Massive Clinton voter fraud in NY?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: introvert

the truth is out there!

A little light reading on the Clinton's history, what great American Politicians they are!

I'm well aware of their history.

But have they engaged in election fraud in NY today?

It might take a few days to come to light, but I have full confidence in the Clinton cheating machine.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Annee

I pull out the letter we got about which location. I keep my voter registration card in my wallet all the time so I pull that out.
I read the ballot, mark it , confirm where to put it and get my little sticker that says I voted.
Our state let us know in advance that our polling place had changed this year. With two letters.

Exactly. You are being responsible for your vote.

Voting precincts can change over night. I had that happen to me. I think they found faulty wiring in the building and had to move immediately.

With everything automated and online - - I'm pretty sure there is a way to verify your voting status before going to vote. Verify it, print it out - - have it with you.

I'm not discounting "sneaky" activity - - but, I'd say most of it is human error (without intent) on both the voter and personnel through out the whole system.

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: introvert

the truth is out there!

A little light reading on the Clinton's history, what great American Politicians they are!

I'm well aware of their history.

But have they engaged in election fraud in NY today?

It might take a few days to come to light, but I have full confidence in the Clinton cheating machine.

Of course you do. Even if there is no evidence to suggest they broke any election laws, you will believe they cheated or broke election laws.

It's to be expected because that is the soup you swim in. Facts are meaningless, it's all about belief.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: introvert

the truth is out there!

A little light reading on the Clinton's history, what great American Politicians they are!

I'm well aware of their history.

But have they engaged in election fraud in NY today?

It might take a few days to come to light, but I have full confidence in the Clinton cheating machine.

Of course you do. Even if there is no evidence to suggest they broke any election laws, you will believe they cheated or broke election laws.

It's to be expected because that is the soup you swim in. Facts are meaningless, it's all about belief.

The lack of facts, or more specifically evidence, is just as likely to mislead as speculation or belief.

If you are going to use a lack of facts/evidence as a rebuttal then you also have to introduce hypothesis and theory into the discussion.
Hypothesis and theory leads to investigation, from which evidence is brought to light. After all everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but not everyone is innocent.

The facts are right now that there are a number of problems with the voting in NY which is leading to people not being able to vote.
The theory is that Hillary Clinton is in some way behind it.

Now we just need an investigation to bring some evidence to light (if there is any)

a reply to: UKTruth

The lack of facts is just as likely to mislead as speculation or belief.

Why is that? If there is a lack of facts, there is no need to speculate or mislead. You wait for evidence or facts to be presented. By all means, we should expect an investigation to take place to find that evidence if there is reasonable suspicion to do so.

If you are going to use a lack of facts as a rebuttal then you also have to introduce hypothesis and theory into the discussion. Hypothesis and theory leads to investigation, from which facts are brought to light. After all everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but not everyone is innocent.

I do not have to introduce a hypothesis or theory. Reasonable suspicion or direct proof leads to further investigation, which leads to facts presented or rebutted in the court of law.

If the evidence supports that a crime has been committed, pursue it. If not, move on.

Too many among us are unable to move on.

The facts are right now that there are a number of problems with the voting in NY which is leading to people not being able to vote. The theory is that Hillary Clinton is in some way behind it.

Theory, or is it "conspiracy"?

There is an important difference.

We should end the day with this refresher phrase that is always true.
If a thread title ends in a question mark the answer is invariably No.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: IAMTAT

Like she needs to cheat. That's funny.

Well, she does.

Hillary has cheated her whole life,

originally posted by: Sillyolme
We should end the day with this refresher phrase that is always true.
If a thread title ends in a question mark the answer is invariably No.

That's not entirely true. This could be a true case of voter/election fraud, but we have to wait and see if there is any real evidence to support that claim.

To go-off and theorize or speculate that one individual or campaign is behind it, without proper evidence, is illogical.

Can't wait to read this site when Hillary wins the Presidency

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

The lack of facts is just as likely to mislead as speculation or belief.

Why is that? If there is a lack of facts, there is no need to speculate or mislead. You wait for evidence or facts to be presented. By all means, we should expect an investigation to take place to find that evidence if there is reasonable suspicion to do so.

If you are going to use a lack of facts as a rebuttal then you also have to introduce hypothesis and theory into the discussion. Hypothesis and theory leads to investigation, from which facts are brought to light. After all everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but not everyone is innocent.

I do not have to introduce a hypothesis or theory. Reasonable suspicion or direct proof leads to further investigation, which leads to facts presented or rebutted in the court of law.

If the evidence supports that a crime has been committed, pursue it. If not, move on.

Too many among us are unable to move on.

The facts are right now that there are a number of problems with the voting in NY which is leading to people not being able to vote. The theory is that Hillary Clinton is in some way behind it.

Theory, or is it "conspiracy"?

There is an important difference.

There are actually facts.

The facts are that polling stations were not open when they should have been, machines are not working and people have been deleted off the register.

You don't have to raise a hypothesis or theory, that's correct, but others have - to which your argument seems to be that there are no facts. That is not really a well thought out argument at all.

Investigation based on theory is healthy and leads to progress in all walks of life.

In this case it may lead to evidence, or may not.

Conspiracy is something different to a hypothesis or theory. A conspiracy is 'an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons'. In effect it's what I think some on this thread are hypothesizing is happening.

It sounds like, though maybe I am wrong, you are dismissing the hypothesis on the basis that there is no evidence and also using a term like 'conspiracy' as a shaming phrase to those that have hypothesized that something corrupt might be happening here.

Firstly, a hypothesis is impossible to dismiss based on a lack of evidence before a reasonable investigation has taken place.
Secondly, conspiracies are very real and have been proven through history in all walks of life. It's only used as an argument in itself by social bullies who think it can shame people into shutting up due to the stigma attached to the word in popular culture.

a reply to: UKTruth

There are no facts that Hillary is responsible.

Isn't that what the thread is about?

originally posted by: muse7
Can't wait to read this site when Hillary wins the Presidency

Agreed, but likely for different reasons because on the day Hillary wins the Presidency, all those who have continuously stated that the US election process is rigged and that voting is a waste of time will be vindicated.

April 19, 2016

I was listening to New York exit polls on the radio today. Almost everyone who voted said that they were disappointed in what Obama has done and want REAL CHANGE. Democrat, Republican, Black, White...everyone.

How is Hillary Clinton winning so many states if she represents the status-quo...more of the same? What type of personality is voting for Hillary Clinton???

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: UKTruth

There are no facts that Hillary is responsible.

Isn't that what the thread is about?

Actually no it isn't.

The thread title is 'Massive Clinton voter fraud in NY?'. It's a question.

There is a hypothesis that Clinton is involved in voter fraud that would explain the facts that polling stations have been closed, voters have been deleted off the register and voting machines are not working.

There has been no investigation yet and no evidence.

Personally I don't believe the hypothesis, but it is backward thinking to suggest you need evidence in order to hypothesize.

At the moment though this is all hypothesis based on facts.

No evidence of anything yet.

I just refute the need for evidence to form an hypothesis - we'd get nowhere if everyone thought like that.

hillary winning her own state is n̶o̶t̶ ̶s̶u̶r̶p̶r̶i̶s̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶t̶o̶t̶a̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶e̶x̶p̶e̶c̶t̶e̶d̶ obvious voter fraud.
how come when bernie gets a win, hillary supporters don't bitch and moan and blame some interference?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: UKTruth

There are no facts that Hillary is responsible.

Isn't that what the thread is about?

Actually no it isn't.

The thread title is 'Massive Clinton voter fraud in NY?'. It's a question.

Uh, yeah --- Clinton.

No one else.

Why go through so much trouble and risk to commit voter fraud, when it's easier to woo delegates??? Delegates are what matters in the end. Right?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: UKTruth

There are no facts that Hillary is responsible.

Isn't that what the thread is about?

Actually no it isn't.

The thread title is 'Massive Clinton voter fraud in NY?'. It's a question.

Uh, yeah --- Clinton.

No one else.

Someone else might want to hypothesize some other reasons. Mine would be simply that the election committee in NY cant organize to save their lives.

The hypothesis is that democracy is an illusion and people are looking "behind the curtain".

The hypothesis is that the "problems" with the system are evidence of "synarchy".

Synarchy is government by those who operate together in secret.

When your "Foundation" takes vast amounts of money from foreign entities and you use Canadian secrecy provisions to avoid public scrutiny these kind of hypotheses can be expected.

They are consistent with what we already know.

Massive Clinton voter fraud in NY?

Maybe.

Maybe not.

Could be New Yorker's really don't like Sanders