|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 21, 2021 18:27:24 GMT -5
As I wrote earlier:
| ... For example: the pandemic. It is a symbolic message. My interpretation is that it isn’t about its effect on humanity, or such, but about how it is handled by each individual. In my case, it is part of a pattern, and precedes a major turn in my life. This is a pattern I experienced a few times before. It is also tied to having the humility to accept that being right is not enough. ...
|
So, two-fold. Ah thanks. Being right is not enough for what? To be happy? Or....? Generally speaking: not enough to create the reality that the awake-conscious-you wants, and that would be in accord with what is right (in your opinion). |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jan 21, 2021 18:29:57 GMT -5
My father always told me we had to give up our seats on the bus for the elderly. I never looked at it as a burden. Not a life or death situation though is it. And giving up a seat on the bus didn't require you to give up all your freedoms, your friends, your capacity to play in the park and bike around the streets. It didn't block you from following your passions and interests. And perhaps even more pertinently, why should kids sacrifice and give up their freedoms, when the adults aren't even taking excellent care of themselves? People are still going to McDonalds in America right? Did America suddenly go from the land of the obese to the land of the health conscious? How many have actually taken the time to explore global studies and see what other people in other countries are doing to take care of themselves? How many know about curcumin, iodine, quercetin, mugwort, and chinese herbs? I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that the basic vitamins are known about. How 'excellent' is it FOR our health to have a mindset that others are responsible and blame worthy for our own health issues? Not much faith in the type of medicine you're touting. Maybe we should let folks with appendicitis just die. You're not blaming kids by asking them to wear mask. I happen to like McDonald's. Not every day, but once in awhile. I haven't been to a western doctor in five years. I go get acupuncture every quarter. Have a Chinese doc. He doesn't claim he can cure covid. He tells me to get vaccinated. That Western medicine is good for some things. Hcq is bs. Read about its track record in Brazil. Trump was taking it before he got covid. He needed antibody treatments. Hcq did him no good. Anyway, we have quite different world views. No chance they'll reconcile. I'm moving on. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 21, 2021 18:30:19 GMT -5
Ah thanks. Being right is not enough for what? To be happy? Or....? Generally speaking: not enough to create the reality that the awake-conscious-you wants, and that would be in accord with what is right (in your opinion). I see. Yes, I don't think any spiritual teaching I've encountered as credited 'being right' as being a powerful creative tool. Personally, I've experienced being deeply deeply wrong at times, and yet that wrongness can create a sort of 'space' in which new creation can come in. I'm not going to say it's a pleasant experience, but a necessary 'deconstruction' at times in a sense. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 21, 2021 18:35:39 GMT -5
Not a life or death situation though is it. And giving up a seat on the bus didn't require you to give up all your freedoms, your friends, your capacity to play in the park and bike around the streets. It didn't block you from following your passions and interests. And perhaps even more pertinently, why should kids sacrifice and give up their freedoms, when the adults aren't even taking excellent care of themselves? People are still going to McDonalds in America right? Did America suddenly go from the land of the obese to the land of the health conscious? How many have actually taken the time to explore global studies and see what other people in other countries are doing to take care of themselves? How many know about curcumin, iodine, quercetin, mugwort, and chinese herbs? I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that the basic vitamins are known about. How 'excellent' is it FOR our health to have a mindset that others are responsible and blame worthy for our own health issues? Not much faith in the type of medicine you're touting. Maybe we should let folks with appendicitis just die. You're not blaming kids by asking them to wear mask. I happen to like McDonald's. Not every day, but once in awhile. I haven't been to a western doctor in five years. I go get acupuncture every quarter. Have a Chinese doc. He doesn't claim he can cure covid. He tells me to get vaccinated. That Western medicine is good for some things. Hcq is bs. Read about its track record in Brazil. Trump was taking it before he got covid. He needed antibody treatments. Hcq did him no good. Anyway, we have quite different world views. No chance they'll reconcile. I'm moving on. You won't have faith unless you actually look at what works (other countries are using HCQ and Ivermectin, but I had already mentioned them). The studies on HCQ are conclusive. It's useful. However, much depends on when it is used. I'm not knocking western medicine, though I think it's deeply corrupt, and thousands of lives have been lost for political reasons. Asking kids to wear a mask is clearly asking them to carry a burden of responsibility for the health of older people. If they don't, and someone dies, they will be blamed, because the dynamic of asking others to be responsible, always comes with blame when they are perceived not to be. We have different world views, but the question is, do they arise from different spiritual view, and THAT is what is relevant here. As said, issues of sovereignty, responsibility, freedom, kindness, purpose of life...that's all spiritual stuff. Are you primarily responsible for your experience? Or are others primarily responsible for your experience? |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 21, 2021 18:40:44 GMT -5
Is it better for our health to believe that we each have authority over our health (and experience in general)? Or it is better for our health to believe that others...and 'the world' in general has authority over our health (and experience in general)? Which is the more spiritual way? The basic definition of 'progressive' is, 'You are responsible for my experience'...so if I am offended, it's entirely YOUR responsibility. Politics and spirituality cannot be separated these days. This isn't about authority, but about fear, about the limiting-belief in personal impotence. Fear always degenerates in anger, in hate, and eventually into indiscriminate violence. Health is determined by your beliefs, and it is also a symbolic message from your inner-self. You have to think in terms of being healthy, not in terms of not being sick, nor of preparing for the eventuality of being sick. When you sign up for a health insurance plan, you plant the seed of illness in your subconscious. ("progressive" is a misnomer; in most cases "spirituality" too) |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jan 21, 2021 18:44:37 GMT -5
Not much faith in the type of medicine you're touting. Maybe we should let folks with appendicitis just die. You're not blaming kids by asking them to wear mask. I happen to like McDonald's. Not every day, but once in awhile. I haven't been to a western doctor in five years. I go get acupuncture every quarter. Have a Chinese doc. He doesn't claim he can cure covid. He tells me to get vaccinated. That Western medicine is good for some things. Hcq is bs. Read about its track record in Brazil. Trump was taking it before he got covid. He needed antibody treatments. Hcq did him no good. Anyway, we have quite different world views. No chance they'll reconcile. I'm moving on. You won't have faith unless you actually look at what works (other countries are using HCQ and Ivermectin, but I had already mentioned them). The studies on HCQ are conclusive. It's useful. However, much depends on when it is used. I'm not knocking western medicine, though I think it's deeply corrupt, and thousands of lives have been lost for political reasons. Asking kids to wear a mask is clearly asking them to carry a burden of responsibility for the health of older people. If they don't, and someone dies, they will be blamed, because the dynamic of asking others to be responsible, always comes with blame when they are perceived not to be. We have different world views, but the question is, do they arise from different spiritual view, and THAT is what is relevant here. As said, issues of sovereignty, responsibility, freedom, kindness, purpose of life...that's all spiritual stuff. Are you primarily responsible for your experience? Or are others primarily responsible for your experience? Ask me that question after I throw a rock at your head. Really not something I ponder at all. Lately the biggest question/issue in my life is whether to start using an Eastern backhand grip to generate more topspin. Getting ready to go play ball with my little cattle dog in the back yard. She's a happiness generator. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 21, 2021 18:51:43 GMT -5
Is it better for our health to believe that we each have authority over our health (and experience in general)? Or it is better for our health to believe that others...and 'the world' in general has authority over our health (and experience in general)? Which is the more spiritual way? The basic definition of 'progressive' is, 'You are responsible for my experience'...so if I am offended, it's entirely YOUR responsibility. Politics and spirituality cannot be separated these days. This isn't about authority, but about fear, about the limiting-belief in personal impotence. Fear always degenerates in anger, in hate, and eventually into indiscriminate violence. Health is determined by your beliefs, and it is also a symbolic message from your inner-self. You have to think in terms of being healthy, not in terms of not being sick, nor of preparing for the eventuality of being sick. When you sign up for a health insurance plan, you plant the seed of illness in your subconscious. ("progressive" is a misnomer; in most cases "spirituality" too) yes, certainly 'authority' relates to fear (and personal impotence). And yes agree with the second paragraph. I've asked folks at times....how much time and energy would you devote to your life to 'prevent' yourself from getting sick? If you had to inject yourself every 15 minutes for the rest of your life to avoid cancer, would you do so? How about every 5 minutes? Would you sit in a chair and swallow medicine all day, every day, to avoid getting sick? There's a point at which every person would say, 'screw it, I'd rather just live now and die when I die'. And of course that relates to lockdowns too. Who would be willing to only go out once a week to a shop for 10 years to seemingly reduce risk? For those who have kids...how many years of your kids lives are you willing to rob them of, in order to be seemingly less at risk? Of course, the truth is, that living in fear ultimately only attracts more of what we fear. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 21, 2021 18:53:58 GMT -5
You won't have faith unless you actually look at what works (other countries are using HCQ and Ivermectin, but I had already mentioned them). The studies on HCQ are conclusive. It's useful. However, much depends on when it is used. I'm not knocking western medicine, though I think it's deeply corrupt, and thousands of lives have been lost for political reasons. Asking kids to wear a mask is clearly asking them to carry a burden of responsibility for the health of older people. If they don't, and someone dies, they will be blamed, because the dynamic of asking others to be responsible, always comes with blame when they are perceived not to be. We have different world views, but the question is, do they arise from different spiritual view, and THAT is what is relevant here. As said, issues of sovereignty, responsibility, freedom, kindness, purpose of life...that's all spiritual stuff. Are you primarily responsible for your experience? Or are others primarily responsible for your experience? Ask me that question after I throw a rock at your head. Really not something I ponder at all. Lately the biggest question/issue in my life is whether to start using an Eastern backhand grip to generate more topspin. Getting ready to go play ball with my little cattle dog in the back yard. She's a happiness generator. But it is something you think about. It's something we all have to think about every day right now. When you see someone in a mask, the inner thought arises...''is that person taking responsibility for my health? Who is primarily responsible for my health?'' It's a very interesting time in that regard, it's forcing a lot of folks to consider their life philosophy. But enjoy your ball game! Animals are a true gift for us all at this time. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 21, 2021 19:14:24 GMT -5
This isn't about authority, but about fear, about the limiting-belief in personal impotence. Fear always degenerates in anger, in hate, and eventually into indiscriminate violence. Health is determined by your beliefs, and it is also a symbolic message from your inner-self. You have to think in terms of being healthy, not in terms of not being sick, nor of preparing for the eventuality of being sick. When you sign up for a health insurance plan, you plant the seed of illness in your subconscious. ("progressive" is a misnomer; in most cases "spirituality" too) yes, certainly 'authority' relates to fear (and personal impotence). And yes agree with the second paragraph. I've asked folks at times.... how much time and energy would you devote to your life to 'prevent' yourself from getting sick? If you had to inject yourself every 15 minutes for the rest of your life to avoid cancer, would you do so? How about every 5 minutes? Would you sit in a chair and swallow medicine all day, every day, to avoid getting sick? There's a point at which every person would say, 'screw it, I'd rather just live now and die when I die'. And of course that relates to lockdowns too. Who would be willing to only go out once a week to a shop for 10 years to seemingly reduce risk? For those who have kids...how many years of your kids lives are you willing to rob them of, in order to be seemingly less at risk? Of course, the truth is, that living in fear ultimately only attracts more of what we fear. My point is to take or do (exercise) something to make you healthier, stronger. That would have the side-effect of not getting ill. If you're already ill, you have to only think in terms of getting healthy. I take vitamins and supplements daily and exercise daily, to be healthy. To think in terms of "taking something not to get cancer" is different from "taking something to be healthy". What keeps you healthy isn't the pill ultimately, in my view. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 21, 2021 19:38:39 GMT -5
yes, certainly 'authority' relates to fear (and personal impotence). And yes agree with the second paragraph. I've asked folks at times.... how much time and energy would you devote to your life to 'prevent' yourself from getting sick? If you had to inject yourself every 15 minutes for the rest of your life to avoid cancer, would you do so? How about every 5 minutes? Would you sit in a chair and swallow medicine all day, every day, to avoid getting sick? There's a point at which every person would say, 'screw it, I'd rather just live now and die when I die'. And of course that relates to lockdowns too. Who would be willing to only go out once a week to a shop for 10 years to seemingly reduce risk? For those who have kids...how many years of your kids lives are you willing to rob them of, in order to be seemingly less at risk? Of course, the truth is, that living in fear ultimately only attracts more of what we fear. My point is to take or do (exercise) something to make you healthier, stronger. That would have the side-effect of not getting ill. If you're already ill, you have to only think in terms of getting healthy. I take vitamins and supplements daily and exercise daily, to be healthy. To think in terms of "taking something not to get cancer" is different from "taking something to be healthy". What keeps you healthy isn't the pill ultimately, in my view. I think the key aspect is that there has to be sense of enjoyment around the idea of being healthy. If there's a sense of 'duty' or 'obligation' or even 'ritual' to the idea of being healthy, then it's nowhere near as powerful as the sense of 'enjoyment'. What do you wish to create? If it's private, no problem. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 21, 2021 20:00:49 GMT -5
Are you talking about Trump v. Biden Wisconsin where the Trump campaign claimed 221,000 votes in Dane and Milwaukee counties should be thrown out because election officials in those counties misapplied the criteria for "indefinite confinement." The case decided 4-3 for the defendants by the conservative majority, elected, Wisconsin Supreme Court. The one Judge Hagedorn, a conservative who wrote the majority opinion, likened it to challenging the adopted rules of the game after the game is over. As judge Hagedorn pointed out the number of "indefiniely confined" voter applications increased in every county in Wisconsin, but Trump only challenged the votes in two. Pretty much the same case that Federal Court Judge Ludwig, a Trump appointee, dismissed with prejudice. And a dismissal a 7th Court of Appeals panel unanimously upheld. That panel also included a Trump appointed judge. How about Georgia were Trump claimed signature matching was done improperly in Gwinnet county, I believe, and an audit of 4,000 signatures by handwriting experts only found 2 suspicious signatures, which btw were later confirmed to be valid. Or the claim by some that precincts in Wayne County Michigan had more votes cast than registered voters. Again another claim contradicted by the facts. There is no such precinct. I went through 105 pages of voter stats trying to find it. It wasn't there. In fact Wayne County had 62% voter turnout compared to 68% in the state. Detroit had voter turnout number in the 50s. Hillary got 30,000 more votes in Wayne County than Biden. Or Tucker Quarrelsome readng off the names of dead people in Georgia who voted but who turned out to be very much alive. Or the postal worker who claimed he saw folks backdating ballots. He admitted he saw no such thing. Or the claim of the video that bogus votes were being pulled out from boxes under tables in Fulton County when there weren't supposed to be any election workers at that site, ordered to start counting the next morning because of the burst pipe when in fact the Georgia secretary of state had countermanned the county official order and made them count ballots through the night. Or the case of poor Ruby Freeman. Talk about screwing innocent people. Or in Arizona where they claimed a van was bringing in bogus ballots when it was a news van bringing in video equipment. I can go on. Name the case in Nevada. I'd like to research it. Look when your own AG says there was no evidence of widespread fraud, there more than likely is no widespread fraud. Plain and simple the guy lost and he lost big. By more than 7,000,000 votes. Can't wait for Scott Adams sequel to Winning Bigly. Here is a story on the Nevada case. It's notable because it's one of the few litigation's in which a trial court actually allowed the presentation of evidence, and because of the matter of hours the appellant was given to provide briefs, and how quickly it was decided, and without allowance for oral argument. There was another WI Sct. case that was decided on the same day as the one you're referring to. The plaintiff in that one was the WI Republican party, and in it the court ruled that t he votes of people who used COVID as a reason to claim indefinitely confinement were invalid. This was one of the issues I mentioned to farmer that was indeed litigated prior-to the election. The issue is significant because the WI constitution is explicit in requiring a reason for absentee balloting, and is very restrictive in what those allowable reason might be. By my recollection well over an additional 100k claims of confinement were made in 2020 over 2019 which was an increase by many multiples. Biden's alleged margin was about 10k votes, and the areas that the confinement ballots disproportionately sourced from heavily favored Biden. In order for the Trump campaign to take advantage of this ruling they would have had to individually canvass each of the voter's who claimed indefinite confinement and proved that their reason was COVID or otherwise have proven that they were not indefinitely confined. Now, our going back and forth cherry picking our strongest cases from both sides isn't likely to change anyone's mind, but I will point out (and please, this is not an insult to you personally, I'm pointing out a phenomenon) that you seem to have made up yours from material that was and is very easy to find. For example, the claim of dead voters is a controversial one, and one of the sources I found the most credible in this was Matt Brainard. You won't find that site on google, and you can barely find it on the bottom of the first page of duckduckgo if you look near the bottom AND you know to search for his name and "voter integrity project". Matt is very conservative in his claims about dead voter's because, as he explained once, there are a number of factors that can lead to false positives such as multi-generational names. So he didn't include those in his findings, but was falsely stated as claiming that by Ryan Germany during the now-infamous Trump-Raffensperger call. That's a fact you won't hear reported in the main stream media. Why is that? One of Matt's data points I found compelling were the number (in the thousands) of GA ballots that were apparently cast from PO Boxes, vacant lots and commercial addresses, all in direct violation of GA law. The reason I found this particularly interesting is because, unlike double-voting or out-of-state voting or non-citizen voting, (as far as I understand Matt's findings) this can be determined simply by inspecting the list of addresses from data that was publicly available immediately after the election. The signature match audit you're referring to was done by the GBI, with no partisan observation, and, by my understanding was matching signatures on the ballot with the signature on the paperwork that requested the ballot - rather than matching the registration and past vote signature. In past elections the usual rejection rate for absentee ballots was generally around 3%, but in GA and several of the other relevant states the rejection rate was less than .5% - and this despite that most of the mail-in voter's were first time this time and that there were an unprecedented number of mail-in ballots. If anything, the results of the GBI audit lead me to question the veracity of the GA process to an even greater degree than before because, if nothing else, of this statistical disparity from past rejection rates. Did you know that Jimmy Carter put his name to a commission report that specifically identified mail-in voting as the biggest risk to election integrity? Once ballots are mailed out they can be harvested by anyone with the will to pay or otherwise convince the receiver of that ballot to give it to them. This is a crime very much like a low-level, retail drug sale. Does anyone really think we can ever prevent it? (note that yes, she worked for a Republican, here's a Democrat example, and no, neither are from the Presidential election) As Rudy has pointed out, because of the awareness of these risks, the procedure for counting mail-in ballots is very different from counting in-person ballots. It is the partisan observation of the opening of the ballot that resulted in those past 3% rejection rates, often by matching the voter name with registration rolls, and matching the envelope signature to either past in-person or to the registration signature. In several states - including in GA - Republican poll workers were made to stand too far away to do this verification, and in several cases were ejected from the rooms and subjected to verbal and even in a few cases physical harassment. The PA Supreme Court (which is elected and 7-2 Democrat) upheld an absurd ruling that the statute requiring this process was fulfilled simply by allowing for observers to be in the same building as the count. Each of these claims of irregularity have two sides to them, and it's quite possible to isolate specific statements and claims made by both sides that have little regard for the objective truth, as most people that bother to spend the energy writing or talking about it have a vested interest in influencing opinion. We see the State Farm Arena tape very differently. I don't find Raffensperger, Sperling or Germany to be credible on the matter, first and foremost because they contradict the obvious point that the partisan observers were told that counting was going to stop, instead, offering an explanation that they supposedly left on their own accord. This is contradicted by the affidavits of those observer's, by contemporaneous news reports, and by the video, and of late, the audio. There are versions of the video that show the same stacks of ballots being fed into the counter's multiple times, and the vote totals as reported that night show the statistically improbable spike in Biden votes as correlated to the activity on the tape. Perhaps the most d@mning statistical implication is that the voting trends among blacks, hispanics, women and other traditionally Democratic cultural groups in the states with the improbable spikes were different from the trends in other urban areas, where Trump made gains in the percentage of votes with those groups. The Wayne County commissioner's who refused to certify until they were doxed and threatened refused because of the Detroit precincts that were "out of balance", which means - by my understanding - that there were mail-in votes that couldn't be accounted for by registered voters, and as I understand it, yes, there were specific precincts in Detroit where the number of votes cast actually exceeded the population of the precinct, much less the number of voting age individuals in that precinct, even much less the number of registered voters.
That last "fact", of course, is about as nth-hand as information gets, and, I think it wise for both of us to admit for the context of this dialog that each of us are in the same position here, in that if we are going to take a firm stand of belief on one side or another, it's ultimately based on trusting the word of some 3rd party. Always two sides, such as the PA Postal worker you mentioned, who has the IG inspector who the worker later claimed falsely stated that the worker recanted on tape as saying "I am trying to twist you a little bit..."  What I heard, repeatedly in Nov and Dec from the MSM, was that there was "no evidence". Rudy says he has thousands of affidavits, some of them about fake ballots dumped in the middle of the night in multiple states. One of his eye-witnesses detailed to the MI legislature how stacks of ballots were double-counted (Dominion machine would jam, the worker's would re-scan without zeroing the total), and on specific questioning he and the witness claimed they hadn't met before that day, only spoken on the phone. Raffensperger, Sperling and Germany have explained video of machines shredding ballots outside of the conference facility where the recount was done with the notion that the materials were from past elections, despite that the building was a provisional temporary use for the recount, isn't a government building, much less one associated with elections. These are just a few of the most obvious examples of incidents which go beyond the initial analyses of statistical anomaly.
Now you might not believe these affidavits or these eye-witnesses, and I can understand why you might not. But I think it very relevant to the OP that perhaps there is an opportunity here for you to potentially understand why some like me might find them credible, without having to change your mind.
As far as emotional appeal, many of us have a hard time believing that Joe got a record number of Presidential votes, especially given the campaign he ran. Guy couldn't draw a crowd with a paint-by-numbers rig.  Personally - and I know you might find this shocking - it seems to me that we're long past the point were we can trust the governmental and media sources that we simply took for granted in the past as being truthful. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 21, 2021 20:09:33 GMT -5
My point is to take or do (exercise) something to make you healthier, stronger. That would have the side-effect of not getting ill. If you're already ill, you have to only think in terms of getting healthy. I take vitamins and supplements daily and exercise daily, to be healthy. To think in terms of "taking something not to get cancer" is different from "taking something to be healthy". What keeps you healthy isn't the pill ultimately, in my view. I think the key aspect is that there has to be sense of enjoyment around the idea of being healthy. If there's a sense of 'duty' or 'obligation' or even 'ritual' to the idea of being healthy, then it's nowhere near as powerful as the sense of 'enjoyment'. What do you wish to create? If it's private, no problem. I wish to be(come) proficient in consciously creating the reality I want, by harmonizing with the other parts of my personality: inner-self, subconscious. Surely, I also have a mental list: happy, healthy, ... that applies to my awake-conscious-self's reality. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jan 21, 2021 20:26:31 GMT -5
Are you talking about Trump v. Biden Wisconsin where the Trump campaign claimed 221,000 votes in Dane and Milwaukee counties should be thrown out because election officials in those counties misapplied the criteria for "indefinite confinement." The case decided 4-3 for the defendants by the conservative majority, elected, Wisconsin Supreme Court. The one Judge Hagedorn, a conservative who wrote the majority opinion, likened it to challenging the adopted rules of the game after the game is over. As judge Hagedorn pointed out the number of "indefiniely confined" voter applications increased in every county in Wisconsin, but Trump only challenged the votes in two. Pretty much the same case that Federal Court Judge Ludwig, a Trump appointee, dismissed with prejudice. And a dismissal a 7th Court of Appeals panel unanimously upheld. That panel also included a Trump appointed judge. How about Georgia were Trump claimed signature matching was done improperly in Gwinnet county, I believe, and an audit of 4,000 signatures by handwriting experts only found 2 suspicious signatures, which btw were later confirmed to be valid. Or the claim by some that precincts in Wayne County Michigan had more votes cast than registered voters. Again another claim contradicted by the facts. There is no such precinct. I went through 105 pages of voter stats trying to find it. It wasn't there. In fact Wayne County had 62% voter turnout compared to 68% in the state. Detroit had voter turnout number in the 50s. Hillary got 30,000 more votes in Wayne County than Biden. Or Tucker Quarrelsome readng off the names of dead people in Georgia who voted but who turned out to be very much alive. Or the postal worker who claimed he saw folks backdating ballots. He admitted he saw no such thing. Or the claim of the video that bogus votes were being pulled out from boxes under tables in Fulton County when there weren't supposed to be any election workers at that site, ordered to start counting the next morning because of the burst pipe when in fact the Georgia secretary of state had countermanned the county official order and made them count ballots through the night. Or the case of poor Ruby Freeman. Talk about screwing innocent people. Or in Arizona where they claimed a van was bringing in bogus ballots when it was a news van bringing in video equipment. I can go on. Name the case in Nevada. I'd like to research it. Look when your own AG says there was no evidence of widespread fraud, there more than likely is no widespread fraud. Plain and simple the guy lost and he lost big. By more than 7,000,000 votes. Can't wait for Scott Adams sequel to Winning Bigly. Here is a story on the Nevada case. It's notable because it's one of the few litigation's in which a trial court actually allowed the presentation of evidence, and because of the matter of hours the appellant was given to provide briefs, and how quickly it was decided, and without allowance for oral argument. There was another WI Sct. case that was decided on the same day as the one you're referring to. The plaintiff in that one was the WI Republican party, and in it the court ruled that t he votes of people who used COVID as a reason to claim indefinitely confinement were invalid. This was one of the issues I mentioned to farmer that was indeed litigated prior-to the election. The issue is significant because the WI constitution is explicit in requiring a reason for absentee balloting, and is very restrictive in what those allowable reason might be. By my recollection well over an additional 100k claims of confinement were made in 2020 over 2019 which was an increase by many multiples. Biden's alleged margin was about 10k votes, and the areas that the confinement ballots disproportionately sourced from heavily favored Biden. In order for the Trump campaign to take advantage of this ruling they would have had to individually canvass each of the voter's who claimed indefinite confinement and proved that their reason was COVID or otherwise have proven that they were not indefinitely confined. Now, our going back and forth cherry picking our strongest cases from both sides isn't likely to change anyone's mind, but I will point out (and please, this is not an insult to you personally, I'm pointing out a phenomenon) that you seem to have made up yours from material that was and is very easy to find. For example, the claim of dead voters is a controversial one, and one of the sources I found the most credible in this was Matt Brainard. You won't find that site on google, and you can barely find it on the bottom of the first page of duckduckgo if you look near the bottom AND you know to search for his name and "voter integrity project". Matt is very conservative in his claims about dead voter's because, as he explained once, there are a number of factors that can lead to false positives such as multi-generational names. So he didn't include those in his findings, but was falsely stated as claiming that by Ryan Germany during the now-infamous Trump-Raffensperger call. That's a fact you won't hear reported in the main stream media. Why is that? One of Matt's data points I found compelling were the number (in the thousands) of GA ballots that were apparently cast from PO Boxes, vacant lots and commercial addresses, all in direct violation of GA law. The reason I found this particularly interesting is because, unlike double-voting or out-of-state voting or non-citizen voting, (as far as I understand Matt's findings) this can be determined simply by inspecting the list of addresses from data that was publicly available immediately after the election. The signature match audit you're referring to was done by the GBI, with no partisan observation, and, by my understanding was matching signatures on the ballot with the signature on the paperwork that requested the ballot - rather than matching the registration and past vote signature. In past elections the usual rejection rate for absentee ballots was generally around 3%, but in GA and several of the other relevant states the rejection rate was less than .5% - and this despite that most of the mail-in voter's were first time this time and that there were an unprecedented number of mail-in ballots. Did you know that Jimmy Carter put his name to a commission report that specifically identified mail-in voting as the biggest risk to election integrity? Once ballots are mailed out they can be harvested by anyone with the will to pay or otherwise convince the receiver of that ballot to give it to them. This is a crime very much like a low-level, retail drug sale. Does anyone really think we can ever prevent it? (note that yes, she worked for a Republican, here's a Democrat example, and no, neither are from the Presidential election) As Rudy has pointed out, because of the awareness of these risks, the procedure for counting mail-in ballots is very different from counting in-person ballots. It is the partisan observation of the opening of the ballot that resulted in those past 3% rejection rates, often by matching the voter name with registration rolls, and matching the envelope signature to either past in-person or to the registration signature. In several states - including in GA - Republican poll workers were made to stand too far away to do this verification, and in several cases were ejected from the rooms and subjected to verbal and even in a few cases physical harassment. The PA Supreme Court (which is elected and 7-2 Democrat) upheld an absurd ruling that the statute requiring this process was fulfilled simply by allowing for observers to be in the same building as the count. Each of these claims of irregularity have two sides to them, and it's quite possible to isolate specific statements and claims made by both sides that have little regard for the objective truth, as most people that bother to spend the energy writing or talking about it have a vested interest in influencing opinion. We see the State Farm Arena tape very differently. I don't find Raffensperger, Sperling or Germany to be credible on the matter, first and foremost because they contradict the obvious point that the partisan observers were told that counting was going to stop, instead, offering an explanation that they supposedly left on their own accord. This is contradicted by the affidavits of those observer's, by contemporaneous news reports, and by the video, and of late, the audio. There are versions of the video that show the same stacks of ballots being fed into the counter's multiple times, and the vote totals as reported that night show the statistically improbable spike in Biden votes as correlated to the activity on the tape. Perhaps the most d@mning statistical implication is that the voting trends among blacks, hispanics, women and other traditionally Democratic cultural groups in the states with the improbable spikes were different from the trends in other urban areas, where Trump made gains in the percentage of votes with those groups. The Wayne County commissioner's who refused to certify until they were doxed and threatened refused because of the Detroit precincts that were "out of balance", which means - by my understanding - that there were mail-in votes that couldn't be accounted for by registered voters, and as I understand it, yes, there were specific precincts in Detroit where the number of votes cast actually exceeded the population of the precinct, much less the number of voting age individuals in that precinct, even much less the number of registered voters.
That last "fact", of course, is about as nth-hand as information gets, and, I think it wise for both of us to admit for the context of this dialog that each of us are in the same position here, in that if we are going to take a firm stand of belief on one side or another, it's ultimately based on trusting the word of some 3rd party. Always two sides, such as the PA Postal worker you mentioned, who has the IG inspector who the worker later claimed falsely stated that the worker recanted on tape as saying "I am trying to twist you a little bit..." What I heard, repeatedly in Nov and Dec from the MSM, was that there was "no evidence". Rudy says he has thousands of affidavits, some of them about fake ballots dumped in the middle of the night in multiple states. One of his eye-witnesses detailed to the MI legislature how stacks of ballots were double-counted (Dominion machine would jam, the worker's would re-scan without zeroing the total), and on specific questioning he and the witness claimed they hadn't met before that day, only spoken on the phone. Raffensperger, Sperling and Germany have explained video of machines shredding ballots outside of the conference facility where the recount was done with the notion that the materials were from past elections, despite that the building was a provisional temporary use for the recount, isn't a government building, much less one associated with elections. These are just a few of the most obvious examples of incidents which go beyond the initial analyses of statistical anomaly.
Now you might not believe these affidavits or these eye-witnesses, and I can understand why you might not. But I think it very relevant to the OP that perhaps there is an opportunity here for you to potentially understand why some like me might find them credible, without having to change your mind.
As far as emotional appeal, many of us have a hard time believing that Joe got a record number of Presidential votes, especially given the campaign he ran. Guy couldn't draw a crowd with a paint-by-numbers rig. Personally - and I know you might find this shocking - it seems to me that we're long past the point were we can trust the governmental and media sources that we simply took for granted in the past as being truthful. I deleted the post because I have no desire to engage in this and regretted posting it. I'm telling you regarding Wayne County what you assert is incorrect. There are no precincts with more votes cast than population. Regarding stacks of ballots being scanned multiple times, you know as well as I do that databases don't allow primary key duplicates. Unless you're buying into the Dominion conspiracy. If they were scanned multiple times, it's more than likely that the scan failed. I would offer the same argument you propose that your political proclivities predispose you to ignore certain facts. The most poignant of these is why did Barr state the election was won by Biden? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 21, 2021 20:50:03 GMT -5
Or Tucker Quarrelsome readng off the names of dead people in Georgia who voted but who turned out to be very much alive. Tucker actually included an apology and retraction to an elderly lady whose name he broadcast, about two nights after it. Included her picture and a nice little bio and explanation about how he (not blaming his staff) had come to the wrong conclusion. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that I can't find it over on youtube. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 21, 2021 21:01:46 GMT -5
Here is a story on the Nevada case. It's notable because it's one of the few litigation's in which a trial court actually allowed the presentation of evidence, and because of the matter of hours the appellant was given to provide briefs, and how quickly it was decided, and without allowance for oral argument. There was another WI Sct. case that was decided on the same day as the one you're referring to. The plaintiff in that one was the WI Republican party, and in it the court ruled that t he votes of people who used COVID as a reason to claim indefinitely confinement were invalid. This was one of the issues I mentioned to farmer that was indeed litigated prior-to the election. The issue is significant because the WI constitution is explicit in requiring a reason for absentee balloting, and is very restrictive in what those allowable reason might be. By my recollection well over an additional 100k claims of confinement were made in 2020 over 2019 which was an increase by many multiples. Biden's alleged margin was about 10k votes, and the areas that the confinement ballots disproportionately sourced from heavily favored Biden. In order for the Trump campaign to take advantage of this ruling they would have had to individually canvass each of the voter's who claimed indefinite confinement and proved that their reason was COVID or otherwise have proven that they were not indefinitely confined. Now, our going back and forth cherry picking our strongest cases from both sides isn't likely to change anyone's mind, but I will point out (and please, this is not an insult to you personally, I'm pointing out a phenomenon) that you seem to have made up yours from material that was and is very easy to find. For example, the claim of dead voters is a controversial one, and one of the sources I found the most credible in this was Matt Brainard. You won't find that site on google, and you can barely find it on the bottom of the first page of duckduckgo if you look near the bottom AND you know to search for his name and "voter integrity project". Matt is very conservative in his claims about dead voter's because, as he explained once, there are a number of factors that can lead to false positives such as multi-generational names. So he didn't include those in his findings, but was falsely stated as claiming that by Ryan Germany during the now-infamous Trump-Raffensperger call. That's a fact you won't hear reported in the main stream media. Why is that? One of Matt's data points I found compelling were the number (in the thousands) of GA ballots that were apparently cast from PO Boxes, vacant lots and commercial addresses, all in direct violation of GA law. The reason I found this particularly interesting is because, unlike double-voting or out-of-state voting or non-citizen voting, (as far as I understand Matt's findings) this can be determined simply by inspecting the list of addresses from data that was publicly available immediately after the election. The signature match audit you're referring to was done by the GBI, with no partisan observation, and, by my understanding was matching signatures on the ballot with the signature on the paperwork that requested the ballot - rather than matching the registration and past vote signature. In past elections the usual rejection rate for absentee ballots was generally around 3%, but in GA and several of the other relevant states the rejection rate was less than .5% - and this despite that most of the mail-in voter's were first time this time and that there were an unprecedented number of mail-in ballots. Did you know that Jimmy Carter put his name to a commission report that specifically identified mail-in voting as the biggest risk to election integrity? Once ballots are mailed out they can be harvested by anyone with the will to pay or otherwise convince the receiver of that ballot to give it to them. This is a crime very much like a low-level, retail drug sale. Does anyone really think we can ever prevent it? (note that yes, she worked for a Republican, here's a Democrat example, and no, neither are from the Presidential election) As Rudy has pointed out, because of the awareness of these risks, the procedure for counting mail-in ballots is very different from counting in-person ballots. It is the partisan observation of the opening of the ballot that resulted in those past 3% rejection rates, often by matching the voter name with registration rolls, and matching the envelope signature to either past in-person or to the registration signature. In several states - including in GA - Republican poll workers were made to stand too far away to do this verification, and in several cases were ejected from the rooms and subjected to verbal and even in a few cases physical harassment. The PA Supreme Court (which is elected and 7-2 Democrat) upheld an absurd ruling that the statute requiring this process was fulfilled simply by allowing for observers to be in the same building as the count. Each of these claims of irregularity have two sides to them, and it's quite possible to isolate specific statements and claims made by both sides that have little regard for the objective truth, as most people that bother to spend the energy writing or talking about it have a vested interest in influencing opinion. We see the State Farm Arena tape very differently. I don't find Raffensperger, Sperling or Germany to be credible on the matter, first and foremost because they contradict the obvious point that the partisan observers were told that counting was going to stop, instead, offering an explanation that they supposedly left on their own accord. This is contradicted by the affidavits of those observer's, by contemporaneous news reports, and by the video, and of late, the audio. There are versions of the video that show the same stacks of ballots being fed into the counter's multiple times, and the vote totals as reported that night show the statistically improbable spike in Biden votes as correlated to the activity on the tape. Perhaps the most d@mning statistical implication is that the voting trends among blacks, hispanics, women and other traditionally Democratic cultural groups in the states with the improbable spikes were different from the trends in other urban areas, where Trump made gains in the percentage of votes with those groups. The Wayne County commissioner's who refused to certify until they were doxed and threatened refused because of the Detroit precincts that were "out of balance", which means - by my understanding - that there were mail-in votes that couldn't be accounted for by registered voters, and as I understand it, yes, there were specific precincts in Detroit where the number of votes cast actually exceeded the population of the precinct, much less the number of voting age individuals in that precinct, even much less the number of registered voters.
That last "fact", of course, is about as nth-hand as information gets, and, I think it wise for both of us to admit for the context of this dialog that each of us are in the same position here, in that if we are going to take a firm stand of belief on one side or another, it's ultimately based on trusting the word of some 3rd party. Always two sides, such as the PA Postal worker you mentioned, who has the IG inspector who the worker later claimed falsely stated that the worker recanted on tape as saying "I am trying to twist you a little bit..." What I heard, repeatedly in Nov and Dec from the MSM, was that there was "no evidence". Rudy says he has thousands of affidavits, some of them about fake ballots dumped in the middle of the night in multiple states. One of his eye-witnesses detailed to the MI legislature how stacks of ballots were double-counted (Dominion machine would jam, the worker's would re-scan without zeroing the total), and on specific questioning he and the witness claimed they hadn't met before that day, only spoken on the phone. Raffensperger, Sperling and Germany have explained video of machines shredding ballots outside of the conference facility where the recount was done with the notion that the materials were from past elections, despite that the building was a provisional temporary use for the recount, isn't a government building, much less one associated with elections. These are just a few of the most obvious examples of incidents which go beyond the initial analyses of statistical anomaly.
Now you might not believe these affidavits or these eye-witnesses, and I can understand why you might not. But I think it very relevant to the OP that perhaps there is an opportunity here for you to potentially understand why some like me might find them credible, without having to change your mind.
As far as emotional appeal, many of us have a hard time believing that Joe got a record number of Presidential votes, especially given the campaign he ran. Guy couldn't draw a crowd with a paint-by-numbers rig. Personally - and I know you might find this shocking - it seems to me that we're long past the point were we can trust the governmental and media sources that we simply took for granted in the past as being truthful. I deleted the post because I have no desire to engage in this and regretted posting it. I'm telling you regarding Wayne County what you assert is incorrect. There are no precincts with more votes cast than population. Regarding stacks of ballots being scanned multiple times, you know as well as I do that databases don't allow primary key duplicates. Unless you're buying into the Dominion conspiracy. If they were scanned multiple times, it's more than likely that the scan failed. I would offer the same argument you propose that your political proclivities predispose you to ignore certain facts. The most poignant of these is why did Barr state the election was won by Biden? What I wrote actually admitted this -- or at least I certainly meant to imply it by referring to the proclivity of each side and how we're each in the same nth-hand boat. Perhaps you're misreading what I prefaced that wasn't insult: my point was that your perspective is easily found by searching or consuming media, as it's by far the dominant narrative broadcast. The fact was that those Detroit precincts were officially reported as "unbalanced", and, to my knowledge, that was never explained. The population claim is an interesting one, as it should be easy to either confirm or debunk based on raw data, and I'd certainly be interested if you have a source either way. You're making an assumption about the way the Dominion system works that neither of us is really privy to, the claims of the rescanning are made from a review of the video evidence and based on eye-witness reports. My opinion as to the nature of Barr's claim is far from objective. It seems to me that he didn't find what he never really looked for, and his lack of interest is the same as his motivation for delaying the Durham probe. The one most salient factor of the Turmp phenomenon is that it finally put some reality into what I'd term as the past uniparty theater of contest that was instead cooperation, at the expense of the American people. The only people that Trump united are the political, financial, economic and cultural elites, and I pose to you, why is it accepted norm that the political elites live in 10 figure houses after having lived lives of ostensible "public service" on 6 figure salaries? |
|
