Rancid wrote:Question is how many people are falling for it all? What percentage of people have to believe in the alternate Trump reality for it to be destructive to society?
If @Doug64 is correct, about 50 million people.
And yes, that seems like enough to make problems.
Finfinder wrote:There is no need to back pedal. That was my entire point. All I did was post a link; I didn't comment on metrics. I could have posted my screen name only and nothing else, and we would be at the same place.
Yes, your lack of argument was noted. Fortunately, @Saeko was kind enough to read and critically analyse that source.
I agree with her analysis that the authors deliberately ignored plausible and legal explanations for the anomalous ballot counts.
I don't need anybodies confirmation to have common sense on such things like losing a 900,000 vote lead mysteriously in the middle of the night after they stopped counting.
Again, this is due solely to the mechanisms involved in counting mail ballots. Many polling places were not allowed to start counting these ballots until the close of polls on November 3rd. This would then result in a very large number of ballots being added that night or early in the 4th.
Trump’s allegations about voter fraud and mail in ballots would explain why these mail in ballots would be overwhelmingly for Biden.
And of course, the existence of Covid would explain the disproportionately large number of mail in ballots.
Or ....... 80 % of Republican and 30% of Democrats believe this election was stolen.
An idea is not correct simply because a lot of people believe it.
I think there is enough to look into it. Personally I don't think many of the mail in votes are constitutionally legal, fraud would just be a by product of that.
I do not think you know what fraud is. Fraud requires intentional deceit. If people thought they were voting legally, they cannot be charged with fraud.
And mail in votes are constitutionally legal.
These guys are flipping out because it takes times to make a case and there seems to be some momentum right now with circumstantial evidence. All these court rulings for or against are landmark, so the entire purpose is to get to the Supreme Court.
I will assume that you do not actually know what a landmark case is nor how this relates to getting a case all the way to the SCOTUS.
But please, take your time and build a solid argument.