Actually, we use charts and graphs a lot. That’s why I can read it properly, and Karen (and you, apparently) can’t.
Gee I didn't think I'd have to spell it out even more simply....yes PURPORTING.....but why not give an explanation and put people's minds at ease? Are you getting this yet? Instead all that's given is "no evidence of widespread fraud" WTF does that even mean? If you can't see a problem with that then the blinkers you and Simon are accusing people of wearing are actually worn by you.
And what exactly do you think that proves? Is that your attempt at an ABC style "gotcha" moment? Edison Research is the organisation that provided an estimate before the election of how many votes may be expected. In the case of Wisconsin the number they provided was 3.4-3.5m, which turned out to be high. They base this estimate on their research, historical trends, etc. etc. Obviously as the count goes on, that number will change as more or less votes than they expected come in. Note that they only estimate total vote numbers, and make no comment or projection on who those votes may be for. That is where their involvement ends. They had no involvement whatsoever in producing the graph. The graph itself came straight from the (US) ABC News count as it was broadcast.
Like I said, up to the accusers to prove it. That would be you in this case. A ton of stuff floating around ‘claiming’ to be one thing or another - all evaporates when it is actually investigated.
STOP BuLLSHiTting - the graph you posted was from Edison Research - NOT ACTUAL VOTES REGISTERED! Read the bottom if the page you posted!
Now you're just being dumb and obtuse. I'm not accusing anything... It's been put forward by others.... Not me and it's not my video footage (I'm in Australia btw) and it had obviously unsettled enough Trump voters to make them think there's wrongdoing. Have you seen the video with the suitcases? I think it needs explanation. Why not explain it? What harm can that do? Not explaining it makes it even more suspicious in my books. I don't understand how you can't see that.
Georgia only did the signature matching on a sampling in one county, Cobb county. It wasn't the entire county, and certainly not the entire state.
Great article. I still don't think he incited violence.... That's a stretch if you heard his speech..... He's preached law and order all the way through the BLM riots and said his supporters should match on the capital.... You know, like a protest? Anyway all this could have been avoided by just giving explanations to Trump's claims of election fraud instead of sweeping it under the carpet.
True.... But I don't like Facebook and Twitter etc making decisions about what I can read. Otherwise, it's their problem.
I've given that job away it causes too much pain and suffering. In fact this whole thread is more like a comedy ....... This one in particular:
LOL I remember prior to Trump being elected part of the smear campaign was talking about the danger of him having that power of the nuclear codes. Wasn't he actually the only president in decades not to start a war or something? Never mind the peace deals he brokered.
That is such a funny bit of old humour, I remember watching it many years ago, good to see & have a giggle again... & you're right it describes this thread perfectly.
You left out Bill Gates, George Soros, The Clintons, Chemtrails, Fake moon landings, and I'm sure there are more.
