The exact thing happened that everyone said for months leading up was gonna happen.
What are the odds!
lol
2020 US Election alleged fraud - OFFICIAL evidence from affidavits ongoing. #stopthesteal
- Thread starter YippeeYiYeo
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The exact thing happened that everyone said for months leading up was gonna happen.
What are the odds!
lol
Oh they understand this, they just refuse to accept that a slight deviation in behaviors as a result of the environment to prior elections is valid democracy in their own mind.
magpie_marty
Premium Platinum
- Apr 30, 2017
- 6,215
- 7,331
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Mark Levin over at fake news is blaming the Supreme Court.
Given the way the votes were done this year it was closer to i backed australia. At the end of the first day they were 300 - 0 in front. Then the next day england batted and they scored 380 and won while australia was still stuck on 300. I dont understand how the team that batted first lost. It must be fraud.
There's a 10% hard core support, the kind of idiots who go to rallies, who are donating money to Trump, pledging allegience to Trump and some even can't wait to take up arms for him. It looks like it's all republicans because there are so many of them, and the majority of republicans are keeping quiet because they need the nutbars on board for 2024 or they're gonna tear the party apart.
(The GOP is going to get torn apart in the lead up to the next election, but for the next 2 years they'll focus on attacking the Dems for EVERYTHING you can imagine.)
It's communism, Socialism, cronyism, murder, child abuse, killing babies, stealing your guns, being non-white. It'll be FEAR up to 11 like it always is.
Not sure the GOP money-men will want to put Trump up again, but not sure they'll have a choice. It'll be clear that electing Trump is near impossible, he'll be known as the COVID failure as his main legacy. 300,000 dead and it's still not even the traditional flu season yet.
Africa has much different demographics to the west.
24 studies all saying the same thing. Lockdowns have stuff all effect. The FACTS are clear.
The pro-lockdown evidence is shockingly thin, and based largely on comparing real-world outcomes against dire computer-generated forecasts derived from empirically untested models, and then merely positing that stringencies and “nonpharmaceutical interventions” account for the difference between the fictionalized vs. the real outcome. The anti-lockdown studies, on the other hand, are evidence-based, robust, and thorough, grappling with the data we have (with all its flaws) and looking at the results in light of controls on the population.
Lockdowns Do Not Control the Coronavirus: The Evidence
"The use of universal lockdowns in the event of the appearance of a new pathogen has no precedent. It has been a science experiment in real time, with most of the human population used as lab rats. The costs are legion. The question is whether lockdowns worked to control the virus in a way that...
www.aier.org
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Read your own links numptyAfrica has much different demographics to the west.
24 studies all saying the same thing. Lockdowns have stuff all effect. The FACTS are clear.
The pro-lockdown evidence is shockingly thin, and based largely on comparing real-world outcomes against dire computer-generated forecasts derived from empirically untested models, and then merely positing that stringencies and “nonpharmaceutical interventions” account for the difference between the fictionalized vs. the real outcome. The anti-lockdown studies, on the other hand, are evidence-based, robust, and thorough, grappling with the data we have (with all its flaws) and looking at the results in light of controls on the population.
Lockdowns Do Not Control the Coronavirus: The Evidence
"The use of universal lockdowns in the event of the appearance of a new pathogen has no precedent. It has been a science experiment in real time, with most of the human population used as lab rats. The costs are legion. The question is whether lockdowns worked to control the virus in a way that...
That's on just one study (the first one linked).
You're just one of the many people who ignore evidence to scream about the money you lost. * the people, I WANT MY MONEY!!!
If you lock down people they can't spread a virus. It's obvious epidemiological logic that a simpleton boomer like yourself wouldn't understand. So just go back to screaming about mussies and the brownies.
Might also be a bit hard for Trumf to run an election campaign from a New York state prison.
Not only is the lockdown damping the spread of COVID, it's also reduced the incidence of just about every other infectious disease out there.
Crankyhawk
Brownlow Medallist
The articles linked, many are not published in high value medical journals and their peer review process may have questions.Africa has much different demographics to the west.
24 studies all saying the same thing. Lockdowns have stuff all effect. The FACTS are clear.
The pro-lockdown evidence is shockingly thin, and based largely on comparing real-world outcomes against dire computer-generated forecasts derived from empirically untested models, and then merely positing that stringencies and “nonpharmaceutical interventions” account for the difference between the fictionalized vs. the real outcome. The anti-lockdown studies, on the other hand, are evidence-based, robust, and thorough, grappling with the data we have (with all its flaws) and looking at the results in light of controls on the population.
Lockdowns Do Not Control the Coronavirus: The Evidence
"The use of universal lockdowns in the event of the appearance of a new pathogen has no precedent. It has been a science experiment in real time, with most of the human population used as lab rats. The costs are legion. The question is whether lockdowns worked to control the virus in a way that...
Most are either from very early in pandemic and/or Europe focused - could not see one which discussed Australia at any rate.
The one which I find interesting/ useful potentially is the cost analysis one (link 11) for Israel which concludes lockdown is economically not cost effective.
Edit unfortunately the link does not give full text, and the comments suggest that track and trace approach had “staggering assumptions “ (which cannot be seen as not full text; in addition article being peer reviewed still). This does not indicate proof; specifically anyone can submit anything to an online journal (they are voracious content seekers) but only after peer review is anything worthwhile.
Last edited:
Backtracking before getting sued
- Jul 5, 2012
- 24,745
- 40,163
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
Yes.
And to think, ALL of this could have been avoided if they’d just had the common sense to make voting compulsory like here in Australia.
Crankyhawk
Brownlow Medallist
Added to trumps blacklist.
- Sep 17, 2019
- 22,327
- 35,377
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #1,314
Can you explain the difference?
Crankyhawk
Brownlow Medallist
Poorer (by gdp) therefore less travel
Younger by average age
Warmer climate
And the big one
Lack of health infrastructure and low testing rates means underestimate of case numbers in most African nations
magpie_marty
Premium Platinum
- Apr 30, 2017
- 6,215
- 7,331
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Sidney has been talking to Hugo Chavez and is close finding the fraud.
Africa has much different demographics to the west.
24 studies all saying the same thing. Lockdowns have stuff all effect. The FACTS are clear.
The pro-lockdown evidence is shockingly thin, and based largely on comparing real-world outcomes against dire computer-generated forecasts derived from empirically untested models, and then merely positing that stringencies and “nonpharmaceutical interventions” account for the difference between the fictionalized vs. the real outcome. The anti-lockdown studies, on the other hand, are evidence-based, robust, and thorough, grappling with the data we have (with all its flaws) and looking at the results in light of controls on the population.
Lockdowns Do Not Control the Coronavirus: The Evidence
"The use of universal lockdowns in the event of the appearance of a new pathogen has no precedent. It has been a science experiment in real time, with most of the human population used as lab rats. The costs are legion. The question is whether lockdowns worked to control the virus in a way that...
The kind of person who screams about the "Mainstream Media" who then posts articles from the AIER which swings between climate change denial, anti-vax (dressed up as freedom to choose), COVID denial and "herd immunity works".
We're in Australia, we've got ample evidence that lockdowns work from 6 different states, plus NZ across the dutch. A lack of lockdown, such as UK and the USA has had a different impact.
Give us an example in ANZ of where a lockdown failed and in what way it failed.
Their situation was a bit different. When they wrote their constitution, they specifically excluded a lot of people from that so-called democracy including women, slaves, natives.
People who claim theirs (or our) constitutions are still standing the test of time and documents that don't need changing (read conservatives) really need to have a good think about all the many ways they could be better.
The Bill of rights was within the same generation as the writing of the original US constitution, pretty clearly acknowledges that they missed a lot of stuff and that the document is VERY fallible. But somehow that's ignored by modern-day conservatives who think they know better than everyone since 1787, who were perfect people (and slave owners).
rofl
Received a tersely worded letter or 2 from the lawyers in the last few days I'm tipping
edit: yup, word has gone round the campfire lol
Last edited:
rofl
Received a tersely worded letter or 2 from the lawyers in the last few days I'm tipping
edit: yup, word has gone round the campfire lol
View attachment 1031146
That's not even the Dominion company, that's a smaller company which was also implicated. I'm tipping Dominion will wait until Trump is out of office before they go after damages, to prevent DoJ interference. They could even include Trump's family in the lawsuit, they've been saying some egregious lies without the same cover as the President has.
Ouija Board evidence is admissible in the Supreme Court.
Yeah - that's the fun thing about being open with how much the post election donations have yielded. Dominion and the other smaller company know there is a cache of cash ready to try and take a slice.
Need to include that segment on Tucker, Hannity and Ingraham also. Surprised they actually did not require the hosts themselves to present the mea culpa (ala Newsmax) as the segment comes off as a paid commercial which most would probably switch off.rofl
Received a tersely worded letter or 2 from the lawyers in the last few days I'm tipping
edit: yup, word has gone round the campfire lol
View attachment 1031146
- Mar 19, 2020
- 12,528
- 39,012
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Burundi said it well when they got asked why they have zero coronavirus cases and havnt asked for testing kits.
They have poverty, malaria, malnutrition, horrific mortality rates in those under 5 (56 per 1000 compared tp Australias 3 per 1000). A disease with 99% survival rate isnt really high on the list of priorities for them right now
Whether you can grasp it or not, the reality is there. Covid is a first world problem. The rest of the world, well they have bigger problems
Similar threads
