Here you go, a “real” source. He said there were more bullet ballots than there likely really are, but there’s still a really suspiciously high number of them. How is this not at least worth investigating?

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    What seems more likely: 1) a vast conspiracy between the Trump campaign, a collection of hackers, Elon Musk and various workers at his super PAC, and any number of other insidious actors all part of a shadowy cabal that conspired to hack the vote, and this one dude, who got almost every data point verifiably wrong and has demonstrated zero evidence for his other related claims, somehow "got it right. Or, 2) a small amount of Trump voters didn’t give a shit about or know much of anything about any other offices/candidates and just voted for Trump and left?

    Right.

    It’s so sad to watch people grasp at conspiracy theories like this. Conspiratorial thinking is highly correlated with feelings of insecurity, low agreeability, narcissism, intolerance of uncertainty, feelings of a lack of control, fear, and a tendency toward confirmation bias and proportionality bias. So I guess seeing people on the left start indulging this way of thinking just like Trump supporters did isn’t shocking, but it’s still sad to see.

    • Alteon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Within every election, there is a certain number of bullet ballots to be expected. The norm falls around 1-2% or so, with an expected margin of error. Every swing state (and ONLY swing states). Hit around 5-12%.

      There were 57 bomb threats that targeted ballot counting stations. All in swing states.

      In pretty much every swing states, Trump won the Presidency, but Democrats won pretty much every other down ballot race?

      The polls were pretty much correct for the swing states… except for the Presidency?

      There’s coincidences and then there’s fucking Looney Toons levels of improbability.

      I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but considering all that, you don’t think a single investigation should occur?

      • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        59 minutes ago

        Right, you’re not a conspiracy theorist—you’re just “asking questions” and urging people to “do their own research.” Where have we heard that before? While you throw around baseless accusations about the Harris-Trump election, the reality is this: there’s no credible evidence to support claims of widespread fraud. Swing states have robust systems for verifying results, and the election process is overseen by bipartisan officials, including both Democrats and Republicans who vouched for its integrity. Demanding “just one investigation” isn’t about seeking the truth; it’s about refusing to accept the outcome.

        I know you you’re unlikely to read let alone comprehend this post—just like you didn’t read the article you’re twisting—but for anyone else stumbling across your nonsense, this is the reality: your claims are bullshit. They’re not just wrong, they’re embarrassingly, demonstrably wrong based on the very data provided for you in the article to which you are responding. Let’s go through the numbers you’ve clearly ignored.

        You say there were “5-12% bullet ballots” in swing states, but the data in no way supports that claim. Take North Carolina: out of 5,722,556 ballots cast, 5,592,243 included votes in the governor’s race. That means just 130,313 ballots didn’t—a mere 2.3%, not your laughable “5-12%.” Arizona? Of 3.4 million ballots cast, only 81,673 didn’t include votes for the Senate race—about 2.4%, again miles below your inflated, made-up conspiracy numbers. Nevada? The difference was 23,159 ballots out of nearly 1.5 million—a negligible 1.6%. Interesting. On average that’s… basically right where you said it should “normally” be.

        Bullet ballots in battleground states are rare, but they’ve always existed, especially in contentious elections. And they’ve always been higher in battleground states. Swing-state voters tend to focus on the presidency when the stakes are high, which is common knowledge to anyone who understands voting behavior. Your numbers? They don’t exist.

        As for your implication that it’s “improbable” for Trump to win the presidency while Democrats do better down-ballot, I hate to break it to you, but racism and sexism is a much simpler, proven explanation with data to support it. Polling had consistently shown that Harris faced deep resistance, even among Democrats, with much of it rooted in gender and racial bias. Voters who rejected Harris while supporting other Democrats weren’t casting “impossible” ballots—they were reflecting prejudices that have been documented for decades. You don’t need a vast conspiracy to explain why Kamala Harris lost; you need to look at exit polls and confront the ugly reality of American history and culture

        The bomb threats on Election Day, which you seem desperate to weave into your narrative, were investigated by the FBI and found to largely be hoaxes originating from Russian email domains. These threats, while reprehensible, had no impact on the election’s integrity and were not linked to any domestic conspiracy. The idea that they were part of a grand scheme to disrupt the “chain of custody” or facilitate hacking is pure fantasy, unsupported by a shred of evidence. If anything, they reflect an attempt to intimidate voters and officials, not to alter outcomes. Clinging to this as proof of fraud is the hallmark of conspiracy theorists: taking unrelated incidents and spinning them into a baseless, implausible story when reality doesn’t fit their worldview.

        And this is exactly where your conspiratorial thinking falls apart. Rather than accept straightforward, evidence-backed explanations—strategic voting in swing states, voter sexism, or even the simple fact that Trump remains popular among many, indeed most, voters in this country—you leap to shadowy plots and grand conspiracies. This is textbook conspiracy logic: inflate normal patterns into anomalies, ignore the data that contradicts you, and demand investigations into “questions” you’ve invented yourself. It’s bad-faith reasoning at its worst.

        Your entire argument isn’t skepticism; it’s denial. You’re not interested in the facts—if you were, you’d see how consistently they dismantle your claims. This isn’t about election fraud. It’s about your refusal to reckon with reality.

        She lost. Get over it.

      • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Didn’t you know? If dems called out trump for stealing the election, they’d be no better than him 😇

        /s yall need to get your heads out of your asses, the election was clearly stolen and pretending otherwise won’t save you from trump or make you a superior person

        • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          54 minutes ago

          Hey look! You expressed like five of the aforementioned psychological traits! I also like how you accuse me of not reading the article, but then try to buddy up with this idiot that actually didn’t read it and is spouting numbers that directly contradict the actual data provided by the article you posted just because they’re supporting your paranoid conspiracy. If only there was a term for that habit, like “confirmation bias” or something.

          You seriously did a speedrun checking off those psychological traits. 🤣

          • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            52 minutes ago

            Does it feel good putting this much effort into defending Donnie? Do you feel superior to everyone else bc you ignore obvious signs of election fraud and tampering? Or are you under the impression if you start kissing ass now he won’t deport or kill you?

            • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              37 minutes ago

              Not everyone is a sweaty, low-effort reality denialist, but it’s pretty ironic coming from someone that has created multiple posts on this subject and has commented dozens of times on your own posts trying to defend your desperate hope.

              I realize now that you have a mental disability that makes it very difficult for you to let things go and face new realities, so this is going to be with you for a long time. I’m going to block you, but I truly do wish you the best, and I hope you are able to wrestle your demons.

              • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                32 minutes ago

                My demons are trump and asshole like you who endlessly defend him and his fascism. I hope I get to do some wrestling too :3

    • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      You didn’t read the article did you? Or even the snopes “correction” of it? Pls do that before discounting it as fake, being wilfully ignorant about this does nobody any good