Thread by @ThyConsigliori

19 October 2021 #MAGAanalysis #1AMinuteMen

Election Fraud – We Now Know The Correct Term!

Funny thing, the results are in with stunning clarity, exactly as called for and explained in advance, yet I still feel like I should feel surprised. You see them below.

https://twitter.com/ThyConsigliori/status/1450090727627755522

2) For a budding pollster, myself, one thing that surprises me is how very little of it I've done here at Twitter where it is simply so easy to do. I'll have to meditate on that. I share because I still feel like 83% is a stunning number in spite of lack of experience here.

3) Thinking about it, I suspect, now, that lack of demographic sampling, and employing only my own followers doesn't feel all that scientific to me, and in polling, to fail at science is simply to fail. Let's talk about that for a moment.

4) Just five minutes before today's poll ended I made what was, to me, a very important realization. If we poll ourselves in the MAGA Movement, and find our own honest terminology we are also, and RIGHTLY, helping our opponents as well.

5) A point I keep making to all my Democrat friends and clients is this. When we can agree to disagree, and do so agreeably, we are demonstrating the true patriotism and respect of free speech that this nation is founded upon. We're supposed to have to agree.

6) So often, though, we just talk right past each other or worse, merely attack each other, merely speak AT each other, not to or with each other. We fail to engage in open-ended debate where each side has an actual chance of affecting the other side's thinking.

7) Enter good science, and specifically the pollster's work. It isn't just science, it's also of course an art as are all serious endeavors. But the art is artificial if not undergirded by science, honest science. And yes, there is absolutely such a thing as dishonest science.

8) I am, actually, kind of blown away. For instance, considering the theory documented yesterday, and predicting that Election Fraud would win, so little as 51% would have lived up to prediction. Weakly, but, you know, 51 > 50, and that actually is enough.

9) Okay Class, a bit more about science now. I am a follower of Sir Karl Popper's. For those who know, that means I am NOT a follower of Thomas Kuhn's although I have immense respect for Kuhn's work. For those of you who don't know, don't worry. I'll explain the minimum you need.

10) To oversimplify, Kuhn doesn't believe in persuasion, at all. He believes in partisanship. A theory is born. It meets certain needs and those feeling those needs sign on, and sign on hard. If their number grows, eventually opposition dies out. Voila, a new doctrine.

11) He'd never admit it, but for Kuhn, in my judgment, science ends up being a clique of the faithful that grows stronger than the click of the doubters. It takes on, if not a religious dynamic, at least a psychological one and is not, in the end about testing.

12) Enter Popper. First thing he tells us, get this, is that no theory is EVER confirmed, only NOT disconfirmed. For Popper all theories remain strong where they are, weak where they are and the weaknesses MUST be found and addressed, one way or another.

13) So take today's results, Popper might devilishly state that my theory was NOT STRONGLY disconfirmed by today's test results. Of course the psychology of testing means that I feel massively, 100%, absolutely confirmed. Popper allows me my feelings, and smiles scornfully.

14) One more thing about Popper. He wants us to make the boldest, strongest and, stick tight, MOST FALISFIABLE claims for our theory, and strongest and again MOST FALISFIABLE hypotheses for testing. Bold claims. How could I NOT love that? Easily disproved. Wow again.

15) You just cannot let me get started on Rene Descartes again, right now. Buh, buh, but...Popper was, in fact, a Descartes fan, and most of all a fan of Descartes method of doubt. Descartes taught us that if you would know something, doubt it and see if it still survives.

16) Whew, that was a close one. I almost got stuck there talking about Descartes. You have to keep me in line, you know. So here's this morning's epiphany, again. The more we MAGA folk clarify our own terms, the more help we give to our honest opponents.

17) My first bold claim is that they exist, and in fact exist in the millions. There are millions of honest Democrats who are absolutely certain that Election Fraud did not occur and is not a meaningful topic for America. They believe it is divisive and a distraction, and more.

18) They see Trump as a spoiled, rude brat, and they see us as his dupes. They see our complaint about Election Fraud as the whining not only of poor losers, but of poor Americans, with no care about the real integrity of elections, and only a care to win at any cost.

19) They, I put forward, honestly believe all these things and support them 100% in their right to do so. I of course utterly disagree, but that was my point above, we're supposed to be allowed to disagree. So, I have to be able to state their position without attacking it.

20) Gotta go slow there. Stating their position as well as I can - WITHOUT ATTACKING IT - is a HUGE component in listening. Once we've agreed I actually understand, which may involve me accepting many corrections from them where I was wrong, I may then attack, back.

21) It's sequential. First, in a proper debate with respect, I listen and support. I, in fact, help the make their case as strongly as possible. I don't want to win a debate against a weakly stated position, catching my opponent in his minor errors of expression. Rather...

22) Rather if I'm going to win the point, I want to defeat my opponent's very strongest case possible. Funny thing here, for me, losing is winning. If I lose the point, it means I got persuaded, and that is actually winning. In a proper debate, real losing becomes...impossible.

23) Let's look again at our first poll on topic. We had only 47 votes, but they broke strongly for the word Vote as opposed to Voter. Just one 'r' different, yet, a much larger idea, by far. Even of so few people, 64% is a significant number to me.

24) There are lots of reasons that account for today's vote size of 131, and surprisingly high percentage at 83 for Election Fraud. Of them, I propose that the real reason is simple. It is, in fact, the correct term. It's the term that matters, and that MUST be addressed.

25) So I say, MAGA souls, Republicans who pinch noses or utterly oppose Trump, and all the rest of you loosely called Democrats. Let's have this debate and may the truth win. Or, as Popper would prefer, our closest approach to the truth.

26) Let's NOT leave this dangling. I couldn't quite get all the way there, on 20 January 2021 when Trump turned over the keys to the White House, but as I rolled forward, I came to accept that, at least for now, by Trump's leaving, Biden is my president. Bristling, I surrender.

27) As more speculative guess than anything else, I sadly predict that there will be no climatic moment when proof of Election Fraud becomes so overwhelming that Biden is, as I believe he should be, ousted. But then again, I never thought he should be allowed in.

28) But I say this to all Election Fraud deniers (did you see what I did there? And yes, that is a propaganda move, indeed) it really is on you to persuade us. If you don't bring us back into the fold our entire nation will continue to suffer. You MUST persuade us.

29) We, on the other hand, are Election Integrity deniers. If my prediction is right, and Biden rides out the full term, we have nothing to prove to you. You have the upper hand. You have your guy. But there is no winning this non-proof of ours. It leaves the nation divided.

30) So if you guys are hearing me, follow Popper's rules above and put together an honest Election Integrity Investigation with the strongest deniers on each side. Let's solve this problem with science and yes...

Together.

19 October 2021 #MAGAanalysis thread ends at #30.

Alas it is no bold prediction that no one will follow my advice on this topic. It's not futile anyway, though. Some will see the wisdom in it, even if no, no one will do anything about it. Or maybe I'm wrong!