DarkBrandon0111 said:

---

This graph is the result of an error. The corrected graph shows that Trump also received votes at every recorded time.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/04/michigan-election-ballots-mail-absentee-hour-count-update/6161367002/

But I already know what your reply is. You'll say the dems got caught and erased the evidence like you always do.

---

Before even opening that link, I said to myself "I'll bet that article contains that BS graph in which the time resolution was reduced to an hour between data points in order to hide Joe's miracle vote spike and claim it never happened." Then I opened the link and well...what do you know...there it is!

Then I noticed the user name and am now wondering if you're just a(nother) troll.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Nitro Power said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Artorias said:

---

As soon as you explain these...

---

---

Simple explanation to look-up for people who are critical thinkers and do not want to end up at their predetermined conclusions.

Michigan and Pennsylvania count in-person votes first, and only once all the Election Day votes have been tallied do they begin to count the mail-in votes.

FiveThirtyEight published a graph of the jump in votes in Wisconsin at 8:27 a.m. EST on Nov. 4 on its election live blog (here) alongside this explanation by reporter Maggie Koerth: "Biden was down in Wisconsin before the Milwaukee absentee results came in early this morning. The boost pushed him up past Trump, but the race in this state is still very, very tight."

---

Simplistic analysis shows you know nothing about statistics or auditing. That is statistically impossible, and even a simpleton can see that something is wrong there.

You're not as smart as you think you are.

---

Yeah, they are unsourced graphics on an internet chat forum. Not sure why people are having a problem seeing that fact. jk. I know why.

---

Can't argue the point, so attack the source...

I guess that is a win.

---

Yeah, that's not what that saying means. Your source is literally no source at all.

---

That graph was widely reported. Never has it been questioned until now. Months after the fact you pretend like it doesn't exist and it was made up. ok. sure you're being honest.

You have no argument. you're attacking the credibility of the info because you can't argue against it.

That is what you're saying. It is what it means. I understood your argument correctly. AGAIN, you're not levitating above the rest of us. You're not as smart as you think you are.

---

I have debunk several of the claims, and provided real sources, but sure you're being honest.

You don't want to provide specifics because you probably know they can be debunked like all the other accusations.

---

I'm glad you're conceding, and I know you won't be able to argue the point. Have a nice night.

---

No, go ahead and provide a specific example and I'll debunk it right now.

---

I already did. Explain how 1000's of votes all came in 100% for Biden. Go ahead. Explain a statistical impossibility. You can't.

Its like flipping a coin 1000's of times and getting heads every time. That what the straight line means....

---

It was a typo....lol

---

Timed exactly at the time they stopped counting for broken pipes.

---

Fulton county release all the video and debunked that claim as did the multiple audits by third parties.
https://securevotega.com/fact-check/

Quote:

---

State Farm Arena
5:22am Videos of Discovery of Water Leak When Workers Arrive

In the 5:22am videos below, workers arrive in the State Farm Arena absentee ballot processing room first thing in the morning and see the leak for the first time. Workers move tables and ballots to prevent potential water damage, but no ballots or equipment are damaged.

6:30am Videos of Initial Clean Up Activities

In the 6:30am videos below, staff members wait for the water leak to be cleaned up. You can see them moving tables but not tampering with the ballots. Poll workers return to the room and wait to resume their work.

7:11am Videos of Carpet Vacuuming and Drying

In the 7:11 am videos below, workers are vacuuming and drying floors to finish up the cleaning process. Multiple people are present getting the room ready for the remainder of the day.

8:22am Videos of Re-setup of Room to Process Ballots

In the 8:22am videos below, workers begin to move and arrange the room to the original layout prior to the leak. They move tables and ballot containers for the counting processes. There were no "secret" suitcases. In the second video, with tables set in an "L" shape against a top to bottom window wall in the background, a man moves a table with a black tablecloth that clearly has nothing underneath it. At around 10:00 pm, poll workers will put empty absentee ballot containers underneath that table as they initially prepare to stop counting ballots for the night.

9:45pm-1:00am Videos of Workers Processing Ballots, Storing Legal Ballots, Removing Legal Ballots From Storage and Scanning

In the 9:45am-1:00am videos below, the room has now been reset, the water has been cleaned, and poll workers have continued processing legal ballots. In the second video, again with the L shaped tables set against a top to bottom window wall, at 9:57 pm, empty absentee ballot containers are brought into the room as poll workers prepare to stop counting for the night. The empty containers are filled with uncounted absentee ballots, closed, sealed, and then stored under the table at 10:06 pm in a room full of people (minute 12:37-21:52). The absentee ballot containers were stored under the table because poll workers thought they were done for the night. The containers were then taken out again at 11:02 pm for processing after the poll workers were told they needed to continue working. All ballots shown in the video have been legally verified. Numerous people are in the room witnessing the process.

---

---

Oooo you got me. Political hacks have fact checked me! The live data was wrong in multiple states all at the same time and miraculously after being way down biden started all of the sudden to be getting votes at a higher rate.

---

Not miraculously. There are perfectly reasonable explanations that you chose to ignore.

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain away a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your facts are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

Quote:

---

Convenient that lots of states made the same error after stopping counting at 3AM.

---

As admitted in the Time magazine article, FNC's call of Arizona for Biden was the signal that the plan was working and stage two was a go. That resulted in the pre-planned interruptions, reset and then the spikes.

Think about this. Fox calls for Biden on election night and fairly early. But Maricopa County continued receiving thousands and thousands of ballots and were still counting for ten days after the election. Ten days. Maricopa County makes up 60% of the entire state's population.

And where were those late arriving ballots coming from? Not the US Postal Service. No, those ballots were coming from Runbeck Election Services, the company that printed the ballots in the first place, had the voter rolls, knew who had and had not voted in real time.

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

And the JSON live data supports you.

Subsequent entries by time show a decreasing count when it should have been always incremental.

That's what counting does, it increases.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

Stinky T said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Stinky T said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

Stinky T said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

Stinky T said:

---

1876er said:

---

Cheating so obvious it can't be proved.

---

See, this is just lazy posting and really serves no purpose. By design, there is no way to tie a ballot to a person after it has been submitted and tabulated. So there really is no way to go back and prove that a person's ballot was submitted or tabulated correctly. So yes, there is no way to "prove" it definitively after the fact. But that doesn't mean you can't use your brain, look at anomalies, and weird results and draw some conclusions to what may have happened.

And because it cannot be proven due to our anonymous election procedures does not mean it did not happen. Doesn't mean it did either. Wise people can consider both options.

---

But that's just it, people have proven those anomalies and weird results were not anomalies or weird results at all.

Then you need to consider the impracticality of the overarching claim that 'Trump would have been the winner if he had won these districts in these key states' when those districts wound not have gotten him to 270.

---

Statistical reasoning is not proof of it not occurring anymore than it is that it did. My point - you can't concretely "prove" anything, either way, through analysis of facts due to the nature of the process. So we are left with a bunch of statistics dorks pointing fingers in opposite directions.

My responses are not to say cheating happened or it didn't. More to say since we cannot prove anything after the fact, the process needs to be tighter than a gnat's ass leading up to an election. Anyone that tries to argue that the processes were anything but loose in some states in 2020 is nothing more than a partisan hack.

---

I don't buy the illogical argument that the integrity of the election can not be proven.

---

Ok. Then let's hear how you can definitively prove that ballot harvesting doesn't occur?

---

Nearly all ballot harvesting is perfectly legal and legitimate.

Ballot harvesting occurs legally in nearly every state in EVERY election. When you mail in a ballot, the very act of the post office employees to deliver your ballots to the election officials is, by definition, ballot harvesting. If you allow someone else to deliver your ballots to the election officials or to mail it for you, they are ballot harvesting. Each state has election laws to regulate how and when ballot harvesting may be legally done.

So nobody can prove that ballot harvesting doesn't occur because it must occur by the very nature of modern voting.

If you want to end ballot harvesting, then the only possibly way to do it is to eliminate all voting except at the polling place on election day. That would mean no absentee voting -- if you weren't in your precinct on election day, you would not be allowed to vote. It would mean no military voting unless you were stationed near your home so that you could go to your precinct to vote. Nobody who is shut in and unable to go to the polls would be able to vote.

---

The fact that you use the word nearly so many times proves my point. You have absolutely no idea what actual percentage of ballots harvested are done so illegally. If you don't know what that percentage is, then by logical reasoning you cannot determine if it affects the outcome of any given election or not, unless the margin of victory exceeded the total number of ballots harvested.

Now imagine you have an election where harvested ballots becomes an enormous percentage of the total number of ballots cast. Does the opportunity for illegally harvested ballots increase or decrease? Can you tell me what that exact percentage is? Did your election get more or less secure?

---

I don't think anyone claims that there isn't ballot harvesting that is illegal. In some states, your next door neighbor could deliver your ballot on your behalf and it would be legal. In other states, your next door neighbor could not legally deliver your ballot on your behalf.

In most such cases, the ballot harvesting would not affect the outcome of the election -- the ballot was just harvested by someone barred in that state.

What many here are claiming is that ballot harvesting is something that it is decidedly not -- ballot tampering. Whether or not ballot harvesting would be legal in an individual case, we can be sure that ballot tampering is never legal. Ballot harvesting is the term for delivering a ballot to the election officials on your behalf, no matter who delivers it and does not include ballot tampering at all.

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

---

You're pretending not to know. Try to keep up or else you're not interesting. Everyone knows which states we are talking about. Start with the ones from the link I sent you. All you're doing is stalling and obfuscating the obvious. the longer you pretend not to know what states the less credibility you have. I've sent you two graphs. You've lied about them and continue to run interference, and to pretend like I've not given you specifics.

To be clear I want you to explain away all the swing states, so your little trick of trying to bog the convo down in the little details is lame.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Convenient that lots of states made the same error after stopping counting at 3AM.

---

As admitted in the Time magazine article, FNC's call of Arizona for Biden was the signal that the plan was working and stage two was a go. That resulted in the pre-planned interruptions, reset and then the spikes.

Think about this. Fox calls for Biden on election night and fairly early. But Maricopa County continued receiving thousands and thousands of ballots and were still counting for ten days after the election. Ten days. Maricopa County makes up 60% of the entire state's population.

And where were those late arriving ballots coming from? Not the US Postal Service. No, those ballots were coming from Runbeck Election Services, the company that printed the ballots in the first place, had the voter rolls, knew who had and had not voted in real time.

---

You need to get a life beyond the 2020 election. Go enjoy retirement beyond Texags.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Artorias said:

---

As soon as you explain these...

---

---

Simple explanation to look-up for people who are critical thinkers and do not want to end up at their predetermined conclusions.

Michigan and Pennsylvania count in-person votes first, and only once all the Election Day votes have been tallied do they begin to count the mail-in votes.

FiveThirtyEight published a graph of the jump in votes in Wisconsin at 8:27 a.m. EST on Nov. 4 on its election live blog (here) alongside this explanation by reporter Maggie Koerth: "Biden was down in Wisconsin before the Milwaukee absentee results came in early this morning. The boost pushed him up past Trump, but the race in this state is still very, very tight."

---

Simplistic analysis shows you know nothing about statistics or auditing. That is statistically impossible, and even a simpleton can see that something is wrong there.

You're not as smart as you think you are.

---

Statistically impossible, you say? On what do you base that conclusion? Do you imagine that every precinct in every county should be uniform?

---

Based on the opinion professional auditors. These are the kind of anomalies that they look at for something being wrong.

Yes I expect that when someone turns in a mass of votes that big chunks of them will not be 100% for biden. That's statistically impossible. That's like flipping a coin and getting heads 100's if not 1000's of times in a row. People don't vote like that.

---

If you were to setup a ballot collection point in a firearm store in those states where such a ballot collection point is legal, would you expect the ballots to be representative of the state? Or would you expect them to be more likely to be Republican than Democrat?

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

---

You're pretending not to know. Try to keep up or else you're not interesting. Everyone knows which states we are talking about. Start with the ones from the link I sent you. All you're doing is stalling and obfuscating the obvious. the longer you pretend not to know what states the less credibility you have. I've sent you two graphs. You've lied about them and continue to run interference, and to pretend like I've not given you specifics.

To be clear I want you to explain away all the swing states, so your little trick of trying to bog the convo down in the little details is lame.

---

So you can't say or won't say?

Op. 81,000,000 votes.

eric76 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Artorias said:

---

As soon as you explain these...

---

---

Simple explanation to look-up for people who are critical thinkers and do not want to end up at their predetermined conclusions.

Michigan and Pennsylvania count in-person votes first, and only once all the Election Day votes have been tallied do they begin to count the mail-in votes.

FiveThirtyEight published a graph of the jump in votes in Wisconsin at 8:27 a.m. EST on Nov. 4 on its election live blog (here) alongside this explanation by reporter Maggie Koerth: "Biden was down in Wisconsin before the Milwaukee absentee results came in early this morning. The boost pushed him up past Trump, but the race in this state is still very, very tight."

---

Simplistic analysis shows you know nothing about statistics or auditing. That is statistically impossible, and even a simpleton can see that something is wrong there.

You're not as smart as you think you are.

---

Statistically impossible, you say? On what do you base that conclusion? Do you imagine that every precinct in every county should be uniform?

---

Based on the opinion professional auditors. These are the kind of anomalies that they look at for something being wrong.

Yes I expect that when someone turns in a mass of votes that big chunks of them will not be 100% for biden. That's statistically impossible. That's like flipping a coin and getting heads 100's if not 1000's of times in a row. People don't vote like that.

---

If you were to setup a ballot collection point in a firearm store in those states where such a ballot collection point is legal, would you expect the ballots to be representative of the state? Or would you expect them to be more likely to be Republican than Democrat?

---

100% for Biden? Dont be dense. 1000's of votes at 3AM in every swing state all came back nearly 100% for Biden. That's how you get that straight line on the graph. Come on man!

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

---

You're pretending not to know. Try to keep up or else you're not interesting. Everyone knows which states we are talking about. Start with the ones from the link I sent you. All you're doing is stalling and obfuscating the obvious. the longer you pretend not to know what states the less credibility you have. I've sent you two graphs. You've lied about them and continue to run interference, and to pretend like I've not given you specifics.

To be clear I want you to explain away all the swing states, so your little trick of trying to bog the convo down in the little details is lame.

---

So you can't say or won't say?

---

Now you've just given up and you're just lying.

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

---

You're pretending not to know. Try to keep up or else you're not interesting. Everyone knows which states we are talking about. Start with the ones from the link I sent you. All you're doing is stalling and obfuscating the obvious. the longer you pretend not to know what states the less credibility you have. I've sent you two graphs. You've lied about them and continue to run interference, and to pretend like I've not given you specifics.

To be clear I want you to explain away all the swing states, so your little trick of trying to bog the convo down in the little details is lame.

---

So you can't say or won't say?

---

Now you've just given up and you're just lying.

---

Or you have and won't give specific detail about the accusations you make.

This is a big lie that you can provide no evidence to support.

Quote:

---

1000's of votes at 3AM in every swing state all came back nearly 100% for Biden.

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Artorias said:

---

As soon as you explain these...

---

---

Simple explanation to look-up for people who are critical thinkers and do not want to end up at their predetermined conclusions.

Michigan and Pennsylvania count in-person votes first, and only once all the Election Day votes have been tallied do they begin to count the mail-in votes.

FiveThirtyEight published a graph of the jump in votes in Wisconsin at 8:27 a.m. EST on Nov. 4 on its election live blog (here) alongside this explanation by reporter Maggie Koerth: "Biden was down in Wisconsin before the Milwaukee absentee results came in early this morning. The boost pushed him up past Trump, but the race in this state is still very, very tight."

---

Simplistic analysis shows you know nothing about statistics or auditing. That is statistically impossible, and even a simpleton can see that something is wrong there.

You're not as smart as you think you are.

---

Statistically impossible, you say? On what do you base that conclusion? Do you imagine that every precinct in every county should be uniform?

---

Based on the opinion professional auditors. These are the kind of anomalies that they look at for something being wrong.

Yes I expect that when someone turns in a mass of votes that big chunks of them will not be 100% for biden. That's statistically impossible. That's like flipping a coin and getting heads 100's if not 1000's of times in a row. People don't vote like that.

---

If you were to setup a ballot collection point in a firearm store in those states where such a ballot collection point is legal, would you expect the ballots to be representative of the state? Or would you expect them to be more likely to be Republican than Democrat?

---

100% for Biden? Dont be dense. 1000's of votes at 3AM in every swing state all came back nearly 100% for Biden. That's how you get that straight line on the graph. Come on man!

---

We do need better controls to make elections more reliable. I'm not arguing that at all. Without better controls, we really don't know if there is a problem or if the votes were legitimate.

As I've said a great many times, security is not simple. When we apply a bandaid to the law to fix a perceived problem, it really means that we don't deal with the real issues. We should redesign the system so that we can be sure that the election is legal, but that takes time. If we were to start today, we might have something by the 2032 or 2036 election. But we are doing nothing so don't expect anything to change.

Malibu2 said:

---

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

---

Is that what people here are saying is 100% for Biden?

I guess Math is hard for some people.

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

---

You're pretending not to know. Try to keep up or else you're not interesting. Everyone knows which states we are talking about. Start with the ones from the link I sent you. All you're doing is stalling and obfuscating the obvious. the longer you pretend not to know what states the less credibility you have. I've sent you two graphs. You've lied about them and continue to run interference, and to pretend like I've not given you specifics.

To be clear I want you to explain away all the swing states, so your little trick of trying to bog the convo down in the little details is lame.

---

So you can't say or won't say?

---

Now you've just given up and you're just lying.

---

Or you have and won't give specific detail about the accusations you make.

This is a big lie that you can provide no evidence to support.

Quote:

---

1000's of votes at 3AM in every swing state all came back nearly 100% for Biden.

---

---

EXPLAIN THE GRAPH AND THE HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF SCREENSHOTS OUT THERE FROM EVERY OUTLET IN EVERY SWING STATE. It comes from ABC news and 538. Start there.

I can't be more clear.

You pretending I'm not being specific is dishonest.

eric76 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

---

Is that what people here are saying is 100% for Biden?

I guess Math is hard for some people.

---

Misrepresenting my arguement I see. I said that in reference to the graphs. Bad faith. Dishonest.

Malibu2 said:

---

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

---

I mentioned that earlier and it fell on deaf ears.
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3307462/replies/62679993

https://www.tmj4.com/news/election-2020/no-joe-biden-did-not-get-100-percent-of-all-milwaukee-absentee-ballots

Quote:

---

What is clear is that the majority of Milwaukeeans who voted absentee voted for Biden. However, 14 percent did vote for President Trump.
169,519 people from Milwaukee voted absentee. Of those, 23,642 voted for President Trump (14%) and 143,124 voted for Biden (84%).

When it comes to election day ballots, 78,160 were cast in Milwaukee. Biden received votes from 51,522 of them. That is 66 percent of same-day voters. Trump received 32 percent of Election Day ballots, racking up 24,771.

---

That explains the big vote jump. When Milwaukee batched the absentee ballots, the big spike came to Biden, and Trump had a tiny spike.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Jmiller said:

---

You provided an unsourced picture that anyone could have drawn up.

You are arguing in bad faith, Preacher.

---

I posted a link to a screenshot I took on election night.

It was from 538.

Every site and source showed the same data on election night. It was just the live data.

You're the one arguing in bad faith.

Either argue the point or I'm done with you. The data is not in dispute. It was the live data across the board. Even CNN would show you that.

You already admitted its impossible to have a jump in votes like that. So you say it didnt happen. I say it did, and you're being dishonest. It's either impossible, or they cheated. I believe its obvious they cheated. You have to do a bunch of mental gymnastics to explain way a lot of irregularities.

I stayed up that night and watched it happen live. You can try to gaslight me, but I don't believe in that many coincidences.

---

It's from 538 but does not have their logo or name?

Your fact are in dispute and your anecdotal observations change nothing. You can either produce a legitimate source to support your accusation, or not.

---

Glad you're conceding the point.

---

If your believe that, then you have more serious problems with comprehension and should leave this discussion.

---

I'm not arguing the veracity of the live data with you. It is what it was. I will not get bogged down by you obfuscating the truth.

Nobody serious denies that was in fact the live data. You're not honest. You cant argue the point so you're attacking my credibility. That shows you've given up trying to explain.

---

You still can't be specific. If you were serious, you should be able to provide specifics. The only thing you have provided is a made-up graphic with no sourcing (you say its from 538 but it has no logo or name). You are not making an argument, you are making a spectacle.

---

LOL have a nice night. I'll check back later in to see if you have the stones to argue the point.

---

I'll do the same to see if you can include specifics to actually formulate an argument that can be discussed.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on an explanation on how multiple states all made the same error in reporting the live data. (the data is not in dispute you cannot pretend it never happened) the logo is on there btw at the bottom. Even shows ABC news as its source. It's the only screenshot I have personally.

I'm still waiting on an explanation on how Biden could have received votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's.

It never happened is not an argument, and is dismissive. It is gaslighting, and will never be a persuasive argument.

---

To be clear, I'm still waiting on specifics.

Which states and in which counties all made the same error in reporting the live data? Please repost the pic. The only ones I see in this thread is not from you (you reposted it) and does not have a logo.

In what state and county did Biden receive votes at a 100% rate to the tune of 1000's?

Not providing specifics does not advance your argument. It is also dismissive, gaslighting and not persuasive to anyone that's not already an election denier.

---

You're pretending not to know. Try to keep up or else you're not interesting. Everyone knows which states we are talking about. Start with the ones from the link I sent you. All you're doing is stalling and obfuscating the obvious. the longer you pretend not to know what states the less credibility you have. I've sent you two graphs. You've lied about them and continue to run interference, and to pretend like I've not given you specifics.

To be clear I want you to explain away all the swing states, so your little trick of trying to bog the convo down in the little details is lame.

---

So you can't say or won't say?

---

Now you've just given up and you're just lying.

---

Or you have and won't give specific detail about the accusations you make.

This is a big lie that you can provide no evidence to support.

Quote:

---

1000's of votes at 3AM in every swing state all came back nearly 100% for Biden.

---

---

EXPLAIN THE GRAPH AND THE HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF SCREENSHOTS OUT THERE FROM EVERY OUTLET IN EVERY SWING STATE. It comes from ABC news and 538. Start there.

I can't be more clear.

You pretending I'm not being specific is dishonest.

---

Since you can't be specific then my previous answer should suffice as it addresses several 'spikes' in the public reporting of votes on election night.

I accept your defeat since you can not be more clear.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

---

Is that what people here are saying is 100% for Biden?

I guess Math is hard for some people.

---

Misrepresenting my arguement I see. I said that in reference to the graphs. Bad faith. Dishonest.

---

The graphs do not show 0% jump for Trump and a 100% jump for Biden. At scale they show a mini jump for Trump in a large one for Biden. It isn't very noticeable in the screenshots that you provided. But it is not accurate to say that the graphs are the final word about the numbers and that they indisputably show that Biden received 100% of the votes. That's not what happen and that's not what the raw data says.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

---

Is that what people here are saying is 100% for Biden?

I guess Math is hard for some people.

---

Misrepresenting my arguement I see. I said that in reference to the graphs. Bad faith. Dishonest.

---

So that isn't 100% for Biden?

I'm happy to hear that.

By the way, want to have some math fun? If p1 and p2 are two consecutive prime numbers, what is the largest that p2-p1 can be? The correct answer to that question is really quite thrilling.

Malibu2 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

From 3:26 AM to 3:44 AM the Biden vote jumped by 149,520 votes in trumps by 31,803. The vast majority was due to Milwaukee finishing its tally. There, Biden gained 143,124 votes in Trumpkin 23,642.

From AP

---

Is that what people here are saying is 100% for Biden?

I guess Math is hard for some people.

---

Misrepresenting my argument I see. I said that in reference to the graphs. Bad faith. Dishonest.

---

The graphs do not show 0% jump for Trump and a 100% jump for Biden. At scale they show a mini jump for Trump in a large one for Biden. It isn't very noticeable in the screenshots that you provided. But it is not accurate to say that the graphs are the final word about the numbers and that they indisputably show that Biden received 100% of the votes. That's not what happen and that's not what the raw data says.

---

That is a lie. The graph shows a complete flatline of Trump votes and a 90degree 100percent dump for biden. This happened in live time at 3AM i watched it with my own eyes. Trumps vote totals even went down. You cannot gaslight me.

The concept of "cities" confuses and frightens them. Why does Milwaukee report more votes than Frog Butt County?