable. We're talking about actual numbers.

So again, if you look at that data and see a way to squeeze an extra 50,000+ people into Alaska's estimate of the number of people over 18 in the state, then please show it. If you think we can agree that they're liable to be off by anything close to that amount, then you're wrong, we can't agree on that.

If you don't want to bother looking at the proof that's been provided to you, then the claim that they have more registered voters than eligible voters stands proven, and you should stop saying it hasn't been just because you assume the numbers could be off by a little bit.

Troll is seriously in the media's "Na,Na, Na, I can't hear you", mind frame..

there is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

 

[PRB]

If you don't want to bother looking at the proof that's been provided to you, then the claim that they have more registered voters than eligible voters stands proven, and you should stop saying it hasn't been just because you assume the numbers could be off by a little bit.

No, it's not proven, we agree the website is unreliable

 

[PRB]

Troll is seriously in the media's "Na,Na, Na, I can't hear you", mind frame..

there is no reasoning with the unreasonable.

Still waiting on you to show there's more votes than voters.

 

[RJB]

If a tree falls in the woods...?

 

[pcosmar]

Still waiting on you to show there's more votes than voters.

Still waiting for your Trolling to be banished..

You parrot the deniers.

 

[PRB]

Still waiting for your Trolling to be banished..

You parrot the deniers.

I deny your lies.

You never claim close to proving that there's more votes than voters.

 

[Invisible Man]

No, it's not proven, we agree the website is unreliable

No we don't.