• ZMonster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not saying “the whole both sides thing” the way you are obviously reading that. I’m saying that if you look into individual convictions, you will find people on both sides. And I don’t have a source, I’m a ding dong at work. I’m only parroting something I read once a while ago. I’d be happy to abandon this hill. I had no idea I was throwing a gauntlet. I thought I was participating in a conversation.

    And thanks for the link, I’ll check it out.

      • ZMonster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I guess I’m confused. Firstly, I don’t understand why you’re so adversarial. Did I say something offensive? I was trying to be helpful in supporting your theory. Maybe you could find a pattern out of what we already can confirm, who knows? Second, I didn’t dispute anything you said, and I didn’t make any claims that a tertiary search can’t at least be relatively consistent with. If you search election fraud convictions there are several articles reporting on just that. Heritage has a report out covering the last 20 years. So what did I say that was so erroneous that you think I should have “fact-checked”?