#NeverAnyElectionFraud

[PeteOlcott]

Pete, we are talking at cross purposes; I’m a philosopher, and it seems you are primarily interested in rhetoric. I happen to think your strategy is also weak from a propaganda point of view, but I am not skilled in rhetoric.

Instead of “There never was any evidence of election fraud sufficient to overturn the 2020 presidential election” or “there never was sufficient evidence of election fraud” or “For all practical purposes there never was any evidence of election fraud.” I would suggest something like this;

“There is no evidence that Trump won the 2020 election and that it was stolen by fraud”.

That some people have been misinformed is not as compelling
as Trump is exactly copying Hitler

[mickthinks]

Now you look as if you are avoiding communication, Pete.

[Age]

So, what is the actual irrefutable Truth here, was there never any evidence of election fraud? Or, was there some evidence of election fraud?

The key fact here is that if we collected the total
of all of the voter fraud cases everywhere in the USA
for the last three years: 1499 that is not enough votes
to even nudge the closest 2020 lection race in Arizona
where Biden won by 10,457 votes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Unit ... in_Arizona

Another key fact that I just learned is the propaganda
works by repeating the same emotionally charged sound bite
because people generally have very short attention spans
and very poor memory. Counter-propaganda works this same
way, yet focuses on the truth instead of repeating a lie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

Still no clarification, from you.

'Looking at' another 'key fact' here is you people only 'see' what 'it' is that you 'want to see', most of the time.

And, one way you prove that you do this is by just not answering the actual clarifying questions posed, and asked, to you, like above here for example

[PeteOlcott]

So, what is the actual irrefutable Truth here, was there never any evidence of election fraud? Or, was there some evidence of election fraud?

The key fact here is that if we collected the total
of all of the voter fraud cases everywhere in the USA
for the last three years: 1499 that is not enough votes
to even nudge the closest 2020 lection race in Arizona
where Biden won by 10,457 votes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Unit ... in_Arizona

Another key fact that I just learned is the propaganda
works by repeating the same emotionally charged sound bite
because people generally have very short attention spans
and very poor memory. Counter-propaganda works this same
way, yet focuses on the truth instead of repeating a lie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

Still no clarification, from you.

'Looking at' another 'key fact' here is you people only 'see' what 'it' is that you 'want to see', most of the time.

And, one way you prove that you do this is by just not answering the actual clarifying questions posed, and asked, to you, like above here for example

So it looks like the verified fact that the total number of cases
that show evidence of election fraud are much lower than the
number of votes needed to change the closest election race
means that there are millions of other proven cases of election
fraud somewhere else TO YOU.

[Age]

The key fact here is that if we collected the total
of all of the voter fraud cases everywhere in the USA
for the last three years: 1499 that is not enough votes
to even nudge the closest 2020 lection race in Arizona
where Biden won by 10,457 votes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Unit ... in_Arizona

Another key fact that I just learned is the propaganda
works by repeating the same emotionally charged sound bite
because people generally have very short attention spans
and very poor memory. Counter-propaganda works this same
way, yet focuses on the truth instead of repeating a lie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

Still no clarification, from you.

'Looking at' another 'key fact' here is you people only 'see' what 'it' is that you 'want to see', most of the time.

And, one way you prove that you do this is by just not answering the actual clarifying questions posed, and asked, to you, like above here for example

So it looks like the verified fact that the total number of cases
that show evidence of election fraud are much lower

So, you, 'now', appear to, reluctantly, agree that there was in fact 'some cases' of thus actual 'some evidence' all along. But, you will never ever, voluntarily, acknowledge this will you?

than the
number of votes needed to change the closest election race
means that there are millions of other proven cases of election
fraud somewhere else TO YOU.

I am not sure 'where' you are trying to take this, but maybe you are under some sort of illusion that I have a position, belief, or agenda here. We will just have to wait, to see.

But, I will again, allude, to trying to counter 'any lie', with 'another lie', in absolutely any way, shape, form, or even size, will never really help you human beings anywhere in Life.

[Age]

Pete, we are talking at cross purposes; I’m a philosopher, and it seems you are primarily interested in rhetoric. I happen to think your strategy is also weak from a propaganda point of view, but I am not skilled in rhetoric.

Instead of “There never was any evidence of election fraud sufficient to overturn the 2020 presidential election” or “there never was sufficient evidence of election fraud” or “For all practical purposes there never was any evidence of election fraud.” I would suggest something like this;

“There is no evidence that Trump won the 2020 election and that it was stolen by fraud”.

That some people have been misinformed is not as compelling
as Trump is exactly copying Hitler

That "donald trump" aspires to be like other "dictators" around 'the world' is glaringly obvious, well to some anyway. But, trying to use 'lies', biased or misleading information, or just 'propaganda', to oppose or counter 'other lies' and/or 'propaganda' is never going to help 'your cause', nor 'your point of view'.

[Skepdick]

Pete, we are talking at cross purposes; I’m a philosopher, and it seems you are primarily interested in rhetoric.

There's a difference?

[Skepdick]

Now you look as if you are avoiding communication, Pete.

Communication is the (inadvertent and benign) manipulation of other minds.

You said you aren't into propaganda.

It's not possible to reconcile these two goals.

[PeteOlcott]

Now you look as if you are avoiding communication, Pete.

Communication is the (inadvertent and benign) manipulation of other minds.

You said you aren't into propaganda.

It's not possible to reconcile these two goals.

#NeverAnyElectionFraud ---
(That could possibly change the election results)
This counter-propaganda must be endlessly repeated

[PeteOlcott]

Pete, we are talking at cross purposes; I’m a philosopher, and it seems you are primarily interested in rhetoric. I happen to think your strategy is also weak from a propaganda point of view, but I am not skilled in rhetoric.

Instead of “There never was any evidence of election fraud sufficient to overturn the 2020 presidential election” or “there never was sufficient evidence of election fraud” or “For all practical purposes there never was any evidence of election fraud.” I would suggest something like this;

“There is no evidence that Trump won the 2020 election and that it was stolen by fraud”.

That some people have been misinformed is not as compelling
as Trump is exactly copying Hitler

That "donald trump" aspires to be like other "dictators" around 'the world' is glaringly obvious, well to some anyway. But, trying to use 'lies', biased or misleading information, or just 'propaganda', to oppose or counter 'other lies' and/or 'propaganda' is never going to help 'your cause', nor 'your point of view'.

#NeverAnyElectionFraud ---
(That could possibly change the election results)
This counter-propaganda must be endlessly repeated

[PeteOlcott]

Pete, we are talking at cross purposes; I’m a philosopher, and it seems you are primarily interested in rhetoric. I happen to think your strategy is also weak from a propaganda point of view, but I am not skilled in rhetoric.

Instead of “There never was any evidence of election fraud sufficient to overturn the 2020 presidential election” or “there never was sufficient evidence of election fraud” or “For all practical purposes there never was any evidence of election fraud.” I would suggest something like this;

“There is no evidence that Trump won the 2020 election and that it was stolen by fraud”.

That some people have been misinformed is not as compelling
as Trump is exactly copying Hitler

That "donald trump" aspires to be like other "dictators" around 'the world' is glaringly obvious, well to some anyway. But, trying to use 'lies', biased or misleading information, or just 'propaganda', to oppose or counter 'other lies' and/or 'propaganda' is never going to help 'your cause', nor 'your point of view'.

I must use counter-propaganda the way that it actually
works or it will not work.

#NeverAnyElectionFraud
(That could possibly change the election results)
This counter-propaganda must be endlessly repeated

#NeverAnyElectionFraud

There never was any evidence
of election fraud* Trump is just
copying Hitler's "big lie"

[PeteOlcott]

#LiesAboutElectionFraud

There never was any evidence of election fraud
that could possibly change the election results.
Trump is just copying Hitler's "big lie"



That is much longer than a sound bite making it much less effective.

[promethean75]

Btw, just wanted to mention that there never was any evidence of election fraud that could possibly change the election results and Trump is just copying Hitler's "big lie" strategy.

[Age]

#LiesAboutElectionFraud

There never was any evidence of election fraud
that could possibly change the election results.
Trump is just copying Hitler's "big lie"



That is much longer than a sound bite making it much less effective.

Well you are the only one saying it, and going on about.

Also, you appear to be speaking in regards to some future event.

Do you still think that 'that, long past, election' could, still, possibly be changed?

[PeteOlcott]

#LiesAboutElectionFraud

There never was any evidence of election fraud
that could possibly change the election results.
Trump is just copying Hitler's "big lie"



That is much longer than a sound bite making it much less effective.

Well you are the only one saying it, and going on about.

Also, you appear to be speaking in regards to some future event.

Do you still think that 'that, long past, election' could, still, possibly be changed?

Most everyone that was taken in by Trump's Nazi styled lies
can be converted using counter-propaganda.

People that are actual evangelical Christians already know
their penalty for supporting a liar. They just need to notice
that he really is a liar. They simply haven't noticed that yet.