Talk:Scott Presler

Election fraud

Why do you spout the leftist mantra that 2020 election fraud claims have been proven false? By whom? Lawsuits are still pending, and the ones in Arizona and Wisconsin have proven fraud. 150,000 fraudulent ballots were cast in Wisconsin. Signatures on file did not match ones on ballots and should have been thrown out. Just because it is unclear and difficult to know if and how election results can be overturned doesn't mean there isn't ongoing litigation and in at least 2 states fraud has been proven. The Arizona governor's election results are still being challenged as well. 108.16.23.228 (talk) 16:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

It appears to me as if almost every article dealing with Trump, or election integrity, or Republican policy positions violates NPOV. I stopped bothering to correct them to wording that doesn't advocate for a particular political view of the because so many admins who can block edits share the article's point of view (and that's fine, everyone can have their own point of view -- it's just poor editorial policy, and shoddy journalistic technique, and violates Wikipedia's own policies. But I give a Chicago shrug here--yes it's corrupt but whaddya gonna do?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oculus Dexter (talk • contribs) 18:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Oculus Dexter, can you explain how this article violates the NPOV policy? Speaking to the claims by the IP users above, can you provide reliable sources supporting theories, such as "Stop the Steal", that promote the claim that widespread electoral fraud allowed Joe Biden to defeat Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election? Best, Bridget (talk) 21:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia needs to scrutinize articles for phrases such as "election fraud", "election deniers", "conspiracy theorists", etc. and demand the writers either abandon such assertions or that they cite sources that support their views as well as the opposing view. These phrases are subjective and have no place in a news article. Any article which disparages any person or groups of people by suggesting that election fraud doesn't exist needs to retract their article until they do their homework. There are non-profit citizen groups all over the U.S. that are uncovering hundreds of thousands of instances of election fraud, including algorithms embedded in some state's voter rolls that apparently have no purpose other than to locate imbedded fake and duplicate voter IDs in order to use them to alter voting results. Check out auditny.com in New York State for one such group that has spent countless hours and their own funds doing research and analysis that New York State should be doing for its voters. All they are asking for is an end- to-end audit of the New York State voter rolls so people can be assured that elections are accurate and secure. These folks stand to gain nothing by exposing these discrepancies. Infact, they have been demonized and defamed by some New York State officials, the very people they elected to serve them. These election integrity groups are trying to get to the truth... something that seems to be very threatening to certain legislators and powerful others. Why? This is a far more interesting story than asserting we look away from the possibility of election fraud; that we ignore the claims of dead people voting and registered voters whose addresses are vacant lots; people under 18 and over 115 years old voting, etc. Where are the truth seekers? What happened to journalistic integrity? Come on Wikipedia! Get on the right side of this very important issue! Voting is the one most important avenue available to United States citizens to voice their opinions on how their government should be run. It is the crux of our constitutional democracy. Without safe and secure elections we might as well be living under a totalitarian or communistic system of government. It appears this is exactly what the purveyors of false statements are hoping for. They certainly don't seem to be concerned about truth, justice and freedom. 23.175.80.191 (talk) 22:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Any proof for all these extraordinary claims on elections? I read through your essay and I can't find any reliable sources to improve our article on Scott Presler. This includes that website you linked on NY state elections. Bridget (talk) 23:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The sources here are often articles, as it's a journalistic resource, but the Articles themselves have "valid" sources for Wikimedia.

Categorized, and sortable.

https://hereistheevidence.com/

So far GOP plaintiffs prevailed on 14 of the 21 cases decided on the merits... 172.58.180.117 (talk) 14:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, many factual documented pieces of evidence detailed in Documentaries:”Absolute Proof “ and “2000 Mules”. Absolute Proof documents video and testimonies as well as voting machine expert testimony to address the capabilities and weaknesses of the Dominion/Smartmatic voting systems for fraud and hacking. The algorithms of the votes do not compute rationally. 2000 Miles uses cellphone tracking evidence as well as testimonies to prove the widespread ballot harvesting committed in the swing states. Just today and in the last 2 weeks evidence has come in citing proof of fraudulent ballots in Pennsylvania as well as Georgia. Zuckerburg himself has recently admitted censoring posts per government order to do so leading up to 2020 election. There was fraud, likely enough to change the election outcomes, but there has been resistance to launch any comprehensive and impartial investigation. Therefore, saying “false” claims regarding the 2020 election being stolen are not “factual” but reflect bias. PermeliaPatron (talk) 20:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

11 million Democrat votes that just “disappeared” between 2020 and 2024 would seem to be empirical evidence that an anomaly took place in 2020 that deserves further investigation before all claims can be summarily dismissed as “False”.

You’re not being objective. Your bias is showing. 154.27.96.10 (talk) 12:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Election Fraud is not a false claim

Election fraud is not a false claim Mitchmich (talk) 01:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Election fraud is a false claim ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 08:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Obvious to most of who TV is not a mentor and are not subject to the propagandic brainwashing produced by those in Media acting as wielders of magical sleight of hand propaganda power on bully pulpit. 2603:8080:FD07:CE6F:6C74:47E3:232E:AB67 (talk) 16:00, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Claims of Election Fraud

Since the claim of election fraud has not been published as true or false by the government or courts I do not believe it should be dubbed “false claim” can it be edited to say allegations of election fraud. To state it is false is an grand assumption with no backing. Jsmith119 (talk) 00:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

2020 election

"False" should be excluded when describing voter fraud in 2020. There is always voter fraud. Saltydog8 (talk) 14:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Untitled topic

When you examine the raw numbers from the 2024 election and compare them to previous elections it’s becoming more apparent that 2020 had some very distinct anomalies. 11 million democrats from 2020 just suddenly decided not to vote in what was called “the most important election in our lives” ? I think calling the claims of election fraud FALSE is misleading at prejudging. Empirical Evidence would seem to indicate that SOMETHING happened that is deserving of further scrutiny. If you disagree with this you’re simply not being objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.27.96.10 (talk) 12:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes I agree 2601:281:204:5BA0:B8DF:3D82:684A:9CEF (talk) 17:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)