Twitter fact-checks Trump tweet for the first time

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, teatime101 said:

What evidence do you have for this?

He doesnt. No one does, he can say it may lead to it and back it up with facts of how it has in the past. But there is none. So its not a fact.

[Susco]

6 minutes ago, teatime101 said:

2 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

Having an all mail-in ballot vote for the 2020 election will lead to voter fraud.

What evidence do you have for this?

The only fear Trump and his fanboys have is because a mail-in ballot will encourage more people to cast their vote, who otherwise could not be bothered for some obvious reason

[johnpetersen]

2 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

It was sure good enough for you to barf up your original opinion on the matter before actually looking into it and getting the actual facts. 

 

 

Show me the facts that prove (prove, with evidence) that there will not be voter fraud. 

5 States in which the governors and both houses of the legislature were controlled by Republicans searched for evidence of voter fraud which they were convinced existed. They found virtually nothing. 5 states including Utah have been doing voting by mail for years. No evidence of fraud there.

[Crazy Alex]

10 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Twitter deletes hate speech, which is so often a core of rightwing views, so yes, in a sense you are correct.

It often a core of leftist views as well.

[Crazy Alex]

6 minutes ago, johnpetersen said:

5 States in which the governors and both houses of the legislature were controlled by Republicans searched for evidence of voter fraud which they were convinced existed. They found virtually nothing. 5 states including Utah have been doing voting by mail for years. No evidence of fraud there.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/21/15-election-results-that-were-thrown-out-because-of-fraudulent-mail-in-ballots/

[johnpetersen]

5 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/21/15-election-results-that-were-thrown-out-because-of-fraudulent-mail-in-ballots/

But the ballots weren't actually mailed in. That was about vote harvesting of mail in ballots. A different thing altogether.

[Crazy Alex]

7 minutes ago, johnpetersen said:

According to MamaNoodle whose comment I was citing. He's the one who believes that. So your quarrel, if you have one, is with him.  Here is his comment in full:

 

"Having an all mail-in ballot vote for the 2020 election will lead to voter fraud. This is what's being said and twitter felt the need to 'fact check' it. 

Do you disagree with this statement? Because if you think this is a lie or in any way untruthful then I dont know what to tell you. To say that there will not be any voter fraud in 2020 with mail-in ballots is a position only an imbecile or a Democrat would take."

I think election security = show up with valid ID, compare signature to that of registration, paper ballot, finger dipped in purple dye.

[ChouDoufu]

2 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

No, refusing any audit is not proof that your position is correct. Its proof of absolutely nothing at all other than hiding something.

 

mama, would you accept this logic from the democrats when they complain trump is hiding something by not releasing his tax returns?  would you agree an investigation is then warranted?  if he has nothing to hide, he'd release them like every recent president has done.  so what sort of crimes is he hiding?

 

2 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

Show me the facts that prove (prove, with evidence) that there will not be voter fraud. 

 

now this is interesting!  not only are you requiring them to prove a negative, but now you're demanding they prove a hypothetical future negative.  AND you want concrete evidence from an event which has not yet transpired.

 

[Crazy Alex]

18 minutes ago, johnpetersen said:

But the ballots weren't actually mailed in. That was about vote harvesting of mail in ballots. A different thing altogether.

But still, mail in ballots were problem, yes?

[Oxx]

11 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

I think election security = show up with valid ID, compare signature to that of registration, paper ballot, finger dipped in purple dye.

Typical bleeding heart leftie.  Dye can be washed off with solvent.  Only chopping the voting finger off would be authoritative.

[Crazy Alex]

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Twitter deletes hate speech, which is so often a core of rightwing views, so yes, in a sense you are correct.

Twitter deletes hate speech. What if I tweeted about injecting Trump with a syringe full of air? That would be hate speech and deleted, correct?

[Scott Tracy]

There is a point, well made. Who fact checks the factcheckers?

 

Knowingly making a false statement has landed people in trouble, some quite recently. One on an aircraft who shouted that he had corona virus, others that said people had dropped down dead after visiting certain places. They were punished, and rightly so. So why can't politicians who lie and spread falsehoods be punished in a like manner, irrespective of their political bent? Why are they considered better than the 'ordinary folks'?

[teatime101]

39 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/21/15-election-results-that-were-thrown-out-because-of-fraudulent-mail-in-ballots/

• The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud, found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent. Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely, the report noted, that an American “will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.”

 

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

 

I'll go with a University School of Law over a 'conservative think tank', thanks.

Edited May 27, 2020 by teatime101

[Scott Tracy]

There is no hate speech in the United States. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, Oxx said:

 

Absolutely, 100% wrong.  It's a public company, listed on the New York Stock Exchange as TWTR.

So you don’t understand that a ‘public company’ is not a ‘public space’.

 

 

Next.

[Chomper Higgot]

18 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

There is a point, well made. Who fact checks the factcheckers?

 

Knowingly making a false statement has landed people in trouble, some quite recently. One on an aircraft who shouted that he had corona virus, others that said people had dropped down dead after visiting certain places. They were punished, and rightly so. So why can't politicians who lie and spread falsehoods be punished in a like manner, irrespective of their political bent? Why are they considered better than the 'ordinary folks'?

You don’t seem to know how fact checking works.

[Sujo]

24 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Twitter deletes hate speech. What if I tweeted about injecting Trump with a syringe full of air? That would be hate speech and deleted, correct?

Are you ok with trump blocking some followers. You know, freedom of speech and all.

[riclag]

18 minutes ago, teatime101 said:

• The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud, found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent. Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely, the report noted, that an American “will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.”

 

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

 

I'll go with a University School of Law over a 'conservative think tank', thanks.

The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School is a non-partisan^[2] law and public policy institute that is sometimes seen as liberal^[3][2] or progressive.^[4] The organization is named after Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brennan_Center_for_Justice

 

I'll go for showin up in person to vote,over liberal and progressive think tanks

Edited May 27, 2020 by riclag

[Lacessit]

27 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Twitter deletes hate speech. What if I tweeted about injecting Trump with a syringe full of air? That would be hate speech and deleted, correct?

Probably not, you'd only be adding a little bit more.

[candide]

56 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/21/15-election-results-that-were-thrown-out-because-of-fraudulent-mail-in-ballots/

From your source:

"Between 1992 and 2018, at least 20 voter fraud cases resulted in overturned elections, according to The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database."

 

During such a long period of time, and for all types of elections at all levels (including primary elections), it represents a ridiculously low percentage. 

 

[tropo]

6 hours ago, mikebike said:

Apparently you do not understand the first amendment.

Don't stop there. Explain why I don't, why you do and where I went wrong.  

[tropo]

12 hours ago, stevenl said:

Topic at hand, quite a few bipartisan and Republican and even Trump investigations have shown Trump to be wrong.

 

Your second paragraph is nonsense on the virus, is nonsense on the Twitter statement and is totally over the top in the china comparison.

On the topic of nonsense - both your first and 2nd paragraph fit that description rather well, but there's no need to flame. If you don't agree with something, explain why you don't agree. 

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Having an all mail-in ballot vote for the 2020 election will lead to voter fraud. This is what's being said and twitter felt the need to 'fact check' it. 

Do you disagree with this statement? Because if you think this is a lie or in any way untruthful then I dont know what to tell you. To say that there will not be any voter fraud in 2020 with mail-in ballots is a position only an imbecile or a Democrat would take.

Opening banks will lead to bank robberies.  So let's ban banks.

 

Or we can acknowledge that banks are essential to the economy and work to minimize bank robberies.

 

With a pandemic and lockdown in place, and possibly still in place in November, encouraging vote by mail is essential to democracy (not that democracy is important to Trump).  In absence of evidence that large scale voting fraud has happened in the past (and there have been lots of mail in ballots in the past), it is logical to proceed with voting by mail.

5 hours ago, Mama Noodle said:

It was sure good enough for you to barf up your original opinion on the matter before actually looking into it and getting the actual facts. 

 

 

Show me the facts that prove (prove, with evidence) that there will not be voter fraud. 

Back to the bank analogy; show me facts that prove, with evidence, that you will never rob a bank. 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/21/15-election-results-that-were-thrown-out-because-of-fraudulent-mail-in-ballots/

All minor local elections decided by a small number of votes, and all cases in which the vote rigging was caught.  How about showing an example of a national, or even state-wide, election being affected by vote rigging or ballot tampering?

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

I think election security = show up with valid ID, compare signature to that of registration, paper ballot, finger dipped in purple dye.

Do you think Trump votes that way, or ever will?

[Crazy Alex]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

All minor local elections decided by a small number of votes, and all cases in which the vote rigging was caught.  How about showing an example of a national, or even state-wide, election being affected by vote rigging or ballot tampering?

So local elections don't count? And how many were NOT caught?

 

Here's a guy recently busted for rigging Democrat primaries. I guess rigging primaries doesn't count.

 

https://www.phillyvoice.com/voter-fraud-south-philly-judge-elections-guilty-domenick-demuro-democrat-voting-machines/

 

Now comes the really trick part. It's going to take some logical thinking. Is there any reason to think people are limiting voter fraud tactics to local elections? A real toughie, isn't it?

 

And should we assume the voter fraud cases in Oregon in the 2016 election are the only people who committed fraud?

 

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/04/10-oregon-voters-plea-guilty-to-voter-fraud-in-2016-presidential-election.html

 

Hey, 2016 election. That would cover local, state and national, right?

Edited May 27, 2020 by Crazy Alex

[candide]

6 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

So local elections don't count? And how many were NOT caught?

 

Here's a guy recently busted for rigging Democrat primaries. I guess rigging primaries doesn't count.

 

https://www.phillyvoice.com/voter-fraud-south-philly-judge-elections-guilty-domenick-demuro-democrat-voting-machines/

 

Now comes the really trick part. It's going to take some logical thinking. Is there any reason to think people are limiting voter fraud tactics to local elections? A real toughie, isn't it?

 

And should we assume the voter fraud cases in Oregon in the 2016 election are the only people who committed fraud?

 

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/04/10-oregon-voters-plea-guilty-to-voter-fraud-in-2016-presidential-election.html

 

Hey, 2016 election. That would cover local, state and national, right?

The source you previously linked (a right-wing source), only found 20 cases between 1992 and 2018. It's peanuts compared to the number of local, national, primary etc... elections during this period of time.!

 

You are creating a tempest in a tea pot!

[heybruce]

49 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

So local elections don't count? And how many were NOT caught?

 

Here's a guy recently busted for rigging Democrat primaries. I guess rigging primaries doesn't count.

 

https://www.phillyvoice.com/voter-fraud-south-philly-judge-elections-guilty-domenick-demuro-democrat-voting-machines/

 

Now comes the really trick part. It's going to take some logical thinking. Is there any reason to think people are limiting voter fraud tactics to local elections? A real toughie, isn't it?

 

And should we assume the voter fraud cases in Oregon in the 2016 election are the only people who committed fraud?

 

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/04/10-oregon-voters-plea-guilty-to-voter-fraud-in-2016-presidential-election.html

 

Hey, 2016 election. That would cover local, state and national, right?

Local elections do count, but are much easier to influence with small amounts of voter fraud.  That is why it is more likely to happen in local elections.

 

Your first source doesn't specify the primaries, but they are probably for local offices.  From your first source:

 

"McSwain said DeMuro added between 27 to 46 fraudulent ballots during the three years of elections focused on by the investigation. While the numbers sound small, they represented 22% of the total votes cast in DeMuro's division in 2014, 15% in 2015 and 17% of the votes in 2016. "

 

Obviously a small number of votes in a small division.  How much influence do you think that had on the national election?

 

Your second source has access restricted, but I found this:

 

"The convictions represent a tiny fraction of the 2,051,448 votes cast in the election, in which Oregon voters elected Democratic Gov. Kate Brown and chose Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump for president."

 

"Most of the convictions involved people who cast a ballot in two different states. Many of the cases initially involved felony charges, but all were eventually reduced to a violation."    https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/04/10-oregon-voters-plea-guilty-to-voter-fraud-in-2016-presidential-election.html

 

Once again, small stuff that wouldn't influence a national or state election.

 

The penalties for voter fraud are stiff, and the likelihood of influencing a national or state election are remote.  The small number of people who are caught are usually just stupid people and not part of an organized effort. 

 

No election is perfect, but lack of participation in elections is a greater threat to democracy than the minuscule amount of proven voter fraud.

[candide]

A factcheck about previous voter fraud claims by Trump here:

 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/09/donald-trump/donald-trumps-dubious-claim-thousands-are-conspiri/

[whaleboneman]

19 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Translation of article: We have GOT to do whatever it takes to see to it Trump is not reelected.

Everyone should do all they can to make sure this pathological liar doesn’t get re-elected.