Who Will be Our Next President?

At least you admit he's the loser, although I don't get the "legitimacy" claim. How do they mean more? Sounds like a bunch of hypocritical cry babies to me.

Being a Jackass fan, I had to

__________________
“I really have to feel that I could make a difference in the movie, or I shouldn't be doing it.“
Joe Dante

Interesting...

Yeah, we're not doing that. You don't get to lie about what you initially said and completely ignore all questions, and then try to bury people in videos and unverified claims like nothing happened.

If you're going to say stuff, you should be accountable for saying it. Take some responsibility and answer the questions.

Here's a case study in how misinformation like this travels, BTW:



And here's a HUGE thread debunking most of the common voter fraud myths:

Somebody get Ja Rule on the line so we can make some sense of all this.

__________________
Imagine an eye unruled by man-made laws of perspective, an eye unprejudiced by compositional logic, an eye which does not respond to the name of everything but which must know each object encountered in life through an adventure of perception. How many colors are there in a field of grass to the crawling baby unaware of 'Green'?

-Stan Brakhage

I didn't lie about anything - I stated an opinion - that's what this whole thread is about.

If I said Kanye West will be the next President would I have to prove it? Would I have to supply evidence? Would saying something like that be a "lie"?

You can't "lie" about predictions. When this thread was made how could anyone know who the President would be? It is an invitation to guess at things.

Obviously if I say the fix is in - it is a speculation - just like a whole lot of other posts on this thread.

I'll be glad, yes, glad, that in just a few more days the results will be in and we can all go back to discussing more pressing topics such as "Does Johnny Depp abuse his spouse?" or "Actors who use secret identities/have private lives," or "Is it really best to watch a movie alone?" Oh please, do tell! We must go on!

No, you lied two ways:

First, by passing along rumors and speculation as if they were fact. I showed you the quotes in this post. You started by simply making claims, then backtracked and said they were "speculation" when questioned.

The second lie was in pretending this did not happen, which is ongoing, apparently.

Correct, which is why I didn't quote your prediction of fraud before the election. I even saw it, and excluded it, for that very reason. The things I quoted were after, by design, including the bit about registrations and election observers. Those remain unanswered and unexplained.

Okay, I'll cede the argument to you - remove my posts you feel are "lies".

I fully admit they were speculation based on current news reports from a variety of sources (like most of the other posts on this thread, since it's entire nature is one inviting speculation and opinion). The Internet and news media is currently full of such reports and even more speculations on them.

I choose not to debate at this time.

I agree with the need for transparency for the most part. I do think there are times when a president may need to lie to the people, but I would not call this situation one of those times. I'm completely on board with saying he has consistently said ridiculous things during the pandemic, there can be no argument there. Tasteless as well. My original question is has his lies caused harm. The reason I ask is because I believe the other side definitely has, and because Trump is often labeled as responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. Now I'm not claiming anything with any certainty here, it's just what I see as some reasonable thoughts. So Trump finds out about the seriousness of the virus, and at this time all of the deaths are in China, and there's been none in America. The argument is that he should have been transparent with the American people right then and there. OK, what I am wondering is what would happen next? We all understand the general idea behind not wanting people to panic. We don't have to agree with it, or agree with it in this particular instance, but we know there's a thought behind it. In this particular instance, I'm not convinced it would have caused a panic. Perhaps, and I would guess he was worried about this, it could affect the stock market and or the economy. Obviously human lives are more important, but the economy is also pretty high on the importance list. There are no deaths in America at this point and there was some thought that the virus could disappear come April with the weather change. I don't know if there's actually any evidence that this has happened with a virus in the past or if it is wishful thinking, but it was something that was talked about. Anyway, let's say he warns the public of this deadly virus coming, what happens next? My guess is next to nothing. By the end of February, we all knew how dangerous this virus was going to be. Still, nothing changed in our lives. It wasn't until after the first few days of March, after people were dying, and it was really starting to spread, that we started to see restrictions. We were also told all through March not to wear masks. My thought is that the restrictions would have come at the same time, even had we known about it earlier. It seems as though nothing was done until we were getting hit right in the face with it. Even after people were dying, many governors and health officials were telling us the risk was very low. Certainly he could have told the public more and sooner, but by not doing it, did it cost us anything? With how we eventually reacted, I have my doubts that it did. It's also not like he didn't do a single thing. He set up the coronavirus task force and restricted travel way back at the end of January. My guess is that he was hoping it wouldn't hit us, or hit us hard in the United States, and we would make it to April when it would magically disappear. If that's what he thought, he was mistaken, but was it a fatal mistake knowing how we eventually handled it once we already knew how deadly the virus was?

It's a matter of opinion but I say so what. That's who he is and that's why some people don't like him and that's why some people like him. If you want to say it's tasteless or inappropriate humor, I get it.

I get this but it should still be pointed out that he recommended wearing face coverings before the CDC did. The thing about this is that half of America doesn't want to be told to wear a mask. Trump is apparently one of those guys. I wear a mask but I don't want to be told to do it. He doesn't have the authority to tell anybody to wear a mask, but that's probably not your point. Your point is probably that he should set a better example. You're probably right, but he seems to be one of those pro American, fight for your right, do what you want type of people. I tend to agree with you, but I understand the other side of it as well.

I think he is a very upbeat person who looks at a lot of things in a positive way. When he said things like this, I thought it was a pathetic way of showing it.

I do not think he covered himself in glory during this time at all. I really got sick of him bragging about what he did, although I think part of it was self-defense. On the other hand, depending on what happens with the vaccine, he could possibly come out of this as a hero, as strange as that may seem.

Looking at it that way you are correct. I was looking at it as how decent are society as a whole is. I think we are both correct.

I'm not going to do the whole multi quote thing because I'm tired and we probably don't really disagree on all that much in reality. The real question between us seems to be the risk involved in getting an early vaccine. Am I risking more betting $5 to win $1000 than I would be risking $1 to win $10? Technically sure, but I think the reward has to be taken into account to find a balance. While you would say it's a risk trying to get a vaccine done in a rush, I would counter that it's a risk not to given what's at stake. I think we could both be right depending on how we choose to look at it.

Hundred percent agree, welcome to the party, and so nice to see you.

I really like what you've been posting the last couple of weeks. I am nobody to say I am proud of you but that is how I have felt reading them.

A nightmare for many I'm sure, but I believe a very realistic possibility.

Let's assume the lawsuits go nowhere and Biden enters the office. You have 4 years of Trump scrutinizing the presidency and tweeting about it. I don't know if people expect Biden to do a good job but I sure as hell don't. If the stock market goes down, Trump will say it wouldn't happen on my watch. If there is a terrorist attack in America, Trump will say it didn't happen on my watch. Soldiers die in a foreign conflict? Trump will say it's a terrible thing for the country. The vaccine comes out faster than anyone previously thought possible? Trump says you're welcome. Biden is going to be constantly compared to Trump and he doesn't have the personality or the balls to live up to him. People will start to look at Biden's shortcomings and wonder if they made a mistake. Trump will make damn sure that they do. Trump's base will not disappear and he's going to have a long time to prepare. I don't see any remotely decent presidential candidates on the horizon from the democrat party. It's going to be fun stuff.

Yeah, I see what you're trying to do here: create an equivalence between straightforward reporting and baseless rumors. Trying to muddy the waters so that all claims are equally speculative, all "reports" equally valid just because, hey, somebody said them.

What you're doing is not speculation. Speculation is what someone does when information is not available. It's not speculation to avoid information because finding it might prevent you believing what you want. It is, in fact, a form of dishonesty, especially when that avoidance is presented as if it were genuine skepticism.

I asked you quite clearly if you were aware of some of the basic facts about registration and overseers. You refused to answer, and the only reason you would not is if the answer is "no" but you wanted to avoid admitting it. Therefore, you heard a rumor and chose to believe it without making any attempt at all to see if it was true. You could have learned more about both topics in a matter of minutes, with minimal effort. You chose not too. Ask yourself why that is.

Not that you'll read this, let alone change your mind, but here's a study which suggests that trying to use Benford's Law ( an actual thing with lots of similar usages) to detect voter fraud doesn't really work with any reliability.

EDIT: here's a good layman-friendly explanation for why this is bunk:

It's hard to make out what's what with the craziness going on now. There could be some type of fraud and there could be mistakes. If there was it may or may not have affected the results. We can't dismiss the possibility that something off could have helped Trump. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if something sketchy went on because there's a lot that looks bad. I was under the impression that the dems started challenging the voting laws when corona came but I guess it was beforehand. I feel that if they have any problems it's more likely to stem from things that happened before the election. It'll be fascinating to see it play out.

My “no” was to your ridiculous suggestion that people who hate Trump should have voted for him. The wannabe Dictator in Chief can throw his childish tantrums on Twitter all he wants once he’s out of office. IDGAF about anything he has to say at that point.

I’m no fan of Biden (hell, I’m not even a Democrat) and I don’t think he’s going to be a great president. But I don’t need him to be a great president, I just need him to suck less than Trump. I’ll agree that the Dems don’t have any great potential candidates on the horizon but I think it would be a mistake for the Republican Party to nominate Trump ever again. Yeah his supporters are united in their support of him, but his mishandling of the pandemic, lies, and refusal to denounce white supremacist groups have lost him a lot of votes and caused some not insignificant division within the party.

__________________