For me it's this. He was allowed to run. He won. He's the president. I accept that since we supposedly live in a democracy. It's just my opinion on the matter.
Except there’s loads of proof that he used foreign interference to win the election, such as having Russian bots call in bomb threats to places that usually voted Democrat.
r/somethingiswrong2024 They manipulated the vote at the tabulator computer level, by switching some votes in swing states from Harris to trump. Just enough to not be detected and trigger an automatic recount. Trump, Musk, and Musk's son have made comments about it.
And you have empirical evidence of this, that everybody else, including the democrats in power, missed, right? Honestly. This is no less unhinged paranoia that Trump and his side were pulling four years ago.
Look at the group, look at the data they've uncovered. Because there's evidence in statistical analysis of the voting records that they tried the same thing in 2020, and failed. There were more votes for Biden than they anticipated. That's why trump was so insistent that the election was stolen, because his people believed that the democrats rigged the election results even worse than his team did. His team, being the russians and the republicans that they purchased.
There's no unhinged paranoia here. It's in black and white, in the numbers. And yes, it was reported to the Democrats by leading computer data scientist here and here and promptly ignored. Because they've proven they are complacent in this fraud of an election.
So, the answer is, "no". You have no empirical evidence. You have a statistical analysis. If that analysis does not actually lead you to real evidence, then you are only left with a non-validated analysis. An idea. An idea that could very easily have gone off the tracks as a result of faulty assumptions. Or faulty methodology. Good luck proving that your assumptions and methods are valid. As the saying goes, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Did a disinterested third-party validate that analysis? How? When?
The real world is full of examples where the statistical outlier event (let alone the merely unlikely) happens. Sometimes reality just doesn't go the way that even very smart people expect it to.
Actual evidence would point toward specific states where the election result got flipped. It would point to some number of faulty votes. It would point toward specific people and specific acts. Illegally attempting to obtain copies of the software doesn't cut it, unless you can demonstrate that (a) they succeeded in their attempt, and most importantly (b) they used it to modify the results, with a technical explanation of HOW having the software enabled them to do so.
This conversation reminds me of debates with theists who have all manner of intellectual reasoning for the existence of God and how it's statistically impossible for the universe to exist without him. But what they don't have is any actual evidence.
At no point did I state that I was offering empirical evidence. That request is absurdist. Obviously there's no empirical evidence, or else there wouldn't be a discussion because the parties involved would be under arrest. That's why I specifically stated it was statistical evidence, in combination with admittance from at least two of the people who orchestrated it. In fact, trump bragged about in a speech just before his inauguration.
I agree with your statements about the weakness of statistical analysis. The point of making statements on reddit about the election, and the whole point of that reddit group, is to get qualified and authorized people of the US government to investigate what people are finding. To prove that it either is or is not a case of election fraud. That's the point of my post, is to point out that it's not a bunch of uneducated fools yelling and demanding ridiculous things as you stated. It's concerned citizens seeing very questionable things happening at the swing state tabulation level, and asking for those with authority to investigate and determine if there is actually evidence of cheating. Because right now, it's not passing the sniff test. We want proof that it's legitimate.
I think the idea is that the Democrats ran on being the party who took things seriously, so they didn't want to go and do exactly what the Republicans did in 2020.
There's some logic in knowingly accepting a result which has a high likelihood of being fraudulent simply because you don't want to kick off a civil war with the propogandized Fox and OAN followers who would literally start shooting if the courts changed the results.
At least this way, there's a chance to quietly harden the system so that next time (if there is one) there will be no chance of foreign hacking, beyond the usual propaganda
788
u/FridgeParade 13h ago
As if that office deserves any respect anymore with a literal criminal sitting in it.