The Big Lie about ‘The Big Lie’

 

William Sullivan, at The American Thinker, writes [emphasis mine]:

With only a few days left until the 2022 midterms, Newsweek laments a new poll by Redfield and Wilton Strategies showing that 40 percent of Americans still believe that the 2020 presidential election was “rigged or stolen.”

This is presented as a shocking revelation about the number of Americans who still buy into the “Big Lie,” despite its “being proven false,” according to the article.

Newsweek buries this particular poll’s more interesting observations.  For example, only 36 percent of respondents disagree that the 2020 election was rigged or stolen.  Of that group, more than one in three find it “understandable” that others might believe that the election was rigged or stolen.  Another 15 percent of respondents neither agreed nor disagreed, and 8 percent signified that they “didn’t know.”

One way to characterize these data is the manner in which Newsweek does, which is to suggest that a horrifying 40 percent of Americans believe in what a bipartisan mainstream media blitz has promoted as “the Big Lie” for nearly two years.

A far more accurate way to characterize these data, though, is to recognize that there are more Americans confident that the election was rigged than there are Americans who are confident that it was all on the up and up.

That already paints a different picture of the prevalence of these supposedly fringe “election deniers.”  And when we factor in those who believe that the election was not rigged, but understand why Americans are skeptical based upon the facts they’ve observed, we find that over three in four Americans (or 75.2 percent, given Newsweek’s numbers) think the election was rigged, understand why other Americans think the election was rigged, don’t know whether or not the election was rigged, or refused to take a position on the subject of a rigged election while talking to a pollster.

In other words, fewer than one in four Americans is confident that the election was legitimate and is completely flummoxed as to how anyone could question its integrity.  That’s a remarkable figure, standing athwart the message being delivered by the senile occupant of the Oval Office, who routinely argues that anyone who questions that election’s integrity is not only a fringe radical, but an enemy of democracy and a potential insurrectionist.

I remain agnostic on whether the 2020 election was “stolen” (though I find laughable the claims that it was “legit” given the number of fraud convictions, irregularities, and other shenanigans that have been (and continued to be) documented). I’ve “moved on,” except in my desire to see things cleaned up to the point where we can trust the process going forward.

I share the article not to rehash the controversies of the election, but simply because I find the numbers cited quite remarkable. Even after years of Big Media outlets banging their propagandist drums about “the most secure election in history,” branding as “Election Deniers” anyone who thinks we ought to take a closer look at some of the things that don’t pass the proverbial smell test, and dismissing tens of millions of Americans as a “neo-fascist fringe group” promoting “The Big Lie” — even after all that — there are still “more Americans confident that the election was rigged than there are Americans who are confident that it was all on the up and up.”

I find that astonishing.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 67 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):

    The point of the American Thinker is that despite the constant drum beat of a media and the passive acceptance of those far too comfortable with the results of 2020, most Americans simply know that is plenty of reason to feel an election conducted like that one is unacceptable. If you decided not to find fraud and didnt, it certainly wasnt because there was not plenty of chance for it. Most people know when such obvious malpractice is staring them in the face. And the issue STILL remains that any changes in law election procedures not enacted by the legislatures made it an unconstitutionally conducted election. I would have hoped that all of the strong hearted “rule of law” advocates would have seen that from the very beginnings and been leading the protests regardless of their presidential choices.

    The article is saying that regardless of what is now years of Big Lie nonsense, you are unconvincing to a mass majority of Americans.

    Perhaps a majority of Republicans repeat the Big Lie nonsense, but not a majority of Americans.

    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered. Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    Being examined by lots of people looking the wrong way down the microscope, or whatever simile you prefer, is not convincing.

    If you look for the trees of a very narrow category of acts that constitute legal “fraud” you run the risk of missing the forest of systems and processes that are inherently unfair, or are designed to be easy to manipulate.

    I think it’s more important that Gary and others like him don’t seem to notice the clues such as “referred” cases etc.  What causes something be “referred?”  What about any examples of incidents that were not “referred” for one reason or another?

    Heck, if I were someone who wanted to fiddle with elections and if I were in a position to do so, such as Secretary of State and maybe running for another office too *cough*KatieHobbs*cough* I might check possible fraud reports first and ONLY “refer” to the AG those that I already knew were nothing-burgers.

    I should also note again, for the umpteenth time, that just because an election is “certified” doesn’t prove it was correct.

    • #31
  2. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):

    The point of the American Thinker is that despite the constant drum beat of a media and the passive acceptance of those far too comfortable with the results of 2020, most Americans simply know that is plenty of reason to feel an election conducted like that one is unacceptable. If you decided not to find fraud and didnt, it certainly wasnt because there was not plenty of chance for it. Most people know when such obvious malpractice is staring them in the face. And the issue STILL remains that any changes in law election procedures not enacted by the legislatures made it an unconstitutionally conducted election. I would have hoped that all of the strong hearted “rule of law” advocates would have seen that from the very beginnings and been leading the protests regardless of their presidential choices.

    The article is saying that regardless of what is now years of Big Lie nonsense, you are unconvincing to a mass majority of Americans.

    Perhaps a majority of Republicans repeat the Big Lie nonsense, but not a majority of Americans.

    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered. Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    Being examined by lots of people looking the wrong way down the microscope, or whatever simile you prefer, is not convincing.

    If you look for the trees of a very narrow category of acts that constitute legal “fraud” you run the risk of missing the forest of systems and processes that are inherently unfair, or are designed to be easy to manipulate.

    I think it’s more important that Gary and others like him don’t seem to notice the clues such as “referred” cases etc. What causes something be “referred?” What about any examples of incidents that were not “referred” for one reason or another?

    Heck, if I were someone who wanted to fiddle with elections and if I were in a position to do so, such as Secretary of State and maybe running for another office too *cough*KatieHobbs*cough* I might check possible fraud reports first and ONLY “refer” to the AG those that I already knew were nothing-burgers.

    I should also note again, for the umpteenth time, that just because an election is “certified” doesn’t prove it was correct.

    So do you believe that Secretary of State Brian Kemp stole the 2018 Georgia election from Stacey Abrams?

    • #32
  3. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):

    The point of the American Thinker is that despite the constant drum beat of a media and the passive acceptance of those far too comfortable with the results of 2020, most Americans simply know that is plenty of reason to feel an election conducted like that one is unacceptable. If you decided not to find fraud and didnt, it certainly wasnt because there was not plenty of chance for it. Most people know when such obvious malpractice is staring them in the face. And the issue STILL remains that any changes in law election procedures not enacted by the legislatures made it an unconstitutionally conducted election. I would have hoped that all of the strong hearted “rule of law” advocates would have seen that from the very beginnings and been leading the protests regardless of their presidential choices.

    The article is saying that regardless of what is now years of Big Lie nonsense, you are unconvincing to a mass majority of Americans.

    Perhaps a majority of Republicans repeat the Big Lie nonsense, but not a majority of Americans.

    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered. Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    Being examined by lots of people looking the wrong way down the microscope, or whatever simile you prefer, is not convincing.

    If you look for the trees of a very narrow category of acts that constitute legal “fraud” you run the risk of missing the forest of systems and processes that are inherently unfair, or are designed to be easy to manipulate.

    I think it’s more important that Gary and others like him don’t seem to notice the clues such as “referred” cases etc. What causes something be “referred?” What about any examples of incidents that were not “referred” for one reason or another?

    Heck, if I were someone who wanted to fiddle with elections and if I were in a position to do so, such as Secretary of State and maybe running for another office too *cough*KatieHobbs*cough* I might check possible fraud reports first and ONLY “refer” to the AG those that I already knew were nothing-burgers.

    I should also note again, for the umpteenth time, that just because an election is “certified” doesn’t prove it was correct.

    So do you believe that Secretary of State Brian Kemp stole the 2018 Georgia election from Stacey Abrams?

    @garyrobbinsDid anyone say the Arizona AG stole the election?

    • #33
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):

    The point of the American Thinker is that despite the constant drum beat of a media and the passive acceptance of those far too comfortable with the results of 2020, most Americans simply know that is plenty of reason to feel an election conducted like that one is unacceptable. If you decided not to find fraud and didnt, it certainly wasnt because there was not plenty of chance for it. Most people know when such obvious malpractice is staring them in the face. And the issue STILL remains that any changes in law election procedures not enacted by the legislatures made it an unconstitutionally conducted election. I would have hoped that all of the strong hearted “rule of law” advocates would have seen that from the very beginnings and been leading the protests regardless of their presidential choices.

    The article is saying that regardless of what is now years of Big Lie nonsense, you are unconvincing to a mass majority of Americans.

    Perhaps a majority of Republicans repeat the Big Lie nonsense, but not a majority of Americans.

    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered. Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    Being examined by lots of people looking the wrong way down the microscope, or whatever simile you prefer, is not convincing.

    If you look for the trees of a very narrow category of acts that constitute legal “fraud” you run the risk of missing the forest of systems and processes that are inherently unfair, or are designed to be easy to manipulate.

    I think it’s more important that Gary and others like him don’t seem to notice the clues such as “referred” cases etc. What causes something be “referred?” What about any examples of incidents that were not “referred” for one reason or another?

    Heck, if I were someone who wanted to fiddle with elections and if I were in a position to do so, such as Secretary of State and maybe running for another office too *cough*KatieHobbs*cough* I might check possible fraud reports first and ONLY “refer” to the AG those that I already knew were nothing-burgers.

    I should also note again, for the umpteenth time, that just because an election is “certified” doesn’t prove it was correct.

    So do you believe that Secretary of State Brian Kemp stole the 2018 Georgia election from Stacey Abrams?

    I figure it’s more likely that the Dems/Abrams tried to steal it, but were unsuccessful.

    The record shows that if the Dims try to steal an election but fail, they will claim it was stolen FROM them.

    • #34
  5. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Ole Summers (View Comment):
    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”. 

    It’s laughable that Gary keeps using “… Election Denier …” as if is gets our goat for winning the argument with the R> management that “election denier” is not a pejorative in the same vein as Holocaust denier, and yet is so mindless and unworthy of intellectual respect that he doesn’t realize he befools himself in reasonable and rational eyes every time he uses it.

    • #35
  6. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):
    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    It’s laughable that Gary keeps using “… Election Denier …” as if is gets our goat for winning the argument with the R> management that “election denier” is not a pejorative in the same vein as Holocaust denier, and yet is so mindless and unworthy of intellectual respect that he doesn’t realize he befools himself in reasonable and rational eyes every time he uses it.

    Befools?  I suppose.  But “beclowns” just sounds better to me.

    • #36
  7. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):
    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    It’s laughable that Gary keeps using “… Election Denier …” as if is gets our goat for winning the argument with the R> management that “election denier” is not a pejorative in the same vein as Holocaust denier, and yet is so mindless and unworthy of intellectual respect that he doesn’t realize he befools himself in reasonable and rational eyes every time he uses it.

    Befools? I suppose. But “beclowns” just sounds better to me.

    Of course, I chose my words for a reason.  A clown can take off his make-up.  A fool is always a fool.

    • #37
  8. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    I look at the specific topic of 2020 election integrity much the same way that I have looked at each major scandal for the last ten years. From Hillary Clinton’s performance as Secretary of State in foreign affairs decisions related to the Middle East up to and including the Biden catastrophe dealing with energy policy, the Democrat Party is America’s foremost enemy. That’s it, it is an absolute fact.

    • #38
  9. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    I look at the specific topic of 2020 election integrity much the same way that I have looked at each major scandal for the last ten years. From Hillary Clinton’s performance as Secretary of State in foreign affairs decisions related to the Middle East up to and including the Biden catastrophe dealing with energy policy, the Democrat Party is America’s foremost enemy. That’s it, it is an absolute fact.

    I consider it a moral imperative to vote against the Party of Death and Destruction (D). I honestly believe people who vote (D) will be made to atone some day. Hopefully not eternally, but I wouldn’t want to chance it. 

    • #39
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):
    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    It’s laughable that Gary keeps using “… Election Denier …” as if is gets our goat for winning the argument with the R> management that “election denier” is not a pejorative in the same vein as Holocaust denier, and yet is so mindless and unworthy of intellectual respect that he doesn’t realize he befools himself in reasonable and rational eyes every time he uses it.

    Befools? I suppose. But “beclowns” just sounds better to me.

    Of course, I chose my words for a reason. A clown can take off his make-up. A fool is always a fool.

    I suppose that’s technically true.  But I don’t expect Jonah and many others to ever un-clown themselves.

    • #40
  11. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):
    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    It’s laughable that Gary keeps using “… Election Denier …” as if is gets our goat for winning the argument with the R> management that “election denier” is not a pejorative in the same vein as Holocaust denier, and yet is so mindless and unworthy of intellectual respect that he doesn’t realize he befools himself in reasonable and rational eyes every time he uses it.

    Befools? I suppose. But “beclowns” just sounds better to me.

    Of course, I chose my words for a reason. A clown can take off his make-up. A fool is always a fool.

    I suppose that’s technically true. But I don’t expect Jonah and many others to ever un-clown themselves.

    That’s because they are clowns.

    • #41
  12. Freeven Member
    Freeven
    @Freeven

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Ole Summers (View Comment):
    Every election should be able to pass a demanding examination. To expect it is hardly being an “election denier”.

    It’s laughable that Gary keeps using “… Election Denier …” as if is gets our goat for winning the argument with the R> management that “election denier” is not a pejorative in the same vein as Holocaust denier, and yet is so mindless and unworthy of intellectual respect that he doesn’t realize he befools himself in reasonable and rational eyes every time he uses it.

    Yep, exactly. 

    Even as a pejorative, “Election Denier” doesn’t work. I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies that there was an election — just as I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies “Climate Change.” Lefties are a sad lot.

    • #42
  13. Freeven Member
    Freeven
    @Freeven

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered.

    This is false:

    A Sampling of Recent Election Fraud Cases from Across the United States

    The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database presents a sampling of recent proven instances of election fraud from across the country. Each and every one of the cases in this database represents an instance in which a public official, usually a prosecutor, thought it serious enough to act upon it. And each and every one ended in a finding that the individual had engaged in wrongdoing in connection with an election hoping to affect its outcome — or that the results of an election were sufficiently in question and had to be overturned. This database is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list. This database is intended to demonstrate the vulnerabilities in the election system and the many ways in which fraud is committed.

    If I were wrong as often as you are, I’d at least consider the possibility that I’m getting my info from unreliable sources.

    • #43
  14. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered.

    This is false:

    A Sampling of Recent Election Fraud Cases from Across the United States

    The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database presents a sampling of recent proven instances of election fraud from across the country. Each and every one of the cases in this database represents an instance in which a public official, usually a prosecutor, thought it serious enough to act upon it. And each and every one ended in a finding that the individual had engaged in wrongdoing in connection with an election hoping to affect its outcome — or that the results of an election were sufficiently in question and had to be overturned. This database is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list. This database is intended to demonstrate the vulnerabilities in the election system and the many ways in which fraud is committed.

    If I were wrong as often as you are, I’d at least consider the possibility that I’m getting my info from unreliable sources.

    And those represent just a few that anyone bothered to do anything about.

    • #44
  15. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    As John Hinderrocker says, is the Democrats may not have stolen the election, but they sure tried.

    To me the bigger issue, is that the majority of Americans think it was not the cleanest election and things were wonky. This is not a good place to be in to trust the election process. Comparing people to Holocaust deniers for it is destabilizing.

     

    It’s not all or nothing, either – there’s obviously been election fraud in the past, present, and soon-to-be future elections.  They’re not perfectly clean or hideously fraudulent, but by taking that stance on either side it allows for the easy and idiotic “othering” that occurs, which is how, today, you get yourself some Nazis.

    Funny, if the voice of the people wanted universal on-demand abortion everywhere and anywhere at all times, paid for by Nazis, but the existing Congress was staunchly (by vote) pro-life, then protesting, marching on Washington, etc, would be considered a civic duty and these protests by progressives would be accompanied by the wearing of t-shirts featuring Revolutionary War themes, Lexington and Concord would be referenced (but not understood), and all the mainstream media would be cashing in like a machine that processes cash real quick like.

    • #45
  16. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Freeven (View Comment):
    Even as a pejorative, “Election Denier” doesn’t work. I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies that there was an election — just as I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies “Climate Change.” Lefties are a sad lot.

    I have to disagree, although my advice is a strict DNE (do not engage) with Gary.

    These pejoratives, like “racist” and “extremist” and “denier,” are weaponized language against people with differing opinions. They “work” to alienate us from each other, to silence opposition, and to cheapen the real evils of racism, extremism, and Holocaust denialism. They damage civil discourse, which is supposedly what R> is all about. I’m disappointed if R> management has decided to allow such divisive and offensive terms to be used here. But, it fits with the general societal decline we’re living through.

    After the Duke lacrosse scandal, Dennis Prager used to say “rape” has come to mean any sex the woman regrets the next day. I think he was being too generous. These false accusations are weapons used quite effectively over time and with repetition by Democrats and the Left. But, I repeat. And so does Gary.

    • #46
  17. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich just went on 60 Minutes and said that the Big Lie was just that, that the allegation that Biden stole the election are horse “sh*t.” https://youtu.be/nJem4dFgs6Q

    He is a Republican. He is our outgoing Attorney General. He investigated and ran down all of the allegations where other identified so called “dead people” to find out that they were, um, not dead. And he said that the folks in “The Big Lie” are “clowns” who are peddling “horsesh*t.”

    The Republican Party will not win as along as we embrace Election Deniers, and the Democrat Party will not win as long as they embrace anti-Semites like Ilhan Omar.

    Back to you.

    Oh, sorry – Gary posted something.  I’m completely convinced of election integrity now.

    That he’s a republican means literally nothing – if you think republicans are on the side of the people, you’d be wrong.  That’s it’s on 60 Minutes, which declines to investigate much of anything of substance today, and has a healthy share of its reporting being quietly retracted years later, means less than zero.

    Republicans won’t win if we don’t do something about election integrity.  Unless you forgot about all the prior elections.  Congress, on either side, benefits from the status quo.  How could it be any other way?

    • #47
  18. Freeven Member
    Freeven
    @Freeven

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):
    Even as a pejorative, “Election Denier” doesn’t work. I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies that there was an election — just as I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies “Climate Change.” Lefties are a sad lot.

    I have to disagree, although my advice is a strict DNE (do not engage) with Gary.

     

    These pejoratives, like “racist” and “extremist” and “denier,” are weaponized language against people with differing opinions. They “work” to alienate us from each other, to silence opposition, and to cheapen the real evils of racism, extremism, and Holocaust denialism. They damage civil discourse, which is supposedly what R> is all about. I’m disappointed if R> management has decided to allow such divisive and offensive terms to be used here. But, it fits with the general societal decline we’re living through.

    After the Duke lacrosse scandal, Dennis Prager used to say “rape” has come to mean any sex the woman regrets the next day. I think he was being too generous. These false accusations are weapons used quite effectively over time and with repetition by Democrats and the Left. But, I repeat. And so does Gary.

    No disagreement on any of that. You are using work in a different sense than I am.

    • #48
  19. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):
    Even as a pejorative, “Election Denier” doesn’t work. I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies that there was an election — just as I’ve yet to come across anyone who denies “Climate Change.” Lefties are a sad lot.

    I have to disagree, although my advice is a strict DNE (do not engage) with Gary.

     

    These pejoratives, like “racist” and “extremist” and “denier,” are weaponized language against people with differing opinions. They “work” to alienate us from each other, to silence opposition, and to cheapen the real evils of racism, extremism, and Holocaust denialism. They damage civil discourse, which is supposedly what R> is all about. I’m disappointed if R> management has decided to allow such divisive and offensive terms to be used here. But, it fits with the general societal decline we’re living through.

    After the Duke lacrosse scandal, Dennis Prager used to say “rape” has come to mean any sex the woman regrets the next day. I think he was being too generous. These false accusations are weapons used quite effectively over time and with repetition by Democrats and the Left. But, I repeat. And so does Gary.

    No disagreement on any of that. You are using work in a different sense than I am.

    Yes, I understood you to mean “Election Denier” isn’t true. I just wanted to address my ongoing concern about R> management’s (lack of) judgment on the issue. 

    • #49
  20. WillowSpring Member
    WillowSpring
    @WillowSpring

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered.  Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    If

    1. The state changes the election rules without following their own constitutional principles;
    2. The FBI and Media cover up not just the Hunter Biden  notebook, but Joe Biden’s complicity and corruption  and promote false accusations against Trump;
    3. “Zucker-Bucks” are used to support what should be governmental functions;
    4. There is little to no chain of custody of mail-in ballots (even if  you ignore “2000 mules”);
    5. Ballot harvesting is not prosecuted or in many cases even investigated.
    6. Poll watchers are physically blocked from watching ballots being brought in. (Remember taping paper over the windows?  or the toilet overflow which ‘closed’ the counting due to ‘flood’)

    Then it doesn’t matter how many times you “hand-recount” the ballots, you still haven’t shown that there was “no election fraud”.  In software, this is known as “garbage-in, garbage-out’.  It doesn’t matter  how many cycles it goes through, I don’t have to declare it a gourmet meal and eat it.

    Gary – I am curious, as a Lawyer, which of the above are you willing to accept?

     

     

    • #50
  21. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    WillowSpring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered. Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    If

    1. The state changes the election rules without following their own constitutional principles;
    2. The FBI and Media cover up not just the Hunter Biden notebook, but Joe Biden’s complicity and corruption and promote false accusations against Trump;
    3. “Zucker-Bucks” are used to support what should be governmental functions;
    4. There is little to no chain of custody of mail-in ballots (even if you ignore “2000 mules”);
    5. Ballot harvesting is not prosecuted or in many cases even investigated.
    6. Poll watchers are physically blocked from watching ballots being brought in. (Remember taping paper over the windows? or the toilet overflow which ‘closed’ the counting due to ‘flood’)

    Then it doesn’t matter how many times you “hand-recount” the ballots, you still haven’t shown that there was “no election fraud”. In software, this is known as “garbage-in, garbage-out’. It doesn’t matter how many cycles it goes through, I don’t have to declare it a gourmet meal and eat it.

    Gary – I am curious, as a Lawyer, which of the above are you willing to accept?

     

     

    I resided in Maricopa County for the last 4 years, just moved back to Utah  last Spring.

    I have a sense that Arizona Republicans, and especially those who reside in Maricopa County, have in recent years suffered from a condition I would call McCain Pollution, similar to the cult of personality many anti-Trump people want to pin on Trump supporters. This results in many historic Arizona Republicans voting against Trump. Because of this, I don’t view Arizona voting pattern the same as those of the other swing states involved in the vote fraud controversy. I’m not saying there’s nothing there but it just doesn’t measure up to what I think has long been present in the cities of Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, and Atlanta. What I say here I can’t back up, it’s just my opinion that voter fraud in Phoenix is not as mature as in these other cities.

    I’m just praying that we don’t have too much Romney Pollution in Utah this time. Evan McMullin has no publicly visible qualifications to represent Utah in the Senate.

    • #51
  22. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Gazpacho Grande' (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich just went on 60 Minutes and said that the Big Lie was just that, that the allegation that Biden stole the election are horse “sh*t.” https://youtu.be/nJem4dFgs6Q

    He is a Republican. He is our outgoing Attorney General. He investigated and ran down all of the allegations where other identified so called “dead people” to find out that they were, um, not dead. And he said that the folks in “The Big Lie” are “clowns” who are peddling “horsesh*t.”

    The Republican Party will not win as along as we embrace Election Deniers, and the Democrat Party will not win as long as they embrace anti-Semites like Ilhan Omar.

    Back to you.

    Oh, sorry – Gary posted something. I’m completely convinced of election integrity now.

    That he’s a republican means literally nothing – if you think republicans are on the side of the people, you’d be wrong. That’s it’s on 60 Minutes, which declines to investigate much of anything of substance today, and has a healthy share of its reporting being quietly retracted years later, means less than zero.

    Republicans won’t win if we don’t do something about election integrity. Unless you forgot about all the prior elections. Congress, on either side, benefits from the status quo. How could it be any other way?

    Meanwhile, Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips are apparently still in jail, involving what they seem to indicate is a massive electoral fraud machine run out of China (my words, not theirs).

    • #52
  23. Luvdfromabuv Coolidge
    Luvdfromabuv
    @LuvdFromabuv

    I find your civil and fact based conversation to be a breath of fresh air.

    But here’s the information you’re missing:

     -the heritage site states 1100 voter fraud indictments that you mentioned. They appear to be single incidents meaning you are referring to only 1,100 votes. A significant percentage are Republicans stealing votes from biden. Further almost 200 million Americans were allowed to vote so what is 1100? It’s about 10% of 1% of 1% Not enough to flip an election. 

    -there was absolute proof of 11,000 votes attempted to be manufactured.  An elected Republican official recorded somebody saying find me 11,000 votes.  This was after all the votes had been counted, then after all the votes had been recounted, then after all the votes were recounted again I Believe by hand. So the only thing he could have been requesting was to create over 11,000 completely fake votes.  That person was Donald Trump who is about to be indicted for this very thing.  This remains the only sizable piece of election fraud evidence that could stand up in a court of law that has ever been uncovered for that election. 

    -humans have created an entity for determining what is true and what is false. It’s called the courts.   1 court might be mistaken. 2 courts it’s unlikely but still possible. But 60 courts including 80 judges ruled that the Republican Party had zero evidence of any substantial voter fraud on behalf of Joe Biden. In fact, Rudy Guliani admitted there was no evidence twice. Once when he was standing before a judge. The second time when he was trying to convince the leader of the Arizona house to steal the election for Trump he said: “we have no evidence only theories.”. Everyone who believes the election was stolen is denying the facts of what the courts found.  Right wing media will tell you that those 60 courts never saw the evidence so they don’t matter. But they never saw the evidence because Trump’s lawyers don’t have any and so there was none to show the judges.  Either the Republican party has no decent lawyers or it has no real election fraud evidence.  I’m sure they have plenty of good lawyers.

    • #53
  24. Luvdfromabuv Coolidge
    Luvdfromabuv
    @LuvdFromabuv

    Part 2

    -anyone who believes in this election fraud is getting their news from right wing media like fox. Let me give you an example of how reliable Fox is.  On the day of the Mar-A-Lago raid a gorgeous confident grinning woman on Fox said Trump is innocent and the FBI is bad because they could have raided Mar-A-Lago earlier than when they did.  Then the next anchorman got on. A confident, grinning, handsome, man said Trump is innocent and the FBI is bad because they could have done this raid later than when they did.  To the viewers this was proof that Trump is innocent. Fox knew they would believe this based on this preposterous reporting. And they were right.  There is some disconnect with reality going on between right wing media and maga that defies all understanding.  With Trump’s supporters willing to support him even if he’s caught shooting somebody on New York’s 5th avenue (Trump said this and was 100% correct!) Fox can throw out any lie no matter how preposterous and maga will believe it.  This is why roughly 70% of all Republicans believe the dems stole the election. Even after every single Trump appointed law enforcement official head of agency declared that there was no real election fraud. Only the LIE that makes them feel good can be believed. And anything supporting Trump makes them feel good.  Trump could declare that he is awesome because he found that there are actually two suns. Fox would report this as evidence of trump being a genius and the Dems are stupid losers and maga would believe it. 

    -you mentioned the undecideds. The deeper truth is that roughly 80% of America does not care to study how our government works, how politics really works, or the laws of reality governing the governing of our country. To them the term midterm has something to do with pregnancy.  So using their opinion as fact that massive election fraud occurred is worthless.  

    I hope this clears things up although I know it won’t.  Maga is a fact-free entity. Just like BLM is -the entity that I’m usually criticizing. What each of them believe is not based on facts but on what they want, and what their tribe believes.  

      But you deserve great credit for your civility and you do have a keen interest in finding the facts which I admire greatly.  

    Peace and love

    • #54
  25. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Luvdfromabuv (View Comment):

    -there was absolute proof of 11,000 votes attempted to be manufactured.  An elected Republican official recorded somebody saying find me 11,000 votes.  This was after all the votes had been counted, then after all the votes had been recounted, then after all the votes were recounted again I Believe by hand. So the only thing he could have been requesting was to create over 11,000 completely fake votes.  That person was Donald Trump who is about to be indicted for this very thing.  This remains the only sizable piece of election fraud evidence that could stand up in a court of law that has ever been uncovered for that election. 

    That’s certainly far from the actual and honest truth.

    • #55
  26. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Let’s get this on the table.  The heinous and leftist term Election denier, used regularly here by one of our more insensitive members, is wrong in part because it is used to cover anyone who has anything to say about the bona fides of the election.

    There is ample evidence of irregularities, but the Democrats who use the term will not concede that and are as off base as some of whom they condemn.

    • #56
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    After the Duke lacrosse scandal, Dennis Prager used to say “rape” has come to mean any sex the woman regrets the next day. I think he was being too generous. These false accusations are weapons used quite effectively over time and with repetition by Democrats and the Left. But, I repeat. And so does Gary.

    Not just the next day.  Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of rape for sex she may not have even had, almost 40 years earlier.

    • #57
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    WillowSpring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    This last election has been examined and examined, and no election fraud was discovered. Indeed, after the months long hand-recount of Maricopa County, Biden gained a few votes.

    If

    1. The state changes the election rules without following their own constitutional principles;
    2. The FBI and Media cover up not just the Hunter Biden notebook, but Joe Biden’s complicity and corruption and promote false accusations against Trump;
    3. “Zucker-Bucks” are used to support what should be governmental functions;
    4. There is little to no chain of custody of mail-in ballots (even if you ignore “2000 mules”);
    5. Ballot harvesting is not prosecuted or in many cases even investigated.
    6. Poll watchers are physically blocked from watching ballots being brought in. (Remember taping paper over the windows? or the toilet overflow which ‘closed’ the counting due to ‘flood’)

    Then it doesn’t matter how many times you “hand-recount” the ballots, you still haven’t shown that there was “no election fraud”. In software, this is known as “garbage-in, garbage-out’. It doesn’t matter how many cycles it goes through, I don’t have to declare it a gourmet meal and eat it.

    Gary – I am curious, as a Lawyer, which of the above are you willing to accept?

     

     

    But remember, he’s only a family law attorney.  I doubt issues such as chain-of-custody, at least regarding physical evidence, come up very much.  Also family law doesn’t have the same levels of appeals etc.

    • #58
  29. WillowSpring Member
    WillowSpring
    @WillowSpring

    Luvdfromabuv (View Comment):

    But you deserve great credit for your civility and you do have a keen interest in finding the facts which I admire greatly.  

    Peace and love

    It sounds like you are taking Gary’s side of the discussion, and since I probably won’t hear from him in response to my comment #50, I invite you to respond to any of the six points. 

    To make a discussion easy, I would like to hear just your response to the 4th point (the one that referred to the documentary “2000 Mules”)

    Have you seen it?  If not, then we’re done.  If so, do you disbelieve it?  Based on what?  For me, it is a very worrisome indication of fraud in the system.  The fact that people from “True the Vote” have been jailed ( for not revealing sources for other issues related to election fraud) is adding salt to the wound.

    Just for the record, I think Trump’s discussion of needing “just 11,000 votes” was misguided and typical of his saying something that could easily be taken in a way he didn’t intend.  I think he was saying that a lot more votes were questionable and it only would take 11,000 to flip the result.

     

     

    • #59
  30. WillowSpring Member
    WillowSpring
    @WillowSpring

    kedavis (View Comment):
    But remember, he’s only a family law attorney.  I doubt issues such as chain-of-custody, at least regarding physical evidence, come up very much. 

    I’m just a retired Engineer, but played a juror in a trial once and “chain-of-custody” was a very significant part of the prosecution evidence.  I think votes should be under the same control.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.