Buying Elections with Immigrants came faster than expected

[Bigbrog]

18 minutes ago, red viking said:

Onus is on the wi

Onus is on the wingers to back up their own claims. 

Plenty of sources have looked into this though and demonstrated pretty well that DOGE is flat out lying. Yes, they are "mainstream" sources. Oh, the horror and evil of that. 

What claims has anyone on here made that they haven't backed up.  I am talking about the claims YOU have made that YOU can't back up...the onus is not on me to prove YOUR statements...but nice try trying to move the goal posts and make it about "wingers' and DOGE and not about the claims YOU make...LOL

[red viking]

18 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

What claims has anyone on here made that they haven't backed up.  I am talking about the claims YOU have made that YOU can't back up...the onus is not on me to prove YOUR statements...but nice try trying to move the goal posts and make it about "wingers' and DOGE and not about the claims YOU make...LOL

DOGE backers should back up the bs claims made by DOGE instead of accepting them at face value (drinking the Kool AId) and re-reporting them as fact. 

BACK IT UP!!! I CHALLENGE YOU!!! 

[fishbane]

Elon Musk does this kind of thing all the time.  He presents a concrete number which could mean something of consequence, but the actual relevant number is some small part of the number he shows so you don't really know.  He surely has at least some estimate for the smaller relevant part, but doesn't give it.  Why would he do such a thing?

Here he has definitive number on the numbers of SSNs issued to non-citizens.  He then says that some of those people they found registered to vote.  Why not say the actual number registered to vote?  He says some of those registered to vote have indeed voted.  He doesn't say how many of them voted or what elections they found that they had voted in.  Why wouldn't he give that number?   It really is the most important number.  How many of these non-citizens issued SSNs by the last administration voted in the last presidential election?  Could it be that the number that actually voted is inconsequentially small?  Presenting the larger number and saying some of them voted makes it seem like it could be a huge problem.

Musk and DOGE have used this tactic before.  With the SSA database they have on numerous occasions noted the number of individuals with DOBs over 120 years ago that are not marked as deceased in the system.   They quote a huge number and say that it is a massive problem.  Why don't they ever say the number of 120+ year olds receiving benefits?  Could it be that none are actually receiving payments from the program?  Quoting the large number of alive 120 year old could mean there is a huge problem and justify their departments work.

Musk has done this with Tesla products.  When unveiling the Tesla semi Musk quoted the range of vehicle and the overall weight which seemed impressive.  The website says "300-500mi of range" when "Fully Loaded at 82k lbs Gross Combination Weight." That is an impressive range and a heavy load, but how much of it is cargo?  They don't say.  How much does the semi weigh without the trailer?  They don't say that either.  The impressive range is likely possibly through an extremely large and extremely heavy battery meaning that a small fraction of the 82,000lbs is cargo. 

Why not give the actual number everyone wants to hear?  People interested in voter fraud want to know how many of those non-citizens voted in federal elections.  People interested in social security fraud want to know how many 120+ year olds are being paid by the system.  People interested in using the telsa semi want to know how much cargo they can transport with that 300-500mi range.  The actual numbers don't send the message he wants being sent.

[Bigbrog]

1 hour ago, red viking said:

DOGE backers should back up the bs claims made by DOGE instead of accepting them at face value (drinking the Kool AId) and re-reporting them as fact. 

BACK IT UP!!! I CHALLENGE YOU!!! 

Man...I don't think you will ever get it.  Show me where I have EVER backed DOGE and their numbers...I'll wait.  I am challenging YOU on your claims...period!  If DOGE has it wrong than they have it wrong...I wouldn't and have never claimed DOGE was right or wrong on anything.  I am ascertaining the ownness of YOUR accusations to be proven are on YOU...period!

[red viking]

10 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Man...I don't think you will ever get it.  Show me where I have EVER backed DOGE and their numbers...I'll wait.  I am challenging YOU on your claims...period!  If DOGE has it wrong than they have it wrong...I wouldn't and have never claimed DOGE was right or wrong on anything.  I am ascertaining the ownness of YOUR accusations to be proven are on YOU...period!

Well, plenty of wingers on here are supporting their claims. 

[Scouts Honor]

3 hours ago, red viking said:

"Proving" stuff with the wingers is a never-ending vortex. You'll find something within the proof that also needs to be "proved." You may even ask a "proof" that the sky is blue. You don't even trust anything in the media or that comes from true research by people w/ PhDs. Instead relying on what Fox and Breitbart tell you. 

I don't play those games. If you take your red-tinted goggles off, the reliable information is all out there. 

Fact is that DOGE hasn't backed up any of their B.S. extragent claims about the amount of money they are saving and virtually none of that money is actually "fraud." 

Onus is on the wingers to prove that the claims made by DOGE are true. Not from people like me to prove that they're untrue. 

um

this is what you do

to a T

 

lmfao at the bold above 

[Bigbrog]

18 hours ago, red viking said:

Well, plenty of wingers on here are supporting their claims. 

Is this your way of saying you are wrong??