Trump Falsely Claims Harris Rally Numbers are Fake

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Who owns Fox?? Like. REALLY owns Fox?

Come on.

originally posted by: lilzazz
a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Harris is not attracting crowds and even if she is they are either paid to be there or they are there to see some celebrity. They are not there to listen to her talk that is a fact.

Do you think the poll numbers are fake as well?

www.economist.com...

Fake ? No .

Skewed . The Numbers are skewed . It's not hard to make a poll say what you want it to say , all you have to do is ask the correct people .

originally posted by: VariedcodeSole
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Who owns Fox?? Like. REALLY owns Fox?

Come on.

So they made AI video, pictures, made sure it would all match up except they missed the reflection?

Or there’s a few thousand people in any big city that would show up for anyone on the left, or anyone on the right?

Which seems more plausible?

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
"Mr Trump, the Republican taking on the vice-president in November's election, said on his Truth Social platform, external that it was a fake and there was “nobody” there waiting for her.

He was bloviating and exaggerating. It's what he does.
All politicians do it. But the way he does it is almost an art form unto itself.

What you're doing there is attempting to normalize Trump's toxic behavior. Basically you're trying to suggest that Trump is only doing what all politicians do, so it's okay.

But he's not doing what everyone else does. You really should read some of the psychological literature on lying.

First, let's consider "normal" lying. Here's an abstract from a recent research paper:

"Truth-default theory (TDT), a theory of human deception and deception detection, has two propositions that focus on the overall rate of lying and individual variation in the frequency of lying behavior. The distribution of lie prevalence is specified to exhibit a non-normal, positively skewed distribution in which the majority of people are normatively honest, and most lies are told by a few prolific liars. Together, these predictions form the few prolific liars modules in TDT. Although the findings of prior research align with TDT predictions, the pan-cultural scope of TDT warrants testing such predictions with new and diverse samples. The current studies (total N = 3,463) sampled participants from China, Germany, Mexico, Israel, Kenya, Russia, and Brazil. Similar long-tail distributions were observed in each of the seven locations, and in language and cultural subsamples. These findings add to a growing empirical literature providing pan-cultural evidence consistent with TDT."


academic.oup.com...#:~:text=The%20distribution%20of%20lie%20prevalence,by%20a%20few%20prolific%20liars.

It is often stated (as you have done) that "everybody lies", and in a limited sense, that's true. Probably nobody gets through life without telling a lie here or there. But as a practical matter, there are huge differences in the frequency with which different people lie. This research article reinforces what has been known for a long time, that a small percentage of the population accounts for the largest percentage of lies. Most people are basically honest and go days or weeks or months at a time without telling lies.

Now let's look at Pathological Liars:

"A [Pathological] liar lies incessantly to get their way and does so with little awareness.

It is viewed as a coping mechanism developed in early childhood and is often associated with some other type of mental health disorder like an antisocial personality disorder. It could be that they lie to avoid something traumatic that happened in their lives, such as abuse, or the condition may be genetic.

When it comes to pathological liars, it is observed that people who have antisocial personality disorder (APD) and narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) indulge in lying.

A pathological liar is often goal-oriented (i.e., focused, one tells lies to get their way).

They have very little regard or respect for the rights and feelings of others.
They are often considered manipulative and cunning.

They create extravagant stories that may be maintained or tweaked over time, and they often believe their lies or have a weak grip on reality.

Unlike compulsive liars, pathological liars are nearly impossible to catch in the act. These people are excellent liars because they lie constantly and make stories up unnecessarily, and often, it becomes extremely difficult to distinguish the truth from false statements.

Pathological liars know how to be confident while lying and use their pathological lying trait as a defense mechanism (e.g. they fix their gaze upon you rather than looking away).

Some of the symptoms of a pathological liar are: they lie to gain something, exaggerating things, they keep on changing their stories, and they live in a false sense of "reality." If confronted, they act defensive and never admit that they are liars. Lastly, they hold no value for truth."

www.medicinenet.com...

Most politicians are normal liars. They lie for the same reasons as other normal liars, but they probably lie more often, because they have more opportunities to lie and more to gain by lying. When Bill Clinton said he "did not have sex with that woman (referring to Monica Lewinsky) that was a normal lie. One way we know it was a normal lie is because he hoped and expected to make the public believe it.

A pathological liar like Trump doesn't really care if you believe him or not. As his lawyers used to say, "he will lie about the time of day when everyone in the room is wearing a watch". He's making false statements in order to be able to maintain the image of himself that he needs.

If you ever go back and read some of the biographies of Trump you can see exactly how this pathological lying developed in him as a child when he couldn't get his father's approval. A textbook case of Narcissistic Personality development.

Normal politicians (unfortunately) lie in normal ways because they are relatively normal people who are trying to acquire and hang on to political power.

Trump lies in a pathological way because he's mentally ill.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: VariedcodeSole

What about the videos?

Even Fox News was in on it?

www.foxnews.com...

I don’t think Trump is going to be capturing swing voters with such a bold claim right now when there’s video, social posts, ect.

He’s got 80+ days left. He should be more measured and work on independents instead of finding comfort getting support from his base. The dude is his own worse enemy right now and has lost the big lead he has because he can’t help himself.

Oh for sure .

The only person who can beat Trump is Trump.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

He went from a commanding lead, even when Harris was announced to what looks to be a going flip.

I think it’s his footing. After the debate he seemed measured and confident, and now he’s constantly acting like the victim. I just don’t think it lands well with people who he should be trying to get.

Do the establishment and left go after him in unfair way? Yup. Did he enter politics swinging? Yup.

The person in an office or friend group who always gets messed with the most is someone who can dish it but not take it.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I don't have to defend what I can clearly see and have presented for others to view. You're spinning off my point on some other tangent.

Is the image untampered with in your opinion, or not? It's just our opinions and this is a conspiracy site that denies ignorance, apparently.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: VariedcodeSole

What about the videos?

Even Fox News was in on it?

www.foxnews.com...

I don’t think Trump is going to be capturing swing voters with such a bold claim right now when there’s video, social posts, ect.

He’s got 80+ days left. He should be more measured and work on independents instead of finding comfort getting support from his base. The dude is his own worse enemy right now and has lost the big lead he has because he can’t help himself.

In the reflection from the fox link there is nobody there. Are we to think now Kamala lands her plane at the hanger a la Trump. Then Kamala says "no taxes on tips" a la Trump, Really? Kamala seems more and more like Trump everyday, not really.
Kamala is on record, tapes and much more espousing far left positions and now an immediate about face on energy policy, border policy, economic policy, etc.. Kamala is a phony so why would you think she and her campaign wouldn't CGI the crowd size and support. The Harris/Walz campaign can do anything and the msm would fawn over it.
There are plenty of examples of crowd size CGI posted. The whole campaign from ousting joe in the dark of night to no indepth conversations about steppin' in for joe and the prospect of being the first women president and a complete policy turnaround...it's all too contrived and to pretend it's not is insulting. C'mon man, who can believe anything coming from the msm and the democrats. One thing is for sure more people are realizing that Trump won the 2020 election.The msm, intelligence community and democrats are an evil unholy trinity.

a reply to: VariedcodeSole

Untampered as in the raw picture?

I wouldn’t be surprised if they put the image through some software to clean it up and reduce glare and other things. Smart phones essentially do that, which is why megapixel isn’t the most important spec on a phone, the software is often what makes the best outcome for images.

Do I think no one was there like Trumps claim? Huge doubt. You’d have to make sure all the media was in on it. Make all the photos and video match.

Again, go to any big city and you can find a few thousand people from either party who would go somewhere so they could say I was in the same room/vicinity of the person. It’s not a fantastical claim, and that wasn’t even that big of a crowd to begin with.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

There was definitely people there. That's not in dispute.

People that were paid upwards of $250 to show up. How many of those? We don't know.

But the Harris campaign has used AI manipulated images.
That's blatantly obvious.

After the assassintion attempt on Trump doesn't it seem odd that they would allow thousands to enter an airplane hanger and spill onto the tarmac where there can't possibly be enough secrity to prevent n incident?

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

I doubt we’re going to change each others mind on this one.

I’m not voting for either of them, so I’m just a witness on this one.

If you think it’s beneficial to his campaign to double down on the biggest claims, that’s his right to make them and his bases right to defend them.

If you all think that’s going to win people who may actually switch their vote, I personally disagree. I think it’s evident he’s loosing traction, and that’s because he went back to old Trump instead of sticking with new Trump that was more composed.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

If Harris said that one of Trumps rallies was AI, I promise no one here would say she was just exaggerating. And I’m sure if someone did they would get roasted.

Because we know for a fact that Trump hasn't faked any crowds.

I know people that went to a few of his events here in Michigan, they said you could barely get near them because the crowds were so big.

Has any of the Libs here been to a Harris event?
Does anyone here know anyone that went to one?

Where there's smoke, there's fire.
Everything about Harris is fake right now, they are propping her up with every trick they have to make the most unpopular VP in American history seem like she has the biggest following since Jesus Christ.

It's all bullsh!t.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Well that's your opinion. Lol.🤷🏻

a reply to: watchitburn

I don’t doubt that both campaigns pull every stop to make sure they have pictures that put their candidate in the best possible light.

From choreographing the event to filters and cleaning images afterwards. There’s been evidence with different politicians doing things like making themselves look thinner and younger.

But his claim was no one was there. I think it’s a bad claim that will hurt him. My point for the last few weeks is he’s focusing too much on the wrong things, and hurting his own campaign.

It’s easy for his base to say “I don’t care, he can say whatever he wants, that’s why I like him”, but he’s already won them. He has to win some of the independent and swing. That’s going to be hard if he’s constantly saying things that people find silly, unnecessary, and miscalculated.

a reply to: RazorV66

So do you think no one was there?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

I doubt we’re going to change each others mind on this one.

I’m not voting for either of them, so I’m just a witness on this one.

If you think it’s beneficial to his campaign to double down on the biggest claims, that’s his right to make them and his bases right to defend them.

If you all think that’s going to win people who may actually switch their vote, I personally disagree. I think it’s evident he’s loosing traction, and that’s because he went back to old Trump instead of sticking with new Trump that was more composed.

I hear ya, just sayin' I wouldn't put it passed the msm and the Harris/Walz campaign to fake the crowd size since they fake a lot of other things. Trump should just stick to policy but part of his appeal is he is unsencored not your typical political correct politician. When Trump says something stupid it gets magnified when he says something smart it gets twisted. Just the opposite for the democrats. And Fox News is mostly like the rest of the msm from what I can tell. The msm is so bad. Hopefully on election day they won't stop counting and finish up a week later.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
"Mr Trump, the Republican taking on the vice-president in November's election, said on his Truth Social platform, external that it was a fake and there was “nobody” there waiting for her.

He was bloviating and exaggerating. It's what he does.
All politicians do it. But the way he does it is almost an art form unto itself.

Is "bloviating" a form of mental illness? I see it used a lot referencing Trump.
It's not a term I am used to !

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

I think the uncensored type thing is what got him elected in 2016.

People showed they wanted something different by the left putting most organic support into Bernie, and the right going with Trump. The populace spoke, and both sides wanted to flip the script.

But I don’t think keeping that style once he won was a good call. I also don’t think that playbook will win this election.

He was an unknown quantity going up against a known quantity.

This time around, he’s the known quantity, and Harris is largely unknown. You and I know she’s a run of the mill politician who will say anything to get elected. But a lot of people don’t. By her not stating her policies, people are just creating an image of her in their own head to be whatever they want it to be. It’s unfair to the people that she hasn’t laid out her platform, and frankly I won’t trust if when it comes out.

But that’s the game right now. And he’s giving fodder to whoever wants it by saying the outrageous stuff instead of running a smart campaign.

Personally, I’d rather see him win than her, I just won’t vote for him again since he burned me last time.