Nashville Bombing

[subgenius]

On another thread, and much to the chagrin of canpakes, i stated a clear position about - and against - any notion for widespread voter fraud.
Yet here you are (still) making false conspiracy based accusations....the irony is not lost.
Yet here you are, still unwilling to recognize your error, in the face of being proven wrong by your failure to provide a single example for that which you claim exists.
That you sincerely believe it is still my burden to further prove you wrong is the most concise example of modern day Democrat/Lib dysfunction.

Fine. What about significant enough voter fraud to invalidate the election results? Do you accept that Biden and Harris legitimately won the election?

Are you as ignorant as canpakes? or is it that you are just as dishonest?

[canpakes]

No chagrin involved there. Just amusement that you have taken this long to seemingly admit that no ‘widespread’ fraud occurred.

"this long" ? because on November 25th (over a month ago) I posted:
Not widespread, but rather narrow and targeted.
You are like the Alexandria Ocasio-CortezKG of this board.
You are dishonest, no corner, no paint.

Yes, “that long”.

Let me help you understand how words work, first by repeating your referenced post here, in its entirety:

Feel free to post examples of this widespread voter fraud, when you’re ready.

(... maybe right after you explain your figure of ‘7000 more Trump votes’ found in Georgia ...)

As uncomfortable as it is to stand more adjacent to Ajax than to...well, than to almost anyone else except Schmo or Icarus/Hawkeye/KG - I must interject.
Not widespread, but rather narrow and targeted.
But for you anomaly and coincidence are easily exchanged and even more easily dismissed.
But alas, federal judges and State legislatures do not seem to share your sentiment.

You would notice two things, if you were alert:

1. At this point, I didn’t ask you anything, let alone if you believed in any fraud. I’m not even asking ajax if he believed that it happened. I’m asking for examples.

2. Similarly, your response didn’t offer a statement of your personal belief. Your attempt to merely modify the description or type of fraud is not an assertion that you believe that fraud exists - be it widespread, or narrow, or targeted, or any combination of those.

Your repeated innuendo that you had something to show for your claims as if you believed them in any way led me to ultimately ask you directly if you even believed any of them ... which was a question that you dodged for pages and pages, until you realized that continuing to do so would make you look either stupid, or dishonest. Or both.

Having painted yourself into a corner, you’ve now finally implied that you don’t think that widespread voter fraud existed.

It took you a while, and you are still attempting to weasel out of a commitment to discuss what specific type of fraud you believe did exist, or whether it flipped the election ... but I applaud that you possess enough self-awareness to realize that your act is a dead end, and that you perceive that settling into ‘dishonest’ at this point is the safer bet. : )

[Gunnar]

Fine. What about significant enough voter fraud to invalidate the election results? Do you accept that Biden and Harris legitimately won the election?

Are you as ignorant as canpakes? or is it that you are just as dishonest?

Answering simple straightforward questions with questions or accusations, instead of simple straightforward answers, is deliberate obfuscation and deflection, and inherently dishonest and disrespectful. Only your honesty and lack of ignorance is in serious question here--not canpake's or mine. Why do you not dare answer these two honest, straightforward questions?

Do you think there is significant enough voter fraud to invalidate the election results? Do you accept that Biden and Harris legitimately won the election?

Are you afraid to give straight, unambiguous answers? Are you afraid that your answers will make you look even more foolish and/or dishonest than you already do? Are you trying to "plead the fifth?" Or, perhaps, is it just that trolling us is the only thing that really matters to you?

ETA: And please don't just claim that you already answered them, and require that we just search the entire forum to find where you supposedly did so!

[canpakes]

ETA: And please don't just claim that you already answered them, and require that we just search the entire forum to find where you supposedly did so!

Well, that certainly won’t work if he links to a post that disproves his own claim. : D

[Gunnar]

ETA: And please don't just claim that you already answered them, and require that we just search the entire forum to find where you supposedly did so!

Well, that certainly won’t work if he links to a post that disproves his own claim. : D

It wouldn't be the first time he ignorantly linked to something (not necessarily one of his own posts) that disproves his own claims. Mark my word, he will eventually do that yet again. Several of us have caught him doing that, whether he admits it or not.

I would love for him to display sufficient honesty and reason to openly acknowledge that there is not anywhere near sufficient justification for denying that Biden's election win was fully legitimate. If, by now, he still can't admit that, he is either seriously delusional, pathologically dishonest, or both.