election stuff
10 responses | 0 likes
Started by mcfarm - March 29, 2022, 6:41 a.m.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-report-255000-excess-votes-for-biden-in-six-key-2020-states/ar-AAVAjew?ocid=AARDHP&li=BBnbfcL   again, the purpose of this report is not to overturn the election. so Please everyone who has their head buried deep because of small incidentals like felons voting, inaccurate rolls and all the rest of this crap from covid that has to cleaned up before the next election

By metmike - March 29, 2022, 2:11 p.m.
Like Reply


You go ahead and keep believing in things that tell you want you want to believe.

I'll use science, facts and data....authentic REAL evidence.

This study is nothing but pure speculation from a biased person(s) to use in order to extrapolate way, way beyond anything that could be accepted as legit evidence from an objective, clear thinking person.

 It estimates fraud that MIGHT HAVE happened in hundreds of counties based on wild speculation about how it could have taken place with no evidence in those counties.

It uses speculation(extrapolation of numbers in a few counties to apply to all counties) with no proof as an ASSUMPTION that it happened and tells us that's the proof. 

Some of his so called proof, is just him comparing 2020 results to 2016 results in certain regions and claiming that it couldn't have happened.

You bet it could have and it did! I went into great detail last year many times about exactly WHY it did. The one and only person responsible for that is Donald Trump's behavior, which caused the people's response when it came time to vote .......NOT Joe Biden rigging the election.

Sorry man, this is BS. Thanks for bringing it here though, so I can expose it for what it is.


Again, I found 10 times more legit fraud than everybody combined here and am aware that real fraud exists.

The difference between me and you is that I can tell the difference between real fraud and fake fraud.

This study is  FAKE fraud........ theoretical/speculative/potential fraud...where NONE WAS FOUND!

Just more of the same crap we've been dealing with the past 16 months. 



                By metmike - July 10, 2021, 12:29 p.m.            

            More theoretical and speculated and unproven fraud Tim.

Maybe I should change that to, most secure based on authentic facts and evidence but most fraudulent based on entirely unproven allegations(almost all proven false) and speculated, potential fraud that might have happened.

The ironic thing about this, is that you guys have insisted that there is 100 times more fraud than the evidence you've provided and metmike has PROVEN 10 times more fraud than all you guys put together.


It's now 7 months after the election and I will continue to ask for PROVEN fraud, based on objective and the legal definition of proof, not the same speculation of things that COULD have led to fraud or things that show small potatoes fraud that, not only do I acknowledge, I showed you tons of it already-so please don't get into trying to MIS characterizing me as somebody not looking-I've been looking closer than all you guys combined at the facts, you guys just read about it on your favorite link/source and believe what they say because its what you want to hear.

We still have not received any proof of widespread, major fraud from you guys.

You can't show it because none of your sources trying to capture the minds of republicans can show it.

That's all you guys are. People reading articles at your favorite sites telling you what to think.

Stop letting these places steal your intelligence. Be independent thinkers. Do your own research with objective minds using critical thinking.

Break free from the Trump hypnosis.

You easily see the other side being brainwashed exactly like this and think its abhorrent. Be outraged that your side is targeting you guys and doing the exact same thing, using propaganda to capture your brains!

Trump didn't target democrats with this crapola.............he used it entirely on republicans that continue to trust and support him, no matter how big the lies.

By mcfarm - March 29, 2022, 4:08 p.m.
Like Reply

John Lott studied economics at UCLA, receiving his B.A. in 1980, M.A. in 1982, and Ph.D. in 1984. Lott has held positions in law and economics at several institutions, including the Yale Law School, the Hoover Institution, UCLA, the Wharton Business School, Texas A&M University, and Rice University. Lott was the chief economic    right MM, people with Lott's bloodline and people associated with the above institutions are mostly crack pots who don't have a clue. I guess someone with AOC's background and bloodline would of been a far better pick for a deep dive into the mess of our elections.

By bear - March 29, 2022, 9:53 p.m.
Like Reply

so, has anyone noticed the new political adds.  there is no presidential election in this cycle, but they have produced these feel good ads about joe biden.  the dems are trying desperately to do something about bidens low poll numbers.  they know biden's unpopular poll numbers will hurt the dems in november.  

By metmike - March 30, 2022, 12:02 a.m.
Like Reply


Basing your case on the source being a smart person using speculative scenarios,  while ignoring thousands of other just as smart people that actually have the authentic data and evidence to prove your source is wrong........just shows that you decided on what you want to believe a long time ago and you will believe anybody saying it and disbelieve everybody that contradicts it........no matter how one sided the empirical data and evidence is against what you want to believe.

Here was another  example of you doing this mcfarm:

                the election...do not shoot the messeger            

                            56 responses |              

                Started by mcfarm - Nov. 7, 2021, 7:14 p.m.            


You thought Biden cheated to win the election.

You still think that Biden cheated to win the election and

You will always think that Biden cheated to win the election, mcfarm.

Even after you seeing 100 times the proof needed for an objective person to know that he clearly won the election.........even if you saw 1 million times the proof needed to show he won fair and square you........you will NEVER change your mind.





By mcfarm - March 30, 2022, 7:35 a.m.
Like Reply

I have posted this and posted this but since you want your own story and mine too here it is again. I have never stated Biden cheated to win. Was their cheating, absolutely there was cheating and anyone with a brain knows this. Again, was their enough to overturn the election. I have said no no and no. Cheating is a non starter for me and dems have been involved for decades. enough is enough and there is no reason to put up with it. None. If it makes you feel better to discount cheating go ahead, I think our country should be better.

By metmike - March 30, 2022, 11:11 a.m.
Like Reply

mcfarm, the links that you post(ed) speak for themselves.

If you don't agree with them, then why post them, then devoutly defend them?

They are usually the far right sources that you use to tell you what to think. This last one is no exception.

Since YOU brought up his impeccable credentials, I'll go ahead and show who he is.......which is the only reason you follow him. I always look at the facts/data and not who is providing them. In this case, Lott's long history of blatant, extreme far right bias  every time tells us exactly where he is ALWAYS coming from. This is why you like him and use him as a source. 


John Lott (political activist)


Lost Bush votes in the 2000 presidential election

In 2000, Lott argued, using a regression analysis, that George W. Bush lost at least 10,000 votes in Florida after the media incorrectly called the state for Al Gore while voting was still on-going in the more conservative parts of the state.[60] Lott's argument is used in the influential social science methodology textbook Rethinking Social Inquiry (edited by Henry Brady and David Collier) as an example of poor methodology. Contrary to Lott's study, they show that the number of lost Bush votes ranged from 28 to 56.[60]

Voter fraud claims

Further information: Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election

Lott has claimed there was voter fraud in the 2020 United States presidential election.[70] He argued there was "irregularities" in the absentee ballots in Missoula County, and later wrote a paper claiming there was evidence of fraud in the absentee ballots in Georgia and Pennsylvania.[71] A 2021 PNAS study by political scientists at Stanford University and the University of Chicago rebutted Lott's paper as being not even remotely convincing, writing that his analysis was "entirely dependent on the completely arbitrary order in which pairs of precincts in other counties are entered in the dataset" and that his conclusions about voter fraud were "utterly baseless."[71][72][73]

By metmike - March 30, 2022, 11:54 a.m.
Like Reply


As always, my favorite posts here are those that disagree with me.

Those are the posts that offer the opportunity for both sides to learn something.

A person echoing what another person already believes can also provide new information but the disagreements offer the best opportunities.

Sadly, in disagreements, most parties just dig in and defend what they think that they know and regurgitate that same old information when confronted and completely ignore the other sides points.

That may appear to be the case in this discussion.

However, I must thank you for introducing the views of and person, John Lott into my brain. Even though it looks like I disagree with him on some issues and his 2020 election paper is a pile of crap, I learned about somebody new and their views(some very interesting) that I never heard of before to be stored into my brain forever.

How about you?

By joj - March 31, 2022, 8:03 a.m.
Like Reply

I saw a really poorly made movie on TV last night. The wife of a supreme court justice attempts to overthrow the government and her husband tries to help her. Totally unrealistic. Nobody would believe it.

By metmike - March 31, 2022, 12:05 p.m.
Like Reply


Good one!

Getting hard to tell the difference between science fiction and reality!

In the age, when millions of times more information(literally) is available at our fingertips than 30 years ago. 

Actually, that's the major part of the reason. People have lost the ability to do critical thinking. They just go to their favorite site/source to hear/read the news the way they want to hear/read. 

Everything that  they think they know that is wrong, constantly get's reinforced. The truth gets rejected..........unless they already believe in the truth.

Almost nobody goes to sites to find out what people that disagree with them are stating. They go to sites to hear good reasons for what they currently think is right. 

Echo chambers. Multiply that by many billions of times every day and you have the recipe for a constantly GROWING division and intollerance of others views. 

Here are 4 quintessential examples. 

1. The fake election steal.

2. The fake climate crisis. 

3. Vaccines killing more people than COVID.

4. Trump colluded with Russia.

All science fiction used by both sides to control the thinking of as many people as possible using convincing sounding, conjoured up schemes DIS/MIS information. 

It's certainly not limited to the US. #2 is science fiction accepted as a reality around the entire globe on a scale several orders of magnitude greater than any other scam perpetrated on the people in history. And it involves hijacking science itself!

We can understand when politics does fraudulent things because people are so political and politics is dishonest. Even ministers and leaders of the faith that we associate with honesty and ethics will become biased when it comes to politics and what to believe.

But they totally don't get that scientists are human beings with political views too.  Are they more honest than men/women of the cloth? Because it's science, they are true to science? 

Scientists are NOT little people in white coats that don't vote or have political views or have material possessions or egos or reputation.

THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS like the rest of us.

They may have more degrees from college and be smarter than most people.........but so are politicians.

Politicians are some of the smartest(many with law degrees and all with gifted communication abilities) people on the planet and most will do whatever it takes to advance the agenda of their political party and try to crush the other sides agenda.

So what makes scientists different than that?

80% are democrats and half of them contribute money to political causes.

But scientists have a switch in their brains that allows them to turn the politics, materialism, emotions and other human traits off, right?

Wrong a roo!

Big misperception. I'm totally NOT saying that scientists are bad people. Just that they are people. Human beings that act just like other human beings and with climate change, many of them are acting just like politicians that align with their political party. 

We know with absolute scientific certainty based on the actual measurements for the 20 years, what the amount of warming is from increasing CO2.

It's only half what is in all the models.

But they refuse to adjust the equations in the models because they need those equations to amplify the warming to create the crisis for their political agenda.

That's not my opinion, it's a stone cold hard fact!

And they just continue to repeat the lie, that they must know is a lie or like many other things in life, they are so extremely biased that they've convinced themselves that its impossible to be wrong. 

Profound:  Smoking Guns!!  Proof with accurate 2 decade long measurement of the actual amount of radiative forcing caused by CO2 of 1 irrefutable reason for WHY global climate models continue to be too warm. Climate emergency is really about social justice and brainwashing people. Even MORE confirmation that climate models overstate atmospheric warming. Models clearly too warm yet incredibly programmed to get even HOTTER!  Now, even more confirmation why the models are too warm. August 2020 https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/57636/

By metmike - April 1, 2022, 9:24 p.m.
Like Reply

A Peer-Reviewed Statistical Analysis of the 2020 Election

Andy May 


   Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times reported on a new peer-reviewed paper that analyzes the results of the 2020 election and found Biden received 255,000 excess votes. It has been accepted for publication by the journal Public Choice and was written by Dr. John R. Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center. The linked pdf may not match the final printed version of the paper that will appear in the journal, but it is the copy that was peer-reviewed. 


  Both Dinan’s article and the paper are worth reading. Unfortunately, statistical analysis doesn’t prove anything, but I found Lott’s analysis impeccable and compelling. His discussion of the problems in several states with mail-in and absentee ballots is interesting and informative. He makes the following points very clearly.


My comment:

    Mike Maguire              

        April 1, 2022 6:24 pm

It's extremely disappointing to see so many people completely blinded by the truth because of their politics.

Tribalism now trumps science, authentic evidence, data and facts for BOTH sides:

Indisputable corruption perpetrated by Trump and those on his side:


Indisputable corruption used AGAINST Trump:


Incredibly, instead of people being able to recognize the blatantly obvious corruption in both cases, most people can only see the corruption in 1 of those cases......while being convinced that the other case was based on real truth........totally based on their political affiliation.

A person's political affiliation now determines what the truth is. Not just in all things politics but science and even in the most extreme cases of their own party's abhorrent corruption and DIS/MIS information campaign's.

Want to know a person's view on the election of 2020?

Just ask them what party they are from.

Or the election of 2016 and the Mueller investigation?

Your guy won? It was fair and legit.

Your guy/gal lost? It was rigged or fraud or colluding with Russia caused it.

Want to know what a person's view is on the vaccine or COVID(science and medicine)?

Good chance their political affiliation is all you need to know!

Want to know a person's view on the fake climate crisis?

Political affiliation is the biggest determinant of the view NOT the authentic science!