2016 Postmortem

BooScout

(10,411 posts)

3. So the election fraud is a fraud...

Reply to niyad (Original post)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 02:45 PM

Jun 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

the so-called "stanford study" from snopes: [View all] niyad Jun 2016 OP

So Snopes reveals Stanford Study is a Fraud. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #1

who says they aren't? niyad Jun 2016 #2

Good point... BooScout Jun 2016 #4

I don't know that. It just resembles Trump's style of lies. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #6

true. and the swiftboating crapola comes to mind as well. niyad Jun 2016 #7

Where does it say that it's a fraud. NWCorona Jun 2016 #10

not a stanford study, no peer review, etc. niyad Jun 2016 #16

Someone guilty of fraud has opened themselves up to liabilities and I dont see that here. NWCorona Jun 2016 #20

what is true: niyad Jun 2016 #21

And where's the fraud part? NWCorona Jun 2016 #28

what do you not understand? this is NOT a "stanford study", it is merely a paper written niyad Jun 2016 #32

Do you really think I don't understand that? I clearly have stated that it isn't a study NWCorona Jun 2016 #36

I studied my navel and found some lost votes MyNameGoesHere Jun 2016 #43

That's a whole lot of sense you made there. I've now changed my mind. NWCorona Jun 2016 #45

Oh MyNameGoesHere---You are my hero. Thank you so much for skylucy Jun 2016 #80

ONLY three million votes in your navel?? You can do better than that. Check your ears too! Number23 Jun 2016 #88

It is not Stanford Study and not peer reviewed. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #19

Again if you want to blame those who brought this up of misrepresentation NWCorona Jun 2016 #23

A lie is a lie no matter what label we put on it. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #30

And if you want to say that about the ones who read the paper NWCorona Jun 2016 #34

A Study made by real scientists using real data paid for by Oil companies that proves global warming Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #39

Can you point to where the authors claim that this is a Standford study? NWCorona Jun 2016 #41

This message was self-deleted by its author Go Vols Jun 2016 #69

The authors are straightfoward! LOL! Including the one who didn't use his own name? randome Jun 2016 #49

I've downloaded the paper and nowhere does it claim to be a Standford study NWCorona Jun 2016 #50

Post #31 by WhiteTara and down. And it's STANFORD, not Standford. randome Jun 2016 #51

I wonder if it was their auto correct as that happened to me on this thread. NWCorona Jun 2016 #52

lolz obamanut2012 Jun 2016 #57

That's an impressive comment you got there. Did you come up with that on your own? NWCorona Jun 2016 #59

They also spelled Berkeley "Berkley" obamanut2012 Jun 2016 #56

Sure, I'd trust these guys in an instant. To tie their own shoes. Maybe. randome Jun 2016 #64

This. Hillary won! scscholar Jun 2016 #78

No. They did not say it was a fraud. They said it was not a Stanford U backed study. panader0 Jun 2016 #22

No. Snopes conclusion is that it's a "mixture." Some assertions may indeed be true, more independent villager Jun 2016 #33

snopes conclusion was that their claim to be stanford students was true. niyad Jun 2016 #71

So the election fraud is a fraud... BooScout Jun 2016 #3

exactly! niyad Jun 2016 #5

OT~ sheshe2 Jun 2016 #62

Thank you sheshe! BooScout Jun 2016 #63

It's embarrassing how much of this gets to DU these days. nolabear Jun 2016 #8

it wasn't always this bad. niyad Jun 2016 #11

It used to be that stuff like this would get mocked for the obvious hackery it is. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #17

Now statements like, "Hillary cheated a gazillion!!!!!" are defended to the death. (That's Squinch Jun 2016 #73

Agreed. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #81

I can't help but think the fact that this "study" was first aired on the "Higgins News Network" Squinch Jun 2016 #82

I went to the site and my first thought was "does CNN know this guy stole all their stuff?" TwilightZone Jun 2016 #83

Except they have spell check and he, apparently, doesn't. Squinch Jun 2016 #84

Yes, there have always been wild ideas here. progressoid Jun 2016 #48

Is snopes subject to any form of peer review or academic scrutiny? Downwinder Jun 2016 #9

They don't have to be in order to identify false or misleading information KingFlorez Jun 2016 #15

Anyone can write any damned thing they can write. MineralMan Jun 2016 #12

The study has been misrepresnted, absoutely Tom Rinaldo Jun 2016 #29

One of the authors admitted that he didn't WhiteTara Jun 2016 #31

Oh, for pete's sake! MineralMan Jun 2016 #37

Where was that posted? That would be interesting. NWCorona Jun 2016 #42

Go to "About" WhiteTara Jun 2016 #47

Can you clarify that a bit. I definitely want to see where you got that info. NWCorona Jun 2016 #54

... WhiteTara Jun 2016 #65

I thought you were talking about one of the two authors of the paper in this article. NWCorona Jun 2016 #70

Which is academic fraud obamanut2012 Jun 2016 #58

But the narrative is definite click bait. WhiteTara Jun 2016 #66

Reminds me of B1 Bob's 1996 recount demands BlueStateLib Jun 2016 #13

But, it confirms what someone thinks, so it must be correct. MineralMan Jun 2016 #14

amazing how that works, yes? niyad Jun 2016 #18

It survived a jury... sheshe2 Jun 2016 #24

Uff da! MineralMan Jun 2016 #38

A-friggin'-men! A massive K & R. Surya Gayatri Jun 2016 #25

Thanks niyad~ sheshe2 Jun 2016 #26

you are most welcome. niyad Jun 2016 #27

An excellent start on the part of Stanford graduate students. Hopefully more to come. senz Jun 2016 #35

If it's so "excellent" why no peer review? Lord Magus Jun 2016 #77

Too early for peer reviews. senz Jun 2016 #86

Only one of them is from Stanford. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #85

too late! It's already part of 'progressive' election lore. wyldwolf Jun 2016 #40

Yep. Repeat it six times, and it becomes fact to them. Squinch Jun 2016 #76

Kick for truth! mcar Jun 2016 #44

Peer review is the sine qua non of any research that wants to be taken seriously. DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #46

Kick....to help those buying into the nonsense Sheepshank Jun 2016 #53

Kicking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 obamanut2012 Jun 2016 #55

When you're still in college your work is golden Dem2 Jun 2016 #60

k&r Starry Messenger Jun 2016 #61

Kicking! sheshe2 Jun 2016 #67

I think the "study" was actually done at Stansbury. Ace Rothstein Jun 2016 #68

Or possibly over a Salisbury steak. Or maybe outside Santa Ana. Some "s" place. Squinch Jun 2016 #75

. . . niyad Jun 2016 #72

Drowning Bernie supporters will cling to anything to stay afloat. JoePhilly Jun 2016 #74

Some on the left are engaging in Tea Party style conspiracy peddling RandySF Jun 2016 #79

YET ANOTHER HILLARY SMEAR BITES THE DUST!! riversedge Jun 2016 #87

. . . . niyad Jun 2016 #89