MAGAThread XX: A Journal of the Plague Year

[Debate Proxy 1]

That the people get censored is clear evidence that even a child can see that Biden isn't the winner, and that that sea of signs is a truthful barometer in this case.

Indeed, it is in most cases, except in cities and states where there's long histories of systematic election fraud. Winning parties don't engage in censorship.

People are not being censored. Private companies censoring people is not evidence of voter fraud. It was already explained to you that the number of signs is not a truthful barometer, and more then that your experience with signs says nothing about signs elsewhere. I live in a highly democratic area, where there are practically only Biden signs, is that evidence Biden won?

Then why are so many people complaining of censorship? I'm not the only one.

There are enclaves of support for one or the other, true. But Biden supporters and megadonors at the top of the social media still would not be suppressing our voices if they legitimately won an election.

Taken together, that is just the combination of information that people in most enclaves can verify. If you really wanted a free and fair election, then there should be no problem with supporting the nation re-voting.

Why are Biden supporters so against this, especially if doing so could help heal a huge breach of trust between Trumpers and Biden supporters, and against us speaking our minds?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Prove your claims with a truly neutral observer.

No. Voter fraud is a crime. There is no need to prove their was no voter fraud, because everyone (voters included) is entitled to the presumption of innocence.

Republicans are in court trying to prove there was fraud. The onus of proof is on them.

[Seangoli]

Lol, a 'nonzero' number of observers was the term they used if I recall correctly.

I swear Trump himself could say "there was no fraud" and some people would still think there's fraud. There's literally no telling some people.

That answer was also rebuffed by the court, because of how dodgy it was.

[Debate Proxy 1]

And we're supposed to believe that "world leaders from across the world" are fair and unbiased observers. What about all the Republicans who've told us that plenty was amiss?

Remember, these are countries full of aristocrats, dictators, or Third World sweatshoppers. Not "independent and neutral observers", but the same old globalist elites who hate America having free elections because of all the lobbyist money they have in Washington.

You mean the Republicans who admitted in a sworn statement in Michigan that they didn't have evidence of voter fraud? Or the ones in Pennsylvania that admitted in court they actually had observers at the polling sites in question? Or how about down in Arizona where they are trying to get the court to seal the evidence they submit of voter fraud from the Public?

You mean those guys, right?

Not the RINOs, and there's plenty of them available to turn coat for the Democrats.

[Albrenia]

People are not being censored. Private companies censoring people is not evidence of voter fraud. It was already explained to you that the number of signs is not a truthful barometer, and more then that your experience with signs says nothing about signs elsewhere. I live in a highly democratic area, where there are practically only Biden signs, is that evidence Biden won?

Then why are so many people complaining of censorship? I'm not the only one.

There are enclaves of support for one or the other, true. But Biden supporters and megadonors at the top of the social media still would not be suppressing our voices if they legitimately won an election.

Taken together, that is just the combination of information that people in most enclaves can verify. If you really wanted a free and fair election, then there should be no problem with supporting the nation re-voting.

Why are Biden supporters so against this, especially if doing so could help heal a huge breach of trust between Trumpers and Biden supporters, and against us speaking our minds?

Against what?

The recounts? Go ahead, have them, they're literally a right you have.

The court cases? Go ahead, just don't whine and scream that there's fraud until you prove it, and shut your mouths when it is proven that there is NOT voter fraud.

The banning of people calling for revolution? Too bad so sad, nationalise social media if you want government to be able to stop that.

[Jedi Council]

People are not being censored. Private companies censoring people is not evidence of voter fraud. It was already explained to you that the number of signs is not a truthful barometer, and more then that your experience with signs says nothing about signs elsewhere. I live in a highly democratic area, where there are practically only Biden signs, is that evidence Biden won?

Then why are so many people complaining of censorship? I'm not the only one.

There are enclaves of support for one or the other, true. But Biden supporters and megadonors at the top of the social media still would not be suppressing our voices if they legitimately won an election.

Taken together, that is just the combination of information that people in most enclaves can verify. If you really wanted a free and fair election, then there should be no problem with supporting the nation re-voting.

Why are Biden supporters so against this, especially if doing so could help heal a huge breach of trust between Trumpers and Biden supporters, and against us speaking our minds?

Perhaps its because they have been conned into believing a total fabrication by a charlatan who just wants to cling to power? Perhaps its because they are sore losers who hate the idea that the "ebul left" actually won the election? Perhaps its because, due to a lack of education and an over abundance of information, their brains cannot process what is true, from what they want to be true?

These are all more likely than a massive conspiracy that saw hundreds of thousands of votes manipulated. For all their bluster, the GOP has yet to even speculate on the logistics of such a fraud, which really is telling.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

If you really wanted a free and fair election, then there should be no problem with supporting the nation re-voting.

Why are Biden supporters so against this, especially if doing so could help heal a huge breach of trust between Trumpers and Biden supporters, and against us speaking our minds?

Because since you haven't managed to prove any significant fraud occurred, what stops the same fraud happening in a re-election?

Trump came close, though it wasn't as close as 2016. A roll of the dice might go better for him.

So imagine Democrats say "OK, re-election then" and SCOTUS agrees (if!). We then start talking about what measures to stop fraud should be put in place. Republicans accuse us of trying to delay the election, and insist it goes ahead between Christmas and New Year, which it does, and by sheer luck Trump wins.

What next? We have two equally suspect elections with opposite results. We'll need a best-of-three to decide. Happy with that?

[Seangoli]

You mean the Republicans who admitted in a sworn statement in Michigan that they didn't have evidence of voter fraud? Or the ones in Pennsylvania that admitted in court they actually had observers at the polling sites in question? Or how about down in Arizona where they are trying to get the court to seal the evidence they submit of voter fraud from the Public?

You mean those guys, right?

Not the RINOs, and there's plenty of them available to turn coat for the Democrats.

These weren't random politicians; they were the damn Lawyers for Trump's campaign giving statents to the damn courts themselves. They admitted, in court proceedings, to these things. The exact people making the Lawsuits for Trump.

[Debate Proxy 1]

Then why are so many people complaining of censorship? I'm not the only one.

There are enclaves of support for one or the other, true. But Biden supporters and megadonors at the top of the social media still would not be suppressing our voices if they legitimately won an election.

Taken together, that is just the combination of information that people in most enclaves can verify. If you really wanted a free and fair election, then there should be no problem with supporting the nation re-voting.

Why are Biden supporters so against this, especially if doing so could help heal a huge breach of trust between Trumpers and Biden supporters, and against us speaking our minds?

Against what?

The recounts? Go ahead, have them, they're literally a right you have.

The court cases? Go ahead, just don't whine and scream that there's fraud until you prove it, and shut your mouths when it is proven that there is NOT voter fraud.

The banning of people calling for revolution? Too bad so sad, nationalise social media if you want government to be able to stop that.

People wouldn't be calling for revolution, especially an elected revolution, if they haven't been suffering for years and years. And now you openly admit it's okay to ban such people?

Free people with First Amendment rights do not "shut up" and just meekly obey our supposed betters.

[Jedi Council]

Against what?

The recounts? Go ahead, have them, they're literally a right you have.

The court cases? Go ahead, just don't whine and scream that there's fraud until you prove it, and shut your mouths when it is proven that there is NOT voter fraud.

The banning of people calling for revolution? Too bad so sad, nationalise social media if you want government to be able to stop that.

People wouldn't be calling for revolution, especially an elected revolution, if they haven't been suffering for years and years. And now you openly admit it's okay to ban such people?

Free people with First Amendment rights do not "shut up" and just meekly obey our supposed betters.

Social media companies are private companies.

If Twitter decided to only host photos of cats tomorrow and ban all other forms of expression, that is their right.

Until they are a public service or as Albrenia said, nationalized, they can do what they wish with their online space.

[Omniabstracta]

Against what?

The recounts? Go ahead, have them, they're literally a right you have.

The court cases? Go ahead, just don't whine and scream that there's fraud until you prove it, and shut your mouths when it is proven that there is NOT voter fraud.

The banning of people calling for revolution? Too bad so sad, nationalise social media if you want government to be able to stop that.

People wouldn't be calling for revolution, especially an elected revolution, if they haven't been suffering for years and years. And now you openly admit it's okay to ban such people?

Free people with First Amendment rights do not "shut up" and just meekly obey our supposed betters.

I mean, you have the right to say what you want, but you don’t have the right to force other people, much less a private corporation, to humor or host your commentary. Whether or not social media should be that way is a different question, but as it stands, the First Amendment does not protect your right to tweet.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Republican Principles.

1. Fair play favors the Winner, unless that's the Democrats
   
2. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats can only win by cheating
   
3. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats cheat more than Republicans
   
4. If fair play fails, Republicans should take over to reform the system

We are currently at (2) I think.

[Debate Proxy 1]

Nor do such crony corporations have a right to be feeding themselves off our tax money, and then censoring our views as it is.

If these were truly private corporations, that would be one thing. But if they are so deeply interlinked and enmeshed into government surveillance funding and structures, that means they have no moral right to suppress the people forced to pay them.

[Diarcesia]

People wouldn't be calling for revolution, especially an elected revolution, if they haven't been suffering for years and years. And now you openly admit it's okay to ban such people?

Free people with First Amendment rights do not "shut up" and just meekly obey our supposed betters.

I mean, you have the right to say what you want, but you don’t have the right to force other people, much less a private corporation, to humor or host your commentary. Whether or not social media should be that way is a different question, but as it stands, the First Amendment does not protect your right to tweet.

Parler is a bastion of free speech with no constraints. Oh wait.

[Omniabstracta]

Republican Principles.

1. Fair play favors the Winner, unless that's the Democrats
   
2. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats can only win by cheating
   
3. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats cheat more than Republicans
   
4. If fair play fails, Republicans should take over to reform the system

We are currently at (2) I think.

I dunno, you already have people like Graham saying that there’ll never be another Republican president unless the electoral system is changed, I feel like we’re dangerously close to (4).

[Diarcesia]

Nor do such crony corporations have a right to be feeding themselves off our tax money, and then censoring our views as it is.

If these were truly private corporations, that would be one thing. But if they are so deeply interlinked and enmeshed into government surveillance funding and structures, that means they have no moral right to suppress the people forced to pay them.

You know what, at least we share a mutual disdain of military-industrial complexes.

[Debate Proxy 1]

Republican Principles.

1. Fair play favors the Winner, unless that's the Democrats
   
2. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats can only win by cheating
   
3. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats cheat more than Republicans
   
4. If fair play fails, Republicans should take over to reform the system

We are currently at (2) I think.

Democrats were pulling this with us back in 2016. Now, all of a sudden, they're so interested in free and fair elections?

[Debate Proxy 1]

Nor do such crony corporations have a right to be feeding themselves off our tax money, and then censoring our views as it is.

If these were truly private corporations, that would be one thing. But if they are so deeply interlinked and enmeshed into government surveillance funding and structures, that means they have no moral right to suppress the people forced to pay them.

You know what, at least we share a mutual disdain of military-industrial complexes.

Actually, glad we do.

[Albrenia]

Republican Principles.

1. Fair play favors the Winner, unless that's the Democrats
   
2. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats can only win by cheating
   
3. Fair play favors the Loser, because Democrats cheat more than Republicans
   
4. If fair play fails, Republicans should take over to reform the system

We are currently at (2) I think.

Democrats were pulling this with us back in 2016. Now, all of a sudden, they're so interested in free and fair elections?

At least you admit to the fraudulence of your position. Even if it is only to point at the Democrats and say they do it too.

[Debate Proxy 1]

Democrats were pulling this with us back in 2016. Now, all of a sudden, they're so interested in free and fair elections?

At least you admit to the fraudulence of your position. Even if it is only to point at the Democrats and say they do it too.

No, when they have engaged in fraud on a massive level since 2016, and are now claiming WE committed fraud, that's like listening to the boy who cried wolf. It's no longer credible with a huge part of the electorate.

It's not like they've all of a sudden stopped their fraud and relentless Trump hate, and become these good and honest people!

[Diarcesia]

At least you admit to the fraudulence of your position. Even if it is only to point at the Democrats and say they do it too.

No, when they have engaged in fraud on a massive level since 2016, and are now claiming WE committed fraud, that's like listening to the boy who cried wolf. It's no longer credible with a huge part of the electorate.

It's not like they've all of a sudden stopped their fraud and relentless Trump hate, and become these good and honest people!

The Democrats are claiming that the election in 2016, while free and fair, was done with misleading or false information. No cheating involved.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

People are not being censored. Private companies censoring people is not evidence of voter fraud. It was already explained to you that the number of signs is not a truthful barometer, and more then that your experience with signs says nothing about signs elsewhere. I live in a highly democratic area, where there are practically only Biden signs, is that evidence Biden won?

Then why are so many people complaining of censorship? I'm not the only one.

There are enclaves of support for one or the other, true. But Biden supporters and megadonors at the top of the social media still would not be suppressing our voices if they legitimately won an election.

Taken together, that is just the combination of information that people in most enclaves can verify. If you really wanted a free and fair election, then there should be no problem with supporting the nation re-voting.

Why are Biden supporters so against this, especially if doing so could help heal a huge breach of trust between Trumpers and Biden supporters, and against us speaking our minds?

Bear in mind that Social Media censor and spoiler speech because they're legally required to do so!

Section 230 good bro. Really, they're afraid of that? No, they're afraid of it being repealed and replaced with something much worse: something which would make them legally liable for anything posted to their service and made public without first passing scrutiny by their censors. Which would be absolutely disastrous for their business.

Carefully considering what's in their business interests, it's not implausible that they would be biased against pro-government content (which would look like censoring on behalf of government to curry favor), so as to have user support in case a future government (effectively) tries to censor the actual platform.

The test of whether this is so, will be in what side they take when Biden is President.

[Albrenia]

At least you admit to the fraudulence of your position. Even if it is only to point at the Democrats and say they do it too.

No, when they have engaged in fraud on a massive level since 2016, and are now claiming WE committed fraud, that's like listening to the boy who cried wolf. It's no longer credible with a huge part of the electorate.

It's not like they've all of a sudden stopped their fraud and relentless Trump hate, and become these good and honest people!

I'd ask for any proof of this fraud in 2016 but I know you don't have it so, yeah.

[Debate Proxy 1]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

[Diarcesia]

All just the same denialism and gaslighting from you people. Honestly...

Coming from the person who said social media censorship and First Amendment violation was a good thing, you've destroyed your credibility to claim any honest concern for fair elections.

What social media do you use?