Ross Weaver
banner
dreamingweaver.bsky.social
Ross Weaver
@dreamingweaver.bsky.social
Photographer, video maker, story studier
Yeah JFK bought Chicago I am aware of history
October 28, 2025 at 2:42 PM
The issue you keep harping on, I already conceded. Of course it could happen lmao, that isn't the issue. The issue is that the alleged cheater is talking a lot about cheating! The question isn't what you are arguing over! bsky.app/profile/drea...
It's historically unprecedented. The burden of proof is on the proving this as legit, as we must assume it's abnormal due to it never happening before. You should be skeptical of the result, not armchair guessing whether it's possible. Of course it's possible. Who cares. "Is it legit" is the issue.
October 28, 2025 at 2:29 PM
Take your issues elsewhere, I didn't ask for em!
October 28, 2025 at 2:27 PM
In other words you don't smell anything off. Ok great! Guess what? I disagree! I think these events are fishy, and out of line with legit results for many reasons that I don't feel like going into here because I don't need to prove shit to you. Please back off and stop trying to prove something.
October 28, 2025 at 2:26 PM
I think you lost the path a ways back. What are you trying to do here? Teach me something? Please be clear I'm a slow learner.
October 28, 2025 at 2:19 PM
Me? Oh so this is about me okay. Moralize me baby
October 28, 2025 at 2:17 PM
Um, I think it's good to see different events as different? Sorry.
October 28, 2025 at 2:14 PM
You seem too eager to prove something about idiot centrists. Moral arguements like that don't really cut the mustard for explaining big political phenomenon afaik.
October 28, 2025 at 2:14 PM
????

Every historical event is unique and requires perspective. Wtaf are you on about
October 28, 2025 at 2:13 PM
1892 is closer because of Grover Cleveland being a bit like Trump with nonconsecutive terms, and Biden and Harrison can be compared some. But then, Trump ran against Harris. It was a totally different script for the election day than 1892, and the same goes for 1984.
October 28, 2025 at 2:12 PM
You think comparing election results map is a good bar for comparison, I simply reject that level of simplicity. 1984 was not precedent to 2024 in anything but temporality. They are different times, different parties, different Americas. Arkansas was still mostly blue in 84. Things changed.
October 28, 2025 at 2:10 PM
In 2024 we have the internet. 1984 was a very different time for politics. We know the recent trends leading up to this election have stopped being relevant. I think what I'm driving at here is we probably won't get a good picture of wtf happened without some time and perspective and hard looks.
October 28, 2025 at 2:05 PM
I don't think you can really compare 1984 and 2024 like that. 2024 was unprecedented. I wouldn't even try comparing maps. The point of the above is that the federal election was filled with abnormalities that set the entire race apart as a political event. Maybe you can compare it to like 1892.
October 28, 2025 at 2:03 PM
It's historically unprecedented. The burden of proof is on the proving this as legit, as we must assume it's abnormal due to it never happening before. You should be skeptical of the result, not armchair guessing whether it's possible. Of course it's possible. Who cares. "Is it legit" is the issue.
October 28, 2025 at 1:50 PM
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof
October 28, 2025 at 1:42 PM