What is the best way to expose President Trump’s “alternative facts”? Do you engage in debate, call him names, or simply ignore him?

So far, none of these approaches has yielded tangible results. But for journalists, at least, CNN’s Jake Tapper may have just provided a clear path forward.

On his daily political program, The Lead With Jake Tapper, the anchor and longtime political journalist decided to address Trump’s allegations of massive voter fraud head on.

“President Trump is claiming, and the White House is reaffirming, the fiction that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election,” Tapper said at the top of his broadcast. “It is, empirically, a stunning allegation for which the White House is providing no evidence. And there is a reason they are providing no evidence: There is no evidence. It is not true,” Tapper said flatly.

So far, Tapper’s smackdown might not sound all that different than anyone else calling b.s. on Trump’s lies. But instead of just being dismissive, Tapper meets the allegation head on. In debate, it’s called a steel man argument—rather than the typical straw man approach, in which you make someone’s claim sound so dumb that you don’t actually have to mount a logical defense against it.

But that didn’t mean Tapper was above throwing some haymakers. Like this part where he uses Trump’s own controversial and derided press secretary against him:

“Moments ago, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer acknowledged that the president believes three to five million votes were illegally cast in November. It was interesting what Mr. Spicer did not say; he did not say that he shared the belief after he was asked,” Tapper said.

And then he brought in the steel man, treating Trump’s argument as if it were reasonable and then fully dismantling it: “Now, has there ever been voter fraud, any instances? Yes. Massive voter fraud? Three to five million votes cast illegally in 2016? No. It’s simply not true. In fact, if there were even a fraction of the voter fraud President Trump is alleging, he would be derelict not to order an investigation,” Tapper said.

“It would likely require a vast conspiracy involving public officials all over the country and would likely have far-reaching impact in other contests, tainting races down the ballot, not just the presidential race,” he continued.

“If President Trump’s beliefs are true, Republican leaders in Congress should be holding hearings and trumpeting this injustice every single day. His Justice Department, his Department of Homeland Security—all of them would need to crack down immediately. Unless, of course, it’s not even remotely true.”

The whole thing was a master class in poignant political discourse and provides a road map for critics on either side of the political aisle for confronting Trump and his surrogates moving forward. Holding alternative facts up to the sunlight of actual facts will make that spray-tan agenda look just as tacky as it really is.

Raven wrote on Jan 29^th, 2017 at 7:01pm:

“President Trump is claiming, and the White House is reaffirming, the fiction that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election,” Tapper said at the top of his broadcast. “It is, empirically, a stunning allegation for which the White House is providing no evidence. And there is a reason they are providing no evidence: There is no evidence. It is not true,” Tapper said flatly.

And Tapper knows this how?

US Election and Vote Rigging: The question is not “if”, but “how much”


http://joannenova.com.au/2016/10/us-election-and-vote-rigging-the-question-is-not-if-but-how-much/

Alternative facts is a euphemism for lies as alternative medicine is as euphemism for quackery.

Raven wrote on Jan 29^th, 2017 at 7:01pm:

But for journalists, at least, CNN’s Jake Tapper may have just provided a clear path forward.

For journalists, he may have. But he didn't.

Trump is president. With 17 million illegals in the US, with systematic support for them by Democrats - 'sanctuary cities, sanctuary campuses', etc- it is entirely feasible that millions of illegals would have voted.

Hundreds of thousands or millions??   Or are the losers proposing that there were no illegals voting??


Why ARE there millions of illegals in the US?? That's the point, really.

A comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud from 2000 to 2014, out of more than 1 billion ballots cast. Even this tiny number is likely inflated, as the study’s author counted not just prosecutions or convictions, but any and all credible claims.

Two studies done at Arizona State University, one in 2012 and another in 2016, found similarly negligible rates of impersonation fraud. The project found 10 cases of voter impersonation fraud nationwide from 2000-2012. The follow-up study, which looked for fraud specifically in states where politicians have argued that fraud is a pernicious problem, found zero successful prosecutions for impersonation fraud in five states from 2012-2016.

It is virtually inconceivable that millions of people committed voter fraud in the election. That would mean a conspiracy involving hundreds of electoral officials all over the country.

Trump as usual is blowing steam. He insulted the intelligence of Americans throughout the election campaign and got away with it.

His ego won't allow the possibility that he failed to get all people on board.

He is a petulant man-child who won't pull the trigger on an official investigation because he knows there is no evidence to support his claims.

But he still has a point. Why isn't Trump ordering an investigation if he believes wide scale voter fraud?

The GOP on the state level has been using fear of voter fraud as a method of making it harder for the poor and black to vote. And it is working, even though proven cases of fraud are few and far between. Trump would never call for an investigation because it would expose the GOP's own fraud.

lee wrote on Jan 29^th, 2017 at 7:05pm:

Raven wrote on Jan 29th, 2017 at 7:01pm: “President Trump is claiming, and the White House is reaffirming, the fiction that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election,” Tapper said at the top of his broadcast. “It is, empirically, a stunning allegation for which the White House is providing no evidence. And there is a reason they are providing no evidence: There is no evidence. It is not true,” Tapper said flatly. And Tapper knows this how?

a complete LACK of evidence. ZERO. NADA.  And he isnt ordering a massive enquiry into it... because he knows it to be false

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 8:41am:

lee wrote on Jan 29th, 2017 at 7:05pm: Raven wrote on Jan 29th, 2017 at 7:01pm: “President Trump is claiming, and the White House is reaffirming, the fiction that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election,” Tapper said at the top of his broadcast. “It is, empirically, a stunning allegation for which the White House is providing no evidence. And there is a reason they are providing no evidence: There is no evidence. It is not true,” Tapper said flatly. And Tapper knows this how? a complete LACK of evidence. ZERO. NADA.  And he isnt ordering a massive enquiry into it... because he knows it to be false

To which you respond with "a complete LACK of evidence. ZERO. NADA. "

I didn't think you would admit to that. :D :D :D :D :D

Raven wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 1:19am:

A comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud from 2000 to 2014, out of more than 1 billion ballots cast. Even this tiny number is likely inflated, as the study’s author counted not just prosecutions or convictions, but any and all credible claims. Two studies done at Arizona State University, one in 2012 and another in 2016, found similarly negligible rates of impersonation fraud. The project found 10 cases of voter impersonation fraud nationwide from 2000-2012. The follow-up study, which looked for fraud specifically in states where politicians have argued that fraud is a pernicious problem, found zero successful prosecutions for impersonation fraud in five states from 2012-2016. It is virtually inconceivable that millions of people committed voter fraud in the election. That would mean a conspiracy involving hundreds of electoral officials all over the country. Trump as usual is blowing steam. He insulted the intelligence of Americans throughout the election campaign and got away with it. His ego won't allow the possibility that he failed to get all people on board. He is a petulant man-child who won't pull the trigger on an official investigation because he knows there is no evidence to support his claims.

So what you are saying is Tapper has NO knowledge of 2016 election.

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 10:44am:

Raven wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 1:19am: A comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud from 2000 to 2014, out of more than 1 billion ballots cast. Even this tiny number is likely inflated, as the study’s author counted not just prosecutions or convictions, but any and all credible claims. Two studies done at Arizona State University, one in 2012 and another in 2016, found similarly negligible rates of impersonation fraud. The project found 10 cases of voter impersonation fraud nationwide from 2000-2012. The follow-up study, which looked for fraud specifically in states where politicians have argued that fraud is a pernicious problem, found zero successful prosecutions for impersonation fraud in five states from 2012-2016. It is virtually inconceivable that millions of people committed voter fraud in the election. That would mean a conspiracy involving hundreds of electoral officials all over the country. Trump as usual is blowing steam. He insulted the intelligence of Americans throughout the election campaign and got away with it. His ego won't allow the possibility that he failed to get all people on board. He is a petulant man-child who won't pull the trigger on an official investigation because he knows there is no evidence to support his claims. So what you are saying is Tapper has NO knowledge of 2016 election.

Try again.  Tapper has no knowledge of any comprehensive voter fraud. Neither does anyone else - which is the point.  See what being a Trump support has done to your brain?

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 10:44am:

Raven wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 1:19am: A comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud from 2000 to 2014, out of more than 1 billion ballots cast. Even this tiny number is likely inflated, as the study’s author counted not just prosecutions or convictions, but any and all credible claims. Two studies done at Arizona State University, one in 2012 and another in 2016, found similarly negligible rates of impersonation fraud. The project found 10 cases of voter impersonation fraud nationwide from 2000-2012. The follow-up study, which looked for fraud specifically in states where politicians have argued that fraud is a pernicious problem, found zero successful prosecutions for impersonation fraud in five states from 2012-2016. It is virtually inconceivable that millions of people committed voter fraud in the election. That would mean a conspiracy involving hundreds of electoral officials all over the country. Trump as usual is blowing steam. He insulted the intelligence of Americans throughout the election campaign and got away with it. His ego won't allow the possibility that he failed to get all people on board. He is a petulant man-child who won't pull the trigger on an official investigation because he knows there is no evidence to support his claims. So what you are saying is Tapper has NO knowledge of 2016 election.

Nobody has any knowledge of massive voter fraud in the 2016. Why? Because there is no evidence of massive voter fraud in the 2016 election.

Raven wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 1:07pm:

Nobody has any knowledge of massive voter fraud in the 2016. Why? Because there is no evidence of massive voter fraud in the 2016 election.

So is absence of evidence the same as evidence of absence?

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 11:28am:

Try again.  Tapper has no knowledge of any comprehensive voter fraud. Neither does anyone else - which is the point.  See what being a Trump support has done to your brain?

So how is he proclaiming that there isn't any evidence?


Raven wrote on Jan 29^th, 2017 at 7:01pm:

“President Trump is claiming, and the White House is reaffirming, the fiction that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election,” Tapper said at the top of his broadcast. “It is, empirically, a stunning allegation for which the White House is providing no evidence. And there is a reason they are providing no evidence: There is no evidence. It is not true,” Tapper said flatly.

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 3:01pm:

Raven wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 1:07pm: Nobody has any knowledge of massive voter fraud in the 2016. Why? Because there is no evidence of massive voter fraud in the 2016 election. So is absence of evidence the same as evidence of absence?

Pretty much yes, because Trump was the one who made the original claim. He's not produced any evidence, so its safe to assume he's full of poo.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 3:05pm:

lee wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 3:01pm: Raven wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 1:07pm: Nobody has any knowledge of massive voter fraud in the 2016. Why? Because there is no evidence of massive voter fraud in the 2016 election. So is absence of evidence the same as evidence of absence? Pretty much yes, because Trump was the one who made the original claim. He's not produced any evidence, so its safe to assume he's full of poo.

Thank you for an interesting insight into your thinking.


Makes you wonder why the Democrats think the election was rigged.

"Nearly half of Democrats think the 2016 presidential election was “rigged,” according to a new poll released this week by YouGov. The poll found that a whopping 42 percent of Democrats believe the election was rigged. Only 58 percent of Democrats responded that Donald Trump was “legitimately” elected on Nov. 8."

http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/18/nearly-half-democrats-think-election-rigged/

They seem to change their minds, depending on who is claiming "victim status".

Why do you need to rig an election where winning the popular vote loses you the election?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 3:20pm:

Why do you need to rig an election where winning the popular vote loses you the election?

Because they only targeted their strongholds. ;)

It gave Hilary more votes but not more States.

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 3:31pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 3:20pm: Why do you need to rig an election where winning the popular vote loses you the election? Because they only targeted their strongholds. ;) It gave Hilary more votes but not more States.

And back to the topic at hand... Trump complains about everything not to his liking and crates conspiracies about them. his inauguration numbers were 'a conspiracy'.  Illegal voting is 'a conspiracy'.

There is a pattern developing and none of it is based on FACTS.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 5:42pm:

There is a pattern developing and none of it is based on FACTS.

And your source for this?

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 5:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 5:42pm: There is a pattern developing and none of it is based on FACTS. And your source for this?

actual hard cold facts - something Trumpoids dislike. The small numbers at the inauguration are an indisputable fact, same with voter fraud.

I presume tho that you prefer the 'alternate facts' of the Trump hysterics?

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 6:16pm:

actual hard cold facts - something Trumpoids dislike. The small numbers at the inauguration are an indisputable fact, same with voter fraud.

Please name your source for voter fraud FACT.

Just " I know so" doesn't cut it. Or are you really in a FACT FREE zone?

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 6:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 6:16pm: actual hard cold facts - something Trumpoids dislike. The small numbers at the inauguration are an indisputable fact, same with voter fraud. Please name your source for voter fraud FACT. Just " I know so" doesn't cut it. Or are you really in a FACT FREE zone?

you are channeling peccahead and being obstinate as well as ridiculous.

REPEATED investigations of voter fraud have found it virtually nonexistent. Not just one or even two but MANY. Besides, it is your idiotic hero - King Trump - that has made the claim. It is now HIS job to prove it, not mine or anyone elsese to debunk it. There is NO EVIDENCE other than his maniacal need to be loved and to win - even when he is hated and lost.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 6:40pm:

REPEATED investigations of voter fraud have found it virtually nonexistent

In the past. What about 2016? Virtually non-existent? Doesn't that mean it exists?


longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 6:40pm:

HIS job to prove it, not mine or anyone elsese to debunk it.

You're the one claiming no voter fraud in 2016. FACTUALLY. But you provide no facts. Now that is fraud. :D :D :D :D :D

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 7:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 6:40pm: REPEATED investigations of voter fraud have found it virtually nonexistent In the past. What about 2016? Virtually non-existent? Doesn't that mean it exists? longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 6:40pm: HIS job to prove it, not mine or anyone elsese to debunk it. You're the one claiming no voter fraud in 2016. FACTUALLY. But you provide no facts. Now that is fraud. :D :D :D :D :D

its a bit of a laugh watching you twist and turn. There were in fact TWO people charged with voting twice at the last election - both voted for Trump.

And i dont have to prove there was no voter fraud. It is a bit like proving there are no reptiles masquerading as humans on earth. The claim stands on its own unless you can prove otherwise.

lee wrote on Jan 30^th, 2017 at 7:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 6:40pm: REPEATED investigations of voter fraud have found it virtually nonexistent In the past. What about 2016? Virtually non-existent? Doesn't that mean it exists? longweekend58 wrote on Jan 30th, 2017 at 6:40pm: HIS job to prove it, not mine or anyone elsese to debunk it. You're the one claiming no voter fraud in 2016. FACTUALLY. But you provide no facts. Now that is fraud. :D :D :D :D :D

Its based on the starting position. The position in the past has been there is very little if any voter fraud. Thus anyone making the claim there is very little if any voter fraud doesn't have to show any evidence because its the assumed state. Trump is stating otherwise and any one else stating wide spread voter fraud has to produce the evidence.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 8:28am:

There were in fact TWO people charged with voting twice at the last election - both voted for Trump.

So you admit there was voter fraud in the 2016 election. Well done. ;)


longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 8:28am:

And i dont have to prove there was no voter fraud.

But you just admitted there was voter fraud. :D :D :D :D :D

After saying all along "There is NO EVIDENCE ". So your facts are "alternative facts"/

What a doofus.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 8:31am:

Its based on the starting position. The position in the past has been there is very little if any voter fraud. Thus anyone making the claim there is very little if any voter fraud doesn't have to show any evidence because its the assumed state

You know that investment quote?

"Past performance is not indicative of future results"? ;)

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 10:47am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 8:31am: Its based on the starting position. The position in the past has been there is very little if any voter fraud. Thus anyone making the claim there is very little if any voter fraud doesn't have to show any evidence because its the assumed state You know that investment quote? "Past performance is not indicative of future results"? ;)

and it is also garbage. Anyone who has ever invested ALWAYS looks at past performance. it is no guarantee, but it is certainly INDICATIVE.


I wouldnt have picked you for a born-again trump supporter. You have normally showed more intelligence than that.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 11:40am:

and it is also garbage. Anyone who has ever invested ALWAYS looks at past performance. it is no guarantee, but it is certainly INDICATIVE.

Nope. Just imagine if you had invested in Enron, no indication it would go bust.

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 12:14pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 11:40am: and it is also garbage. Anyone who has ever invested ALWAYS looks at past performance. it is no guarantee, but it is certainly INDICATIVE. Nope. Just imagine if you had invested in Enron, no indication it would go bust.

and imagine if you have invested in any of two million other companies whose past performance WAS indicative of future performance. While investment rules make it law to say such a thing, it is almost universally ignored because the ONLY measure we have of future success is past success. everythign else is guesswork.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 2:44pm:

While investment rules make it law to say such a thing, it is almost universally ignored because the ONLY measure we have of future success is past success. everythign else is guesswork.

It is all guesswork. ;)

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 2:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 2:44pm: While investment rules make it law to say such a thing, it is almost universally ignored because the ONLY measure we have of future success is past success. everythign else is guesswork. It is all guesswork. ;)

Tell that to the rich investers like Buffet. guesswork, my ass.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 3:25pm:

Tell that to the rich investers like Buffet. guesswork, my ass.

Buffet does a lot of research, but he still fails.

"Warren Buffett Admits To 5 Big Mistakes"

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/warren-buffett-admits-to-5-big-mistakes-2012-2?r=US&IR=T

from 2012

"7 Investing Mistakes Warren Buffett Regrets"

https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/7-investing-mistakes-warren-buffett-regrets/

in 2015

So two more errors in 3 years.

You can do the best research possible on what is publicly available, it ultimately is still guesswork whether an investment will succeed or not.

Of course insider trading is illegal, but it reduces the risk, not eliminates it.

Because people lie. Sometimes to pump up the price, sometimes to force a crash in the price.

There have been just four documented cases of voter fraud in the 2016 election

No one denies that voter fraud exists. Trump's voter fraud expert is himself registered in three states.

But Trumps allegations of fraud involving millions is inconceivable. It would involve a conspiracy of hundreds of official electors all over the country.

Trump is just sore he lost the popular vote, his ego can't abide that so he throws out these allegations to soothe his bruised ego

Raven wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 3:41pm:

No one denies that voter fraud exists.

Tapper did.


Raven wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 3:41pm:

Trump is just sore he lost the popular vote, his ego can't abide that so he throws out these allegations to soothe his bruised ego

And what of the Democrats crying fraud? Perhaps Hilary's ego couldn't handle it. ;)

Of course that was probably looking at amateur hour attempts. What about sophisticated attempts?

lee wrote on Jan 29^th, 2017 at 7:05pm:

Raven wrote on Jan 29th, 2017 at 7:01pm: “President Trump is claiming, and the White House is reaffirming, the fiction that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election,” Tapper said at the top of his broadcast. “It is, empirically, a stunning allegation for which the White House is providing no evidence. And there is a reason they are providing no evidence: There is no evidence. It is not true,” Tapper said flatly. And Tapper knows this how?

and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off?  :D

John Smith wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 3:53pm:

and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off?

Nope. But both Raven and LW have admitted there was voter fraud. How was Tapper unaware?

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 3:53pm: and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off? Nope. But both Raven and LW have admitted there was voter fraud. How was Tapper unaware?

tapper isn't referring to the odd person voting twice here or there, he's referring to trumps claim of 3 million votes. There has never been voter fraud anywhere near that scale before. If there were there would be a mountain of evidence. I know you like trump but you don't need to make a fool of yourself trying to defend him.

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 3:38pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 3:25pm: Tell that to the rich investers like Buffet. guesswork, my ass. Buffet does a lot of research, but he still fails. "Warren Buffett Admits To 5 Big Mistakes" http://www.businessinsider.com.au/warren-buffett-admits-to-5-big-mistakes-2012-2?r=US&IR=T from 2012 "7 Investing Mistakes Warren Buffett Regrets" https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/7-investing-mistakes-warren-buffett-regrets/ in 2015 So two more errors in 3 years. You can do the best research possible on what is publicly available, it ultimately is still guesswork whether an investment will succeed or not. Of course insider trading is illegal, but it reduces the risk, not eliminates it. Because people lie. Sometimes to pump up the price, sometimes to force a crash in the price.

$50B is hard to ignore.  He is doing a whole lot more RIGHT than WRong.  and rather obviously so.

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 3:53pm: and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off? Nope. But both Raven and LW have admitted there was voter fraud. How was Tapper unaware?

I believe he assumed that the reader would work out that FOUR examples of fraud - all republicans - was not in the same universe as '3-5 million' as per Trumps insane assertion.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:21pm:

$50B is hard to ignore.  He is doing a whole lot more RIGHT than WRong.  and rather obviously so.

Yes. As I said he does a lot of research. It doesn't change the fact that even he can get it wrong.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:22pm:

I believe he assumed that the reader would work out that FOUR examples of fraud - all republicans - was not in the same universe as '3-5 million' as per Trumps insane assertion.

Which of course disregards the Democrats who believe in the voter fraud the other way.

So Tapper was speaking with a broad perspective that excluded the Democrats concerns?

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 3:53pm: and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off? Nope. But both Raven and LW have admitted there was voter fraud. How was Tapper unaware?

He was addressing Trump's claims of millions of people committing fraud, never in the history of the US has this happened and it hasn't happened now. You wouldn't be able to hide that scale of fraud for long.

Trump knows this which is why he hasn't pulled the trigger on an investigation. If there was even a shred of evidence Trump would be derelict in his duties if he didn't make the investigation the number one priority of his administration. It threatens the very foundation of American democracy.

Trump spent months insulting the intelligence of Americans and getting away with it. He will continue to do so.

Raven wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:47pm:

Trump spent months insulting the intelligence of Americans and getting away with it. He will continue to do so.

As opposed to Hilary? ;)

Raven wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:47pm:

never in the history of the US has this happened and it hasn't happened now

An assertion that has not been tested. I am sure there are some sophisticated ways to do it, that wouldn't be seen at first glance.

Raven wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:47pm:

lee wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 4:02pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 3:53pm: and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off? Nope. But both Raven and LW have admitted there was voter fraud. How was Tapper unaware? He was addressing Trump's claims of millions of people committing fraud, never in the history of the US has this happened

And then there's the old adage: 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof'... Don't they?

Raven wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:47pm:

lee wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 4:02pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 3:53pm: and you claiming trump released evidence that tapper isn't aware off? Nope. But both Raven and LW have admitted there was voter fraud. How was Tapper unaware? He was addressing Trump's claims of millions of people committing fraud, never in the history of the US has this happened and it hasn't happened now. You wouldn't be able to hide that scale of fraud for long. Trump knows this which is why he hasn't pulled the trigger on an investigation. If there was even a shred of evidence Trump would be derelict in his duties if he didn't make the investigation the number one priority of his administration. It threatens the very foundation of American democracy. Trump spent months insulting the intelligence of Americans and getting away with it. He will continue to do so.

exactly and now Lee Trumpoid seems determined to believe in these 'alternative facts'.

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 4:52pm:

Raven wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 4:47pm: never in the history of the US has this happened and it hasn't happened now An assertion that has not been tested. I am sure there are some sophisticated ways to do it, that wouldn't be seen at first glance.

It has been tested MULTIPLE TIMES. Thats why Trump wont order an investigation because there is no way he will get the result he wants.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:12pm:

exactly and now Lee Trumpoid seems determined to believe in these 'alternative facts'.

Nope.


lee wrote on Jan 29^th, 2017 at 7:05pm:

And Tapper knows this how?

My original post. So how does Tapper know it is not true, if it has not been tested? No "alternative facts".

Like your "alternative facts" on shutting the EPA? ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:13pm:

It has been tested MULTIPLE TIMES.

Correction. It has been tested multiple times in the past. That has no bearing on the 2016 election.

"I'm not guilty your honour. I couldn't have robbed the bank in December 2016 on the Gold Coast. In April 2014 I was in Tasmania". :D :D :D :D :D :D

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:13pm: It has been tested MULTIPLE TIMES. Correction. It has been tested multiple times in the past. That has no bearing on the 2016 election. "I'm not guilty your honour. I couldn't have robbed the bank in December 2016 on the Gold Coast. In April 2014 I was in Tasmania". :D :D :D :D :D :D

you are a dick of the order of peccahead.

But you just prove what kind of dimwitted, morally corrupt fools support Trump.

May trump destroy something you like. After all, the chances are good.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:27pm:

lee wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:13pm: It has been tested MULTIPLE TIMES. Correction. It has been tested multiple times in the past. That has no bearing on the 2016 election. "I'm not guilty your honour. I couldn't have robbed the bank in December 2016 on the Gold Coast. In April 2014 I was in Tasmania". :D :D :D :D :D :D you are a dick of the order of peccahead. But you just prove what kind of dimwitted, morally corrupt fools support Trump. May trump destroy something you like. After all, the chances are good.

I think you're being trolled...

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:27pm:

But you just prove what kind of dimwitted, morally corrupt fools support Trump.

But it is in the same league as claiming past multiple searches for fraud, and finding limited fraud, mean that 2016 fraud did not happen, or is minimal at best.

I am sorry you do not comprehend. I should remember your comprehension issues.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:34pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:27pm: lee wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:13pm: It has been tested MULTIPLE TIMES. Correction. It has been tested multiple times in the past. That has no bearing on the 2016 election. "I'm not guilty your honour. I couldn't have robbed the bank in December 2016 on the Gold Coast. In April 2014 I was in Tasmania". :D :D :D :D :D :D you are a dick of the order of peccahead. But you just prove what kind of dimwitted, morally corrupt fools support Trump. May trump destroy something you like. After all, the chances are good. I think you're being trolled...

not sure. He seems awfully besotted with Trump.  Not sure too many trolls have a stomach for that. He is the real thing.

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 5:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31st, 2017 at 5:27pm: But you just prove what kind of dimwitted, morally corrupt fools support Trump. But it is in the same league as claiming past multiple searches for fraud, and finding limited fraud, mean that 2016 fraud did not happen, or is minimal at best. I am sorry you do not comprehend. I should remember your comprehension issues.

The scientific method that you love to proclaim so loud, does exactly that. After umpteen experiments (elections) with an incredibly low error-rate, the reasonable assumption is that the latest iteration has the same result. We do not experiment endlessly. After a while we discover that we can replicate the experiment as often as we want with near-identical results. We've set out criteria that can falsify the experiment and the undeniable conclusion is that there is an extremely small amount of voter fraud that is negligible and immaterial to the outcome.

We call it the Scientific Method.

You call it... whatever you need it to be to meet your desired outcomes.

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 31^st, 2017 at 6:29pm:

The scientific method that you love to proclaim so loud, does exactly that. After umpteen experiments (elections) with an incredibly low error-rate, the reasonable assumption is that the latest iteration has the same result. We do not experiment endlessly. After a while we discover that we can replicate the experiment as often as we want with near-identical results. We've set out criteria that can falsify the experiment and the undeniable conclusion is that there is an extremely small amount of voter fraud that is negligible and immaterial to the outcome. We call it the Scientific Method.

lol. You are Fkken ridiculous. The reason they don't experiment endlessly in science is because the results won't generally change, unless there is an outside influence, which if known,  will lead to a new experiment.

In voter fraud there is always an outside influence. Now you are using a low error-rate as an excuse for voter fraud? A low error-rate would be a mistake in the counting. Fraud isn't an error, it is a deliberate attempt to do something.