Why so many people believe the election was rigged (video)

Leftists... if you want to really know why so many, that are not you, think the election is rigged, this video nearly perfectly lays out why with facts.

Please don't waste anyone's time and comment on this thread unless you have actually watched the video.

 

When the displayed image is of a guy whose own network argued in court was too consistently full of **** to be believed, your claim of "facts" is already torpedoed at the waterline...

 

You just made yourself look foolish. You clearly didn't watch the video as your time stamp reveals and the content is not from Tucker Carlson. He is just reading another person's work.

Finally, all you did was commit a Logical Fallacy which is a debate loser. In short... your post was a total fail..

 

It actually started with trump saying before the election that the only way Dems could beat him is by cheating.

 

And he was right.

 

So what's so special about trump?

 

While the video is an empassioned explanation and diatribe against the deep state, and indeed an explanation of why Trump supporters think that the election was rigged, it very explicitly calls out these Trump voters as being dead wrong on their voter fraud charges:
"Over ensuing weeks, they got shuffled around by grifters and media scam artists selling them conspiracy theories. They latched onto one then another increasingly absurd theory as they tried to put a concrete name on something very real [deep state]"
So thank you for spreading the news: the election conspiracy theories are a scam. Now someone tell Trump

 

the republicans certainly rigged the elections in the states that they control, and it worked to re elect their senators, congresspersons, and state legislatures. only the sheer odious nature of trump drove a turnout that exceeded the cheating of his party.

 

Why present it third hand then (without even any kind of reference to he primary source)? Why not present the other persons work directly, completely and as written? Could it be that the written source would be easier to breakdown and challenge on the facts while a speech is just about stirring up an emotional reaction (which is indeed why some people believe the election was rigged)?

 

I actually watched the video. Your High Priest Tucker Carlson reading someone else's opinion (or was he expressing his own?) doesn't carry any material facts.

 

It is no surprise that Fox News poisons the mind of their 10s of millions of viewers with lies everyday. This is just one example of many.

 

Thanks for the video. It was good to see you all admit that the view the election was stolen is not based on any actual facts or evidence from the election itself.

 

Tucker is unusual because he asks intelligent questions.

Intelligent questions scare hell out of some folks.

 

So you choose to use the genetic fallacy instead of addressing the content of the video. Typical rookie move.

 

Everything in the video is fact. I guess you missed the part about the illegal law changes. We have no idea if it was stolen because the same people Tucker talks about are trying to block audits.

 

This is the guy that claimed that the metric system was a conspiracy, that women should not do science and had an on air hissy fit after his own guest corrected him mispronunciation of the name of the VP

 

So you can't address the content of the video, either, and another genetic fallacy from the left is entered for the record. I predict many more genetic fallacies from the left before the thread makes it to page 2.

"The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue)[1] is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. In other words, a claim is ignored in favor of attacking or championing its source."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

 

Based solely on the lies of the left and their handlers in the deep state.

 

Darth, you cannot appreciate intelligent questions. In the military one is taught to ask no questions at all, so I understand your shortcomings.

 

Everything in the video was opinion. It was also very selective opinion as it said that "Democratic governors changed voter laws" ignoring that changes we done by Republican governors as well. Then the part about the courts finding them legal was 100% opinion without any basis in fact at all.

In the end all Tucker did was admit there is no actual evidence of fraud, and he does not even realize he did so

 

Genetic Fallacy #3. I'm going to keep count of them in this thread.

 

Your ignorance of our military is only exceeded by your ignorance of medial procedures.

 

That term does not mean what you think it does.

There is no fallacy in pointing out Tucker does not ask intelligent questions

 

Yet voting laws were changed often unconstitutionally and targeted to the swing states.