Take the poll

Please take this poll

Can I get a working definition for "accurate"?

I should have asked that question. I marked "No" but that's because I feel every election has probably had some shenanigans going on with it. Do I think Biden won this election regardless of whatever those shenanigans may have been? Yes, so that was probably a more appropriate response.

wolverine55 wrote:I should have asked that question.  I marked "No" but that's because I feel every election has probably had some shenanigans going on with it.  Do I think Biden won this election regardless of whatever those shenanigans may have been?  Yes, so that was probably a more appropriate response.

Ditto.

I suspect that we might have a Q anon member or two on here. Lol

general maximus wrote:Can I get a working definition for "accurate"?

let's go with "true"

I went under the assumption of the accuracy being that Biden won. If you want 100% accuracy, I do not think any election results are 100% accurate due to a number of causes.

dusty7 wrote:I went under the assumption of the accuracy being that Biden won.  If you want 100% accuracy, I do not think any election results are 100% accurate due to a number of causes.

biden won 'yes'
dictionary 1.accurate (of information, measurements, statistics, etc.) correct in all details; exact. 'no'

Head Idiot wrote:

wolverine55 wrote:I should have asked that question.  I marked "No" but that's because I feel every election has probably had some shenanigans going on with it.  Do I think Biden won this election regardless of whatever those shenanigans may have been?  Yes, so that was probably a more appropriate response.

Ditto.

My original comment was more sarcastic than anything else, but "accuracy" is a wide berth term recently. It was intended to stir the pot a little. More of a needle. Obviously it worked, so I apologize but it bring up the point in the matter that universal accuracy in elections is impossible.

For the record, Biden won this election. Do I think that there is voter fraud, yes. Do I think it could make a difference in elections. Yes. Do I think it changed the outcome of this election, NO.

OSUBucks wrote:I suspect that we might have a Q anon member or two on here. Lol

I was with a guy Saturday who told me the following:

-Trump really won 49 states. He only lost New York.
-McCain was murdered by the deep state.
-HW told W to blowup the World Trade Center.

There was a lot more but those are things that stood out. This guy is also in law enforcement.

mc140 wrote:

OSUBucks wrote:I suspect that we might have a Q anon member or two on here. Lol

I was with a guy Saturday who told me the following:

-Trump really won 49 states. He only lost New York.
-McCain was murdered by the deep state.
-HW told W to blowup the World Trade Center.

There was a lot more but those are things that stood out. This guy is also in law enforcement.

There were members of the Capitol police who had their pics taken with the insurgents. It amazes me what you can get people to believe and some of these believers are relatively smart people. There are a few in the US Congress.

“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
― Voltaire















and in keeping with the ADHD of most of the threads on this message board:

"Voltaire can suck on my balls!"
― Paul Finch

agreed, there are people who still believe the russia collusion and fine people hoax

and some who believe every damn thing that comes out of Trump's mouth. I especially love how well Trump's comments in the supposed "fine people hoax" transcript hold up.

Huck wrote:and some who believe every damn thing that comes out of Trump's mouth.  I especially love how well Trump's comments in the supposed "fine people hoax" transcript hold up.

Reading is fundamental.



"I'm not talking about neo-Nazi's and the white nationalists....."

Meanwhile, Trump is refusing to pay Rudy.

Who would have thought a guy that built his empire on bankruptcy and stiffing vendors wouldn't pay his lawyer?

BirdWatcher wrote:

Huck wrote:and some who believe every damn thing that comes out of Trump's mouth.  I especially love how well Trump's comments in the supposed "fine people hoax" transcript hold up.

Reading is fundamental.


"I'm not talking about neo-Nazi's and the white nationalists....."

It's been one of the rules that I live my life by.....

If I look to my left and there is a neo-Nazi and I look to my right and there is a white nationalist and we are all fighting the same fight....I'm on the wrong frick'in side.

BirdWatcher wrote:

Huck wrote:and some who believe every damn thing that comes out of Trump's mouth.  I especially love how well Trump's comments in the supposed "fine people hoax" transcript hold up.

Reading is fundamental

Here are all of the words that were said at that presser.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/apr/26/context-trumps-very-fine-people-both-sides-remarks/

Teetime wrote:Here are all of the words that were said at that presser.

Yes. I read them. Nowhere in there did he call white nationalists or neo-nazis fine people.

"And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists."

Words. Sometimes hard to understand I guess....

I read that presser a couple of times and I see how you can stitch the quote in the above post together from a couple of different places, but as for an actual quote the isn’t stitched together the verbatim quote is below and it can be read a couple of different ways. Where did you get that quote?


Trump: "Yes, I think there’s blame on both sides. If you look at both sides -- I think there’s blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either. And if you reported it accurately, you would say."

Reporter: "The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest --"

Trump: "Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name."

I can see how you imagined Trump was saying Neo-Nazi's are very fine people... but I can "stitch" together the fact that Trump's daughter, son-in-law, and grandkids are Jews and imagine that Trump doesn't think any kind of Nazi is "very fine."

P.S. the quote "I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally." was not "stitched together." It's a continuous line from right after the reporter says "I do love Thomas Jefferson."

Stitching together lines out of context is a #FakeNews tactic.

Show me a non-stitched line in that article where Trump says neo-nazi's or white supremacists are fine people.

You're imagining the "group" that Trump is talking about to be white nationalists (which he said should be "condemned totally") instead the actual group of people who were there to protest the removal of statues. That's a real group of people... they were interviewed by real news people concerning their protestation of removal and renaming of the park. You probably didn't see those interviews.... CNN didn't carry them...