So you didn't watch the video.... They go to addresses of absentee voters. That is proof of fraud. The question is if it's enough to make a difference. The problem is they claim there is no proof so they won't look.... Its a self fulfilling loop of bs.
I watched some of the video, namely what you said to watch.
A breakdown of your quote
They go to addresses of absentee voters. That is proof of fraud.
Let's say this is true
The question is if it's enough to make a difference.
If there are instances of fraud then you're right in asking if these occurrences are enough to make a difference.
The problem is they claim there is no proof so they won't look.
The issue with this is there are can be instances of fraud but said fraud does not constitute as proof of a larger conspiracy. So when they say there is no proof they're not saying there were zero instances of fraud, they're saying it's not at such a scale that warrants a recount.
I.e. If you committed fraud in your local election the committee wouldn't do a total recount of the whole election as it wouldn't make any sense unless there were a sizable number of fraudulent ballots.
Below is a thorough breakdown of instances of voting fraud.
Now, back away from thinking about 2020 and look at the numbers below as if it's 2014 or 2106.
For example, in a study back in 2014 there were only 31 instances of fraud from 2000-2014
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites.../Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf
If you've gotten this far, good on you.
From reading the many examples above we can see voter fraud does not happen at the level it's purported by Trump or some RW media.
Taking this into account you'd ask yourself what then happened in 2020?
How did Biden win but Dem's didn't conquer the House or Senate races? This alone gives reason to think the election conspiracy is just that, a conspiracy.
This leads me to an answer below:
The simplest answer is typically the right one and that's Trump likely made it up b/c he was raised to hate losing. He was raised to view that anything below "winning" meant you're a loser.**
**it's fine to dislike losing but it's unhealthy to do it in the manner D.T. does. The whole "If you ain't first, you're last" is comedic but there are people in real life who view everything as winning and losing.
So when he lost to Ted Cruz in the Iowa Caucus you had this
Donald Trump, despite conceding defeat to Ted Cruz Monday night in Iowa, is now accusing the Texas Republican senator of stealing the race – and calling for either a new election to be held or the results to be nullified.
www.foxnews.com
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Wednesday accused rival Ted Cruz of stealing a victory in the Iowa caucuses and called for another vote or nullification of Cruz's win.
www.reuters.com
The political din over Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination features the same kind of overheated rhetoric and partisanship of previous legendary confirmation fights. But this time, there is Twitter. The preferred social media platform of President Donald Trump — the one that allows him to...
factba.se
Prior to the 2016 election, you had this
After winning in 2016 but losing the popular vote he tweeted this
You have 3 different periods, early 2016, election 2016, and 2020 all of which Trump spouts voter fraud.
The political din over Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination features the same kind of overheated rhetoric and partisanship of previous legendary confirmation fights. But this time, there is Twitter. The preferred social media platform of President Donald Trump — the one that allows him to...
factba.se
Searching his Twitter archive you can see 607 instances of him tweeting about Fraud most of which lead up to the 2020 election.
So there's either massive voter fraud and D.T. is correct or he just shouts fraud with most of those shouts happening even before the event itself.
I.E. he's covering his bases. If he wins, there's still fraud b/c he didn't win by more BUT if he loses there's such a wide-scale fraud that's the end of democracy.
If there was fraud in 2016 he had an entire 4 years to make sure it didn't happen again. He would've been looked at as being a savior of democracy for "cracking the case" on voter fraud in the race against Cruz and subsequently Hillary.
In reality, there's no massive fraud and for a thought experiment, you should picture Biden tweeting all of this rather than Trump. What would your opinion be then?
Mine would still be that the person making those tweets is a whiny person who cannot stand losing, not because it's bad (it's not) but because his dad told him it was.
@Bill Derington wanted to tag you so you could see Trump's Tweets
@Lost In FL @warrior-cat adding ya'll because I've had convos with the two of you in the past, respect the both of ya'll but I just sit towards the left.
Those that are tagged and those that are not I want you to look at those tweets.
The political din over Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination features the same kind of overheated rhetoric and partisanship of previous legendary confirmation fights. But this time, there is Twitter. The preferred social media platform of President Donald Trump — the one that allows him to...
factba.se
I want you to go through these as well as just navigate through the above archive of tweets just to see what kind of person D.T. is. Look at his 2017 to 2020 tweets and tell me if those were made by Obama or Biden if ya'll would think it's no big deal. If you end up coming to a conclusion that it would be a big deal if those two made any of those tweets then ya'll are in a land of hypocrisy.
Don't turn this into whataboutism either, the issue at hand is voter fraud not the crap that Biden is doing now or what Obama did in 2009-2016.
babylonbee.com
