Lot’s of liberals and never Trumpers wonder why we believe there was vote fraud & election interference. Most liberals don’t watch or listen to conservative news so they are completely in the dark. If you search Google you can only find articles that support the liberal view. If you are on Social Media then most of your friends are liberal and that only adds to the darkness. Try a specific search on something like DuckDuckGo.com and you will see vastly different results versus a Google search. Scholars like Mark Levin have outlined things clearly for those who care.
I’m not talking about the far-right crazy theories and there are plenty of them. I’m embarrassed by some of these claims. They are as crazy as those who believed Trump was somehow a “Putin puppet” or that Trump should be impeached for asking about Joe and Hunter Biden. If you are on the left and thought either one of those was true nothing I will say here will have meaning. I suggest you stop reading now and consider professional help.
The term “widespread” in widespread vote fraud” is the word you need to focus on. Widespread vote fraud is not what you need to throw a Presidential election. I worked on the 2016 Trump Campaign as a volunteer but I was involved with high-level folks at the RNC and on the Trump campaign. I learned a lot of inside baseball because I was new to politics. The first thing I found striking was, generally speaking, you only needed to focus on a few counties/cities in a few states to win an election. Therefore, vote fraud does not need to be “widespread” in order to sway an election.
Second, when the liberal media and others say there is no evidence of “vote or voter fraud” they are sadly mistaken. Even some liberals admit it. I have to explain to my friends on the right that evidence and lawsuits being accepted are two different things. People tend to think our legal system is the arbiter of truth. Trust me, it is not. Law and truth often have very little in common. It gets very complicated but one only needs to think of OJ Simpson. He was found not guilty of murder in criminal court but guilty of “wrongful death in civil court.
Here is a very good article that outlines what many of us see as election fraud. There were also tons of affidavits signed under penalty of purgery of fraud or suspicious activity. For those who think voter fraud is rare here is a quick list of over 1,000 instances of vote or voter fraud resulting in 938 criminal convictions so far. This is not an exhaustive list but simply a sampling that demonstrates the many different ways in which fraud is committed.
I won’t bother going into the election interference by social media and the mainstream media. If you haven’t understood that by now you are living under a rock. Of course, this is borderline because it is your responsibility to seek out the truth. You can no longer trust major media and network outlets, let alone social media. Suffice it to say millions of votes were cast by people who were completely in the dark and manipulated by various nefarious means. Before you on the left leave a comment, I am NOT citing that as vote fraud, just manipulation that is immoral but not illegal.
Inductive reasoning is why many of us call the election “rigged” etc. I will put this in the simplest terms below.
Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which the premises are viewed as supplying some evidence, but not full assurance, of the truth of the conclusion. It is also described as a method where one’s experiences and observations, including what is learned from others, are synthesized to come up with a general truth.
We use these reasoning methods daily but might not understand them in a formal way. Here is an example that might put this into focus for those who have not studied methods of reasoning.
- A house is for sale across the street. One day you see the For Sale sign is gone. You are not sure why it is gone. The wind could have blown it away or someone may have stolen it.
- The next day you see a moving van and furniture going into the house. You have not seen anyone but the movers.
- On the following day, you see lights going off and on in the house at night. You still have not seen anyone, just the lights.
- The next day you see bikes in the front yard along with other toys. You haven’t seen the children, just bikes and toys.
- Garbage day comes and you see trash cans in front of the house as you leave for work and gone when you return home from work. You still have not seen anyone in the house.
- After a week you see the flag up on the mailbox and then it is down after the mailman picks up the mail. You still have not seen adults or children coming or going from the house.
Is it reasonable to think the house was sold and people are living there or is it more reasonable to think these things happened on their own by some kind of magic?
Those of us who think the election was illegitimate are the ones who do not believe in magic. However, we do believe in sleight of hand.
This article should be read far and wide.
Yes, this is a good article. Very good point about the phrase “widespread vote fraud”; it was targeted vote fraud. But another problem I have with that phrase is leftists use it to deny that there was enough vote fraud to matter. But they now acknowledge that there were at least instances of fraud. So why is that fraud not being prosecuted? The answer is that if they even investigated and prosecuted the fraud that we know of, it would reveal more fraud. So anyone who says there is not “evidence of widespread fraud” should be asked the question, why… Read more »
Absolutely right Jason. Also, when we look at the margins we see how small they are. Arizona difference 10,457 votes or 0.3% Georgia difference 11,779 votes or 0.3% Wisconsin difference 20,682 votes or 0.7% Those three states would change the election results. That’s what I meant about only needing to focus on a small city/county. Those three states would have only required less than 43,000 votes to change the game. No need for “widespread” vote fraud or manipulation. Pennsylvania difference 81,660 votes or 1.2% (seems like a big difference until you realize how corrupt Philadelphia is and how unconstitutional the… Read more »
What was unconstitutional about Pa’s changes? How can the changes be Unconstitutional? Didn’t the Pa Supreme Court rule on the matter? Don’t they determine Constitutionally in Pa?
Or are you saying that the Supreme Court ruling was unconstitutional just because they were Democrats?
Here is the full answer: