An unedifying protracted conversation on Twitter, started by someone I don’t know from Adam.
With no evidence https://t.co/wwiXfxFQAf
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 28, 2016
True. Stein (and Clinton indirectly by joining) made similar claims in legal action (not just a tweet). All are wrong.
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 28, 2016
No. There are specifics in Wisconsin case. Trump is just babbling.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 28, 2016
Trump *is* babbling. But even HRC concedes "no actionable evidence" in Wisconsin — recount anyway. https://t.co/E7vVWhVWew
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 28, 2016
But you said they were comparable. They're not.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 28, 2016
They are comparable in that each is a silly claim w/o supporting evidence. That Trump insists his is bigger is no surprise.
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 28, 2016
I.e. not comparable in any way that matters.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 28, 2016
Keep telling yourself that if it helps you to sleep better.
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 28, 2016
Why on earth would it help me sleep better?
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 28, 2016
You want to pretend that Stein and (indirectly) HRC aren't (yet again) making manifestly poor and unevidenced choices. 1/2
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 28, 2016
No I don't. That's a huge leap from what I said. I simply disputed your claim that they're *the same*.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 29, 2016
Your assertion was that Trump's claims are unevidenced. Stein's (and Clinton's, indirectly) are equally unevidenced.
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 29, 2016
But Stein & Clinton haven't *made* claims of the type Trump made. He made a wild factual assertion; they haven't.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 29, 2016
Utterly unevidenced assertions all around, now repeated in PA. https://t.co/74mlsmu0B9
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 29, 2016
Requesting a recount is not the same as asserting there were "millions of people who voted illegally."
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 29, 2016
But Stein (and HRC indirectly) did more than ask for a recount. Per the NYT and other outlets, she alleged fraud w/o evidence
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 29, 2016
Not that I've seen. She said likely, plausible, etc. Link to her asserting it as fact the way he did or stop insisting on it.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 29, 2016
"The Petitioner…believes that an irregularity has occurred affecting all wards in Wisconsin." https://t.co/tbEz21PijG
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 29, 2016
"believes that" – thus it's not a stark factual assertion. This is elementary stuff.
— Ophelia Benson (@OpheliaBenson) November 29, 2016
Confirmation bias writ very, very large. She has to say "believe" in a court filing because she has no evidence. Duh.
— Bob Seawright (@RPSeawright) November 29, 2016
Sigh.