Old_ones wrote: ↑
I don't have to do anything to satisfy your list of arguments from incredulity.
Actually, the best response to an argument from incredulity is to provide the explanation. Dawkins devoted an entire book, The Blind Watchmaker
, to that approach. Alternately, like you have here, one could take the approach of being an obstinate dickhead.
Moreover, the burden of proof is on you.
No. A slew of unprecedented, statistically highly improbable, and prima facie impossible [e.g., hundreds of thousands of more ballots counted than were issued] events occurred. The onus is on the election official, on whose watches they happened, to explain how they didn't either completely botch their job, or weren't flat out cheating.
Your arguments are exactly like creationists trying to poke holes in evolutionary theory because they want to win by default.
Now you're guilty of argument by repeated assertion. Saying over and over we're just like the creationists doesn't make it so -- especially when Dog and Javis have already busted you on it.
You can make your own religion where Trump is the messiah, and the fact that he lost the election really proves he won, and was anointed by god and shit.
Wow, you totally slayed that strawman. I'm in awe of your rhetorical wizardry.
I don't have any illusions about being able to reason with you, and I'm certainly not going to waste any of my time following you down a rabbit hole to find evidence for explanations you are going to reject on the basis of incredulity anyway. I'm just here to point and laugh.
Well, Kirbmarc, Aneris, and the other dickhead sophists flounced long ago, leaving a niche for you.
When it comes to my own personal sensibilities, I think winning the popular vote should be enough
Keep us updated on how that constitutional amendment is going.
I look at presidents who lose the popular vote as an undesirable consequence of a flawed system. Trump has been a minority president for his entire 4 years, he's never been close to winning the popular vote, and that alone says everything you need to know about his legitimacy in my opinion.
Since FDR, Democrat potus candidates have won a majority
of the popular vote only thrice: LBJ -- which was mostly a response to JFK's assassination -- and Obama twice. Carter eked out 50%. The Dems' legacy of being repeatedly and resoundingly rejected, only rarely sneaking in with slim pluralities
, tells you everything you need to know.
I don't care if you accept the vote or not.
You should. You pussies played at your limp-dicked "resistance" for four years. Go ahead, let us show you how it's done.