Joe Biden Wins - Becomes 46th president of the United States

[Bladexdsl]

why do you think this is the biggest voting turnout on us history? it's because trump was so bad everyone couldn't wait to vote him out!

 

[MetoMeto]

Well...good luck Americans, you will need it.

 

[tabzer]

He is wrong buddhists are allowed to have sex

https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2018/12/14/how-do-buddhists-have-sex-8249020/amp/

I'm not trying to be condescending to you in saying this, but thanks for proving me wrong.

 

[SonowRaevius]

https://www.wired.com/story/trump-fires-christopher-krebs-cisa/

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/us/politics/trump-fires-christopher-krebs.html

In more corruption news that conservatives on here probably won't address, Donald Trump fires Cyber Security Official for telling the president there is, in fact, no election fraud.

 

[Lacius]

Put up or shut up.

Great, I have the list. If you're actually interested in settling this, here are the steps that must be followed:

1. You need to request that I post the list (I'm not going to waste time doing this now, since I don't think you actually care to see it).
2. I will post the list.
3. You will provide evidence backing up the various claims on that list.

If you can't or won't do any one of these steps, then you're demonstrably being disingenuous when you say "put up or shut up," and nobody needs to pay attention to you.

Of course @AmandaRose and @Lacius will tell you that you are wrong, because they care so much about honest representation and genuine understanding.

What? "Not having sex" is not an ideal. What are you even blathering on about? I've never posted anything that's anti-sex.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That's a logical fault that both you and @Lacius are failing to acknowledge. Personally, I cannot verify the vote. It is not transparent--so even if you do appeal to authority, it does not gain my confidence.

1. I never once argued "there's no widespread voter fraud." As I've said repeatedly, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud. So, I am not arguing that absence of evidence equals evidence of absence; I'm arguing absence of evidence equals absence of evidence, lol. Your argument falls apart here and now.
2. That all being said, absence of evidence can sometimes be evidence of absence. It's a common misconception that absence of evidence is never evidence of absence.

 

[NuadaXXX]

Biden wins? welcome USA in the dictatorship

 

[Lacius]

Biden wins? welcome USA in the dictatorship

The only candidate who demonstrated any examples of authoritarianism is Donald Trump. Hell, he is right now trying to throw out legally cast ballots in an effort to retain power.

 

[NuadaXXX]

Trump has not passed any laws that restrict you, Biden will do it day 1

In my logical understanding, only someone is a dictator who restricts the people.

 

[KingVamp]

Trump has not passed any laws that restrict you, Biden will do it day 1

In my logical understanding, only someone is a dictator who restricts the people.

Is that so? Link Link

 

[NuadaXXX]

Bad comparison, transgender comparison against restrictions that affect the whole people

 

[tabzer]

Great, I have the list. If you're actually interested in settling this, here are the steps that must be followed:

1. You need to request that I post the list (I'm not going to waste time doing this now, since I don't think you actually care to see it).
2. I will post the list.
3. You will provide evidence backing up the various claims on that list.

If you can't or won't do any one of these steps, then you're demonstrably being disingenuous when you say "put up or shut up," and nobody needs to pay attention to you.

What's with the disclaimer? Just post it. It's not my feelings that you are trying to protect.

What? "Not having sex" is not an ideal. What are you even blathering on about? I've never posted anything that's anti-sex.

Lol. I don't see how it is possible, but it's lost on you.

I never once argued "there's no widespread voter fraud." As I've said repeatedly, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud. So, I am not arguing that absence of evidence equals evidence of absence

If there is widespread voter fraud, then there is evidence. If there is zero evidence, then there is no widespread voter fraud. You want to have your cake an eat it too. This is a situation where nuance is important. Previously, you have made claims that are more aligned with reality, ie: "Trump hasn't presented evidence"--even though it wasn't considered substantial evidence, it still is evidence, but I'll let you have that. What I dispute about what you do is that you is make a statement that accounts for all of reality and possibility, essentially stating that it cannot exist.

I'm arguing absence of evidence equals absence of evidence, lol. Your argument falls apart here and now.

Disagree. Stating that there is zero evidence is, by extension, saying that there is no widespread voter fraud.

That all being said, absence of evidence can sometimes be evidence of absence. It's a common misconception that absence of evidence is never evidence of absence.

I need at least one hypothetical example where this can be true so that I can give you the benefit of the doubt that you are *not backpedaling.

 

[KingVamp]

Bad comparison, transgender comparison against restrictions that affect the whole people

So as long as only a specific group of people are restricted, a person can restrict them with no limits and not be a dictator. Is that your logic?

 

[NuadaXXX]

I would rather call that the lesser evil

 

[AmandaRose]

I would rather call that the lesser evil

Care to elaborate what you actually mean by that statement?

 

[tabzer]

Not that I am saying Trump is not a dictator, but it does seem to be supportive of the military by preventing it from being rife with lawsuits and the target of social scrutiny over a known social issue. It is totally prejudiced, but the military is stronger if it has the support of the nation while everyone blames Trump instead. It's just a thought. No supporting evidence to provide from my end.

 

[Lacius]

What's with the disclaimer? Just post it. It's not my feelings that you are trying to protect.

1. You made the claim that Trump could still win the election, but you never provided evidence of how this is possible, mathematically or otherwise. When specifically going down the route of widespread voter fraud, you never provided evidence of widespread voter fraud.
2. You made the claim I lied about making a mundane edit to my point. Whether or not I made the edit, you never provided evidence of a lie.
3. You made the claim that I said lying and pedophilia were comparable in how bad they were, but you never provided evidence.
4. You made the claim that there was another option with regard to you misunderstanding the burden of proof or being disingenuous when discussing the burden of proof, but you never provided another option. For context, you said Amanda had a burden of proof, when in fact she was calling you out for not providing evidence for other claims you made. When I described how you had the burden of proof, you continued to insist you did not. Since this followed my explanation of burden of proof, you either didn't understand burden of proof, or you were being disingenuous. There are no other options that you have demonstrated.

Lol. I don't see how it is possible, but it's lost on you.

Be specific please. I have no idea what you're talking about. You don't see how what is possible?

If there is widespread voter fraud, then there is evidence. If there is zero evidence, then there is no widespread voter fraud. You want to have your cake an eat it too. This is a situation where nuance is important. Previously, you have made claims that are more aligned with reality, ie: "Trump hasn't presented evidence"--even though it wasn't considered substantial evidence, it still is evidence, but I'll let you have that. What I dispute about what you do is that you is make a statement that accounts for all of reality and possibility, essentially stating that it cannot exist.

It is possible for there to be widespread voter fraud without there being evidence of widespread voter fraud, but the time to believe there was widespread voter fraud is when there's evidence of widespread voter fraud. I didn't once make the argument that there was definitely no widespread voter fraud (not that I don't believe this), and I never once said there absolutely couldn't be evidence of widespread voter fraud. I've only ever said there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud, and that's correct.

You would embarrass yourself less if you took the time to read my posts. You would also waste less time, because you're arguing against a version of me who doesn't exist.

Disagree. Stating that there is zero evidence is, by extension, saying that there is no widespread voter fraud.

That's not how logic works. I can say there's zero evidence of extraterrestrial aliens, for example, but that's not necessarily an argument that they don't exist, and I wouldn't make that argument.

I need at least one hypothetical example where this can be true so that I can give you the benefit of the doubt that you are *not backpedaling.

First, it doesn't matter, since I didn't argue anything other than "there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud," which means I didn't make the argument that absence of evidence is in this case evidence of absence (not that I'm saying I don't agree with that).

As for an example when absence of evidence can be evidence of absence, take the claim that I keep a pet alligator in my basement. If you come over to my basement and see no alligator, no pool, no cage, no alligator food, no blood stains, etc., then you have absence of evidence that functions as evidence of absence. The same could be said for the claim that I own a cat in my house. If you come over to my house and see no cat, no litter box, no cat food, no cat toys, no cat hair, etc., this is an example of absence of evidence equaling evidence of absence.

 

[Lacius]

Bad comparison, transgender comparison against restrictions that affect the whole people

A society that restricts the civil rights of a group can restrict the civil rights of any group. In other words, a society that's unjust for some is inherently unjust. A society that isn't free for some is a society that isn't free.

 

[VinsCool]

Honestly @Lacius and @tabzer I am getting tired of you both playing that little game of "I'm right, no I'M RIGHT!".

Pages and pages of pointless argument over something as simple as "show evidence of voting fraud", simply because each side is refusing to post their sources as long as the other one doesn't.

Sure this is pretty amusing to watch but damn I seriously wonder if you don't have anything better to do with your free time instead.

I won't be exaggerating saying this "argument" has been going for over 100 pages now.

Maybe is it time to maybe back up the statements (both of yours) instead of being so stubborn about waiting for the other person to make a move first?

Just passing by and felt like posting my observation.
Have a good day folks.

 

[ut2k4master]

Honestly @Lacius and @tabzer I am getting tired of you both playing that little game of "I'm right, no I'M RIGHT!".

Pages and pages of pointless argument over something as simple as "show evidence of voting fraud", simply because each side is refusing to post their sources as long as the other one doesn't.

Sure this is pretty amusing to watch but damn I seriously wonder if you don't have anything better to do with your free time instead.

I won't be exaggerating saying this "argument" has been going for over 100 pages now.

Maybe is it time to maybe back up the statements (both of yours) instead of being so stubborn about waiting for the other person to make a move first?

Just passing by and felt like posting my observation.
Have a good day folks.

well one side is consistently posting multiple sources, the other is just making claims. i wouldnt say theyre equal

 

[Drak0rex]

Recounts and investigations are happening. Two more scoops! <DD