Jump to content

Scylla Rhiadra

Resident
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,902

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    182

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Scylla Rhiadra

  1. Scylla Rhiadra
  2. Scylla Rhiadra
    And the only presidential candidate to openly encourage his supporters to vote more than once was . . . Donald Trump. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-tells-supporters-vote-twice-ensure-their-precious-vote-has-n1239194
  3. Scylla Rhiadra
    Who knew Rick Astley ate kebabs?
  4. Scylla Rhiadra
    Pffft. Call me a liberal? Have I insulted you?
  5. Scylla Rhiadra
    In fairness to Arielle, although she is not doing her own fact-checking, she is, unlike another poster who simply shows up to post absurd material from Infowars and other way-out conspiracy sites, at least listening to and engaging with our responses. And she's acknowledging when something has been debunked. This is actually how this is supposed to work -- through discussion, the marshalling of evidence, and a mind open enough to recognize when one has been wrong about something.
  6. Scylla Rhiadra
    https://www.businessinsider.com/georgia-election-official-debunks-trumps-ridiculous-claims-2021-1
  7. Scylla Rhiadra
    Arielle, there is evidence, at least in the case of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, that fraud was not committed, because all of those states use paper ballots, and their audits of the votes after election day constituted checking the numbers recorded by the software against a hand-count of the hard copies of the ballots. So, unless the machines are literally destroying paper ballots, they have clearly not been hacked. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/01/14/fact-check-dominion-voting-machines-create-ballots-only-audits-tests/3973030001/
  8. Scylla Rhiadra
    I think the issue here is the same as regards the fact that polling machines can be hacked. And, according to no less a source than the Washington Post, they can. The point is -- where is the proof that this happened? A variety of investigations, by the media and government, have looked into allegations of dead people voting, etc., and found absolutely minimal evidence of this happening. Again, proving that something can be done doesn't constitute evidence of fraud. And the audits and investigations conducted by these states, some of which are Republican controlled (e.g., Georgia) have disproved that anything like this was happening. It's not merely that there is no evidence -- it's that the existing evidence suggests the opposite.
  9. Scylla Rhiadra
    A more recent pic of Luna's hacker, Pulitzer. With his arm around Giuliani, which should also raise an eyebrow or two. https://gyazo.com/f1b601c848fa88759c5aeff02890e9ee
  10. Scylla Rhiadra
    The quick and easy answer to your question is that they did hand audits of the ballots in Georgia -- where the voting machines scan paper ballots -- and found no evidence of hacking, fraud, or discrepancy between the electronic count and the hand counts. Also, this video does not indicate that fraud was perpetrated. All it says is that these machines were "hackable" by "white hat" hackers -- "white hat" meaning ethical hackers, whose function it is merely to locate security issues. That they can be hacked is not proof that it was done. There is plenty of evidence that voting machines are not very secure -- which is precisely why many states, including Georgia, have moved to machines that work with paper ballots. But, again, Georgia's audits of the paper ballots revealed no fraud. More generally, the problem with a "story" like this is the lack of information. Who is this guy? <redacted>(I think it's David Dill, but I'm not sure.)</redacted> When was this? Where was this? What is the context? The lack of that kind of information means that, even if it is valid and authentic, it's much harder to verify it -- I find the lack of full contextual information in any source that I use a "red flag" that it should be treated with some care and skepticism. ETA: Luna, above, did a better job of this than I did. I just checked again -- this is definitely Pulitzer. Which again underlines my point, above: the absence of full disclosure about who, what, when, where, and why not merely makes it more difficult to validate, but for that reason also should raise suspicions.
  11. Scylla Rhiadra
    Just because I accidentally called you an "Aussie"???? Call me an American. Go ahead! It will make you feel better. 😀
  12. Scylla Rhiadra
    And I'm all but certain that someone will be citing this soon as "proof" that the election was fraudulent. It's even more convincing than a Russian state-sponsored "news agency"!
  13. Scylla Rhiadra
    Wow, you're very good! Do you practice in front of a mirror? Now I'm just waiting to see how many reactionary posters "like" this because it all sounds perfectly reasonable to them.
  14. Scylla Rhiadra
    Good point. And are they wearing tin foil hats? ASOG is run by Russ Ramsland, a notorious right-wing conspiracy nut who has also claimed that the "deep state" was created during a meeting between George Soros, the Muslim Brotherhood, and George H. W. Bush's father in Germany in the 1930s. Really precocious guy, George Soros. He was born in 1930, so he'd have been about 6 when this supposedly happened.
  15. Scylla Rhiadra
    Debunked. https://www.factcheck.org/2020/12/audit-in-michigan-county-refutes-dominion-conspiracy-theory/ https://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,4534,7-359--547422--,00.html
  16. Scylla Rhiadra
    Don't like your "new corporate overlords," eh? I don't much like the old ones either, myself. Can I suggest a strong dose of . . . socialism?
  17. Scylla Rhiadra
    Fair point. I'd forgotten about the provisional government. Still not sure what the point of the invocation of Lenin here is though.
  18. Scylla Rhiadra
    Russia was by no one's definition, a democracy pre-1917. But if your point is that Lenin was a totalitarian . . . well, duh? What point are you making, Orwar?
  19. Scylla Rhiadra
    Been there, done that. It's an interesting question in some respects, but it's apparently impossible to discuss without politicizing it in a very partisan way.
  20. Scylla Rhiadra
    Oh, a great many have. Apparently, condemning language that advocates violence is really really complicated, and depends very much on one's political allegiances.
  21. Scylla Rhiadra
    Can't do it, eh Jackson? You can't just say "What happened was awful, and Trump bears some responsibility for it"? Ok then.
  22. Scylla Rhiadra
    Republican Minority House Leader Kevin McCarthy (until very recently, an ardent supporter of Trump), just now in the impeachment debate: and . . . This from the #1 Republican in the House of Representatives. But don't let that stop you from arguing that this is a "partisan" issue. If you are incapable of condemning, in a straight-forward and uncomplicated way, what happened on the 6th of January, and the President's role in it, without some long and tendentious distraction about how awful BLM is, or how misunderstood Trump is, then all you're doing is demonstrating your utter lack of a sense of right and wrong, and a failure of what McCarthy calls "moral courage." Stop making excuses. Just say it.
  23. Scylla Rhiadra
    Bree's Equation
  24. Scylla Rhiadra
    Love this one. Is the one above Yorkshire?
  25. Scylla Rhiadra
    Ya know, if you're so blinkered by ideology that even Republicans and/or Trump appointees who have condemned the President -- like Mitt Romney, Colin Powell, Liz Cheney, John Kelly, Bill Barr, Betsy DeVos (!!) and John Bolton (!!!!!!!!) -- seem too "lefty" for you, then you're probably not really susceptible to rational discussion anyway. And hence, not really worth my time. ETA: @RowanMinx -- Sorry, I might have been clearer. I was agreeing with your decision to exit, not suggesting that you are part of the problem!
×
×
  • Create New...