Trump

[Kelvin]

His family are taking part in the transition team and therefore are influencing the outcomes. His daughter has attended meetings and been on calls with some of the World leaders he's spoken too. So clearly involved in the presidency. I didn't say they had jobs.

you do realise he is not president yet?

come 20th Jan, the transition team is gone...

Credit me with more knowledge than that Simon. It's also unlike you to be so generous. The transition team's job is to create the government for the incoming president which is why it's called a transition. Trump is also speaking to World leaders as president elect. What he says and does now is more important than anything Obama says despite still being president. His children are clearly involved.

He still has to get through the electoral college members' vote of course so it's not a clear run to inauguration.

[Kelvin]

Trump now claiming he would have won the popular vote if it hadn't been for the millions of illegal immigrants that voted for Clinton. He also reckons had he wanted to he could have won the popular vote anyway had he chosen to do so by campaigning more in the states he didn't win.

Both statements show contempt for the electorate. However, the illegal immigrant voter claim is a stupid assertion if he genuinely believes that millions of illegal immigrants voted to be true. I suspect he knows it's not true and is simply pandering to his followers stoking up more anti-immigrant rhetoric. The alternative is he's an idiot.

In fact, thinking it through a bit more. If the president elect is claiming millions of illegal votes were cast, which presumably he's basing on evidence then, by definition, there should be a recount and/or an investigation into voter fraud.

They really need to take his phone off him or stop him twatting. He won't make the inauguration as this rate.

[Scuffers]

Trump now claiming he would have won the popular vote if it hadn't been for the millions of illegal immigrants that voted for Clinton. He also reckons had he wanted to he could have won the popular vote anyway had he chosen to do so by campaigning more in the states he didn't win.

Both statements show contempt for the electorate. However, the illegal immigrant voter claim is a stupid assertion if he genuinely believes that millions of illegal immigrants voted to be true. I suspect he knows it's not true and is simply pandering to his followers stoking up more anti-immigrant rhetoric. The alternative is he's an idiot.

In fact, thinking it through a bit more. If the president elect is claiming millions of illegal votes were cast, which presumably he's basing on evidence then, by definition, there should be a recount and/or an investigation into voter fraud.

They really need to take his phone off him or stop him twatting. He won't make the inauguration as this rate.

With all due, it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books, so it's not really a big stretch to claim some of them will have been used to cast illegal votes, hell, there's a video of Obama telling illegals it's OK to vote.

Watch on YouTube

Hell, the courts put down the requirement for proper ID to register to vote:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pu ... story.html

then we get to the next bit, he said if he had campaigned more in states he WON, he would have had a larger share of the popular vote - ie. states he knew he had enough support to win the state he did not spend time on, as he only had to win the state.

The US has had the electoral college system for 100's of years, much like our own constituency system, just because she lost, they should change it?

All this goes to show just how dirty and corrupt politics has become, which is probably the very reason Trump won.

[Lazydonkey]

With all due, it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books

Where?

[Scuffers]

With all due, it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books

Where?

Google....

[Kelvin]

Provide the facts that show millions of illegal votes are cast at federal elections. You've said it's already been shown so post it up the detailed analysis that shows it.

Where Trump has got this from is here:

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st ... not-vote-/

It's easy to prove. Just produce the evidence. If it's true why wouldn't you, it would play right into the hands of the Trump camp.

This doesn't highlight voter fraud but I agree that it does highlight a corrupt political system but not for the same reasons you think.

[Kelvin]

With all due, it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books

Where?

Google....

Save us the time. Post up the links where this has been independently analysed and proved in federal elections.

[Scuffers]

No, sorry, but if you CBA to look for yourselves, why should I nanny you?

Look it up for yourselves, the internet's a big place you know.

[graeme]

With all due, it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books

Where?

Google....

Pathetic.

[Lazydonkey]

No, sorry, but if you CBA to look for yourselves, why should I nanny you?

Look it up for yourselves, the internet's a big place you know.

I posted my reply AFTER i'd spent 30 mins looking for proof and coming up with nothing. But thanks for assuming i hadn't.

I found one tweet with no evidence behind it.

When challenged on this evidence the organisation in question replied

“True the Vote absolutely supports President-elect Trump’s recent comment about the impact of illegal voting, as reflected in the national popular vote. We are still collecting data and will be for several months, but our intent is to publish a comprehensive study on the significant impact of illegal voting in all of its many forms and begin a national discussion on how voters, states, and the Trump Administration can best address this growing problem.”

Which isn't proof. I also found the politfact article linked above which seems to be a rational, fact based debunk of the myth of widespread voter fraud.

So, please for all those less gifted on google than yourself provide one link to evidence. It's not nannying, it's a simple request.

it would actually be less work and effort to post a link than to post insults to those asking.

[Kelvin]

No, sorry, but if you CBA to look for yourselves, why should I nanny you?

Look it up for yourselves, the internet's a big place you know.

That's not why I asked you to post it up. I want to see what evidence you're basing your assertion on. Therefore, I'll assume that you can't point to any credible evidence that will stand up to scrutiny. Happy to take that back when you do.

Study after study including the most comprehensive to date by Professor Justin Levitt has shown that voter fraud is a myth. Members of the Republican Party have even admitted to stoking the myth because it helps them in elections.

[Scuffers]

No, sorry, but if you CBA to look for yourselves, why should I nanny you?

Look it up for yourselves, the internet's a big place you know.

That's not why I asked you to post it up. I want to see what evidence you're basing your assertion on. Therefore, I'll assume that you can't point to any credible evidence that will stand up to scrutiny. Happy to take that back when you do.

Study after study including the most comprehensive to date by Professor Justin Levitt has shown that voter fraud is a myth. Members of the Republican Party have even admitted to stoking the myth because it helps them in elections.

total tosh.

so, the democrats busing in out of state votes is not fraud then? (wikileaks)

the court cases to stop states removing dead people from electoral rolls did not happen?

look, if you want court level evidence, then put up the millions of $ to fund it (much like the greens are paying for recounts).

I guess you also did not believe in voter fraud in the UK (tower hamlets just for starters)?

Just because I can't give you a nice link that 'proves' something does not mean it's not happening, election fraud is always a problem, the question is at what level do you turn a blind eye?

[Kelvin]

Voter fraud happens. The assertion is that millions of illegal votes have been cast in this election. There's no evidence to back it up. None.

There have been several studies on voter fraud in the US and none have proved vast voter fraud. Just saying it's happening doesn't make it so and this is exactly what's been happening in this election.

Tower Hamlets is irrelevant in this discussion.

[graeme]

Scuffers,

How the blither f*ck can a reasonably intelligent individual such as yourself fail to understand that if you make a statement of fact in a debate, the onus is on you to present supporting evidence? It even has a name (onus probandi).
What the f*ck kind of arguement is "Google..."? Never mind courts of law or a formal debate, I can't believe I have to point out that it's also just plain bloody rude!

Assuming for one moment every scrap of information which can turn up in the results of an internet search engine is factual, it's still not clear what arguement are you making by saying, "Google..."? That it's such common knowdledge that it doesn't need evidence? That would be an informal fallacy. That the burden of proof is on Donkey to show that it's untrue? That would be an informal fallacy. That it has not been or cannot be shown to be untrue? That would be an informal fallacy.

Is asserting Donkey CBA to look it up an attempt to take the moral high ground so you seem right, because that would be an informal fallacy. Or were you just trying to make him look bad so you'd seem right? Because that too would be an informal fallacy....

You see where this is going? There's no way the burden isn't on you.

You "can't give you a nice link that 'proves' something" and yet you expect Donkey to find just such an article with a simple Google? Usually at this point, a rational person might say something along the lines of, "Actually, I've just had a quick Google myself and you're right, it's not that easy to find supporting evidence. Sorry about that. Here's why I think it's still true...."

But no. You're just never, ever, ever wrong, are you?

[Lazydonkey]

Hmmmm.

So lets see if i've got this right.....

At 08:32 you said

it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books

At 09:08 you said

With all due, it's already been demonstrated that the US electoral role has millions of dead or illegals on the books

Where?

Google....

and then at 09:53

Just because I can't give you a nice link that 'proves' something does not mean it's not happening

Can I imply from this that you'd sent me on a wild goose chase and there is no evidence of your original claim available using Google ?