Both Project Veritas Undercover Investigations now uploaded to YT [IT'S RIGGED]

[Poliwhirl]

voting is a bottom-up process; it happens in precincts in cities in counties in states, there are too many local levels for high-up party leaders to easily orchestrate a nationwide rigging operation and too many people to corrupt. it's not impossible that foul play could happen, but the amount of resources required to make any reasonable dent in electoral numbers is very slim

the electoral process for the president is also not direct. the majority of states are strongly affiliated with one party and all of their electoral votes will go to the party which wins a plurality in that state. in order to maliciously push the outcome of a red state in favor of the democrats, you would need to rig enough votes to win over the plurality in that state. which is to say, in a heavily red or blue state, that isn't happening.

in a swing state, however, maybe you have a chance. so let's take florida. in 2012, florida had a voter turnout of around 57% of the voting-age population (15,839,713). rounding that up to 60%, we can say that around 9,503,827 florida citizens voted in the 2012 presidential election. obama won florida by 74,309 popular votes. that means to shift the plurality in romney's favor, the republican party would have had to rig 74,310 votes, and if we're saying this was done by physically bussing people around to different counties, then it'd be pretty insane to think that nobody would notice seventy five thousand people committing en-masse voter fraud. in other swing states, this number grows, in iowa it'd be 91,927, in colorado it'd be 137,858.

it's definitely not impossible that this happens, but it's so highly improbable that i'm unconvinced anyone has the power to really make that much a difference. we're assuming massive rigging movements across the nation orchestrated by party authority, and the only power higher up party leaders really have over local leaders is money, and this is money that i don't think exists. i'd be willing to believe that fraud is happening and that some people are trying to play the system, but it's highly unlikely that anyone is able to inconspicuously pull off any conspiracy of significant scale. and as with all conspiracy theories like this, we're supposed to believe that the hundreds of thousands of people that would be involved in this process over apparently many decades have all just stayed quiet; that nobody would have ever come out about this corruption after all this time. i'm not sure i buy it.

this is still relevant

[Ad Bot]

[Master Matthew²]

this is still relevant

Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence,
And these videos, These Damning Videos, are very extraordinary evidence.

[Gytyyhgfffff]

they aren't

like otto said how the forget are you going to get enough voter fraud going on to actually effect any election

[otto-san]

Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence,
And these videos, These Damning Videos, are very extraordinary evidence.

and like i said, i'm willing to believe that, on some scale, maybe a hundred or so fraudulent votes per swing state happened at best, which is a hundred or so too many, but it's frankly insignificant, and if this has been happening for over 30 years, then i'd also wonder why it hasn't come up sooner since over 8 elections that wouldn't be an insignificant number of random people involved in passing.

regardless, the best bet is to see if a formal investigation happens and what they find out. this wouldn't be the first time o'keefe was a bit deceptive in his journalism.

[Poliwhirl]

Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence,
And these videos, These Damning Videos, are very extraordinary evidence.

1. why did you word that like a doctor seuss novel
2. it's not... really.. that damning?
like sure, it's obvious that there's a couple organizations that actively try to "rig" the vote by using underhanded tactics, but are they singlehandedly changing that much? not at all. assuming that republican organizations don't try to do the same bullstuff to get a republican in office is laughable. the reporters in these videos conveniently only investigated the corruption present on the democratic side of things, which happens to feed directly into the intense victim complex every far-right conservative seems to have developed.

[Master Matthew²]

1. why did you word that like a doctor seuss novel
2. it's not... really.. that damning?
like sure, it's obvious that there's a couple organizations that actively try to "rig" the vote by using underhanded tactics, but are they singlehandedly changing that much? not at all. assuming that republican organizations don't try to do the same bullstuff to get a republican in office is laughable. the reporters in these videos conveniently only investigated the corruption present on the democratic side of things, which happens to feed directly into the intense victim complex every far-right conservative seems to have developed.

This is so disgusting, its loving public school bullstuff logic "well one committed a crime, so they're both guilty". With malicious actions comes victims, treating the victims as to be equally as guilty because they 'probably' did it too is loving handicapped. So should we say that Annoying Orange probably is ill, and is as evil as Hillary, and you'll say yes.
But WHY?
Hillary has evidence, slung at her one after another, but it's almost always justified by either
A. LOOK WHAT Annoying Orange SAID!
B. Well Republicans have done it too (probably.)

If you cannot prove it, you're wrong.

Project Veritas Action proved it.

[Nonnel]

If you cannot prove it, you're wrong.

this is still not the case
if you cannot prove it, then it's unproven.

[Red Spy]

Why do you capitalize random words

[Master Matthew²]

this is still not the case
if you cannot prove it, then it's unproven.

The Burden of proof is not on the who it was claimed, but the who made the claim.
Until the Claim is made proven its not only unproven but false.

(Innocent until proven guilty)

[Gytyyhgfffff]

Why do you capitalize random words

note how he said "public school bullstuff logic" which implies that he hates public schools
theory: he was homeschooled but poorly

[otto-san]

The Burden of proof is not on the who it was claimed, but the who made the claim.
Until the Claim is made proven its not only unproven but false.

(Innocent until proven guilty)

false means that you can prove it's wrong. if there simply isn't any/enough evidence one way or another, it's unproven.

[Red Spy]

theory: he was homeschooled but poorly

Makes sense

[Nonnel]

The Burden of proof is not on the who it was claimed, but the who made the claim.
Until the Claim is made proven its not only unproven but false.

(Innocent until proven guilty)

but as i said like two days ago, the flip side to "innocent until proven guilty" is not "wrong until proven right"
you listen to both sides as if they are telling the truth. if you assume that the plaintiff is lying, you have a slant that leads to victim blaming.

[Satan From Wreck-It-Ralph]

note how he said "public school bullstuff logic" which implies that he hates public schools
theory: he was homeschooled but poorly

the homeschooled are homeschooled because the homeschooled's parents don't like what the evil actualschools are teaching

[dirtymurphy]

spread this stuff like wildfire