@jhol @lunduke I'm not saying Antifa doesn't exist, I am saying that they're not in an organizational structure.

Also I don't know what you expect from riseup.net, remove any account with the word Antifa in it?
Besides that, their Terms of Service sound reasonable to me: https://riseup.net/en/about-us/policy/tos

Also he does spread conspiracy theories at this point: https://odysee.com/@LundukeOnPolitics:f/January6IsGoingToBeImportant:4
Saying the election was fraudulent after losing over 60 lawsuits... wow
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election

@ml_foo @lunduke

Sure - it's a political movement. (In fact there are some organizational structures- local chapters of Antifa). It's a meaningless point. The movement are doing all kinds of harm in the world, and people are right to complain about them.

Those lawsuits were almost all dismissed on procedural technicalities, so we'll never know what happened. The election certainly wasn't transparent, which is reason enough to complain.

@jhol @lunduke Agreed, violence should be criticised, no matter your political leanings. Same goes for violent cops.

The lawsuits were thrown out for missing evidence mostly.

Why was this election more intransparent than any other one?
From what I can see Republicans made gains in the House, barely lost the Senate by a whisker and lost the presidential election. If there was widespread fraud why didn't the Dems win with bigger margins and lose seats in the house?

@ml_foo @lunduke

Seeing poll watchers thrown out, and the number of statistical anomalies seemed fishy to me. Signatures were not checked. The results took days to settle. Why? - but what do I know? I'm just a Brit.

Once the election was over everyone was very hasty about declaring it for Biden, without addressing any of the concerns.

The whole point of an election is about trust and transparency to prevent chaos.

People should be allowed to question things without being demonized.

@jhol @lunduke But that's what they argued in court and lost. Resoundingly. In different states. It's quite a stretch to argue that the entire US justice department were all conspiring against one party/candidate.

@ml_foo
None of that stuff of was argued in court. It was thrown out mostly on laches or lack of standing
@lunduke

@jhol @lunduke oh yes it was:
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-116-2020mo%20-%20104608159120049033.pdf

@ml_foo @lunduke

"In rejecting the argument, the trial court noted that Section 3146.8 contained no language mandating “meaningful observation”; rather, the court interpreted the section as requiring only that the observer be allowed to be “present” at the opening"

The republican poll watchers were unable to see what was going on, and the judge said they had no right to see. What!?

The rejection rate was 0.038% - it should have been 1-3%.

In the UK we never have such malarkey

@jhol @lunduke The distance was put in place due to Covid restrictions. Also he's an observer not an auditor, see page 19 of the pdf.
It would have been impossible to have him check all the ballots anyway.

Doesn't seem that far off to me:
https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2020:_Analysis_of_rejected_ballots#cite_note-10

Though the numbers are hard to compare at this point anyway.
Plus Georgia had a new law allowing to cure ballots, for example in case a signature was missing.

@ml_foo

Ballot curing is not a plausible explanation for a <1 in 2500 rejection rate.

Anyway theres a legitimate debate to be had here. Noone should be demonizing @lunduke for or anyone else for being unhappy about the fiasco that this election was.

@lunduke

@jhol @lunduke where are you getting that number from?
The election was not a fiasco unless you're Donald Trump.
I'm just hoping that Bryan rethinks his stance on supporting a fascist, calling for an insurrection and sedition.
I also hope that he actually does some research before wrongly spouting conspiracy theories, without citing any sources, let alone evidence.

@ml_foo @lunduke

The number came from here:
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/pa-26000-mail-ballots-should-have-been-rejected-year-less-1000-ultimately

I think there needs to be more respect and understanding in these fractious times. Tossing around words like fascist, insurrection, sedition, spouting, and conspiracy theory is not at all helpful.

Anyway, I think we must agree to disagree. Thanks for the talk. I sincerely hope you have an awesome day!

@jhol @lunduke In 2016, Pennsylvania received about 266,208 mail-in ballots. Just under 1% of them, 2,534, were rejected, roughly in line with historical expectations, according to the 2016 Election Administration and Voting Survey.

@jhol @lunduke Trust me I don't use those words lightly, but that is just the way I see it.
After all, I didn't really expect to be able to convince either you or Bryan that this election wasn't "stolen". I agree with Bryan though an audit might help convince some doubters, but I guess even then some will say that the audit is rigged.
I hope you have an awesome day too, all the best.

@ml_foo @lunduke

time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

> That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.

Many questions