Has anyone tried this argument? If so, what have you found?

We have enough stats, and academics validating them, to make heads spin, but haven't been able to crack the wall of ignorance. I was wondering if anyone has tried something to this effect, and what response they received...

"Democratic Senate candidates collectively received four million more votes than Republican Senate candidates nationwide, which appears to provide an independent validation of the many academic studies indicating that the final vote tallies were incorrect."

???

effect whatsoever. They just say "so? Lots of people vote like that."

tally--so the statement can be construed as suggesting maybe they didn't get those votes in actual fact.

I'm not really sure what the statement is saying, actually. It needs rewording at least.

populations of the country?

I would forget worrying about past votes .. and take a few steps back. The big picture is where the truth is.. we are either people who can empathize with others or we are selfish bullies. A few votes here and there actually muddy up the argument for voting reforms. There is increasing evidence that people were targeting during the voting (fewer machines, or felons perused in they were black but not Hispanic in Florida). Take a few steps back and let the arguments for Voter Act reforms and paper ballots rise to the top. The ones where we actually have some hard proof on.

Then we can win that war. If we suffer through this detail or that and what it means at the micro level.. we will be wasting valuable resources on that. If there is no 'hot proof' now... there will never be. So step back and fight the voter's rights fight at the State Level. That is always where the fight was going to have to take place.

We need clear facts to win support and pass the laws at the state level.

That's what our parents learned long ago in World War II.

http://www.flcv.com/midwest.html

so they vote for Dem senators. These Senators end up representing a lot of people! But the Senate is not elected propositionally to population nationwide. The House is, so you might argue that the House should be more Democratic, and that this raises suspicion. But when you look at DeLay's TX redistricting which gave the Repukes an advantage in Congress coming out of the gate, you can see why the House can be more Republican.

If someone wants to make your argument, it should be tied in with Congressional gerrymandering which skews the results by eliminating Dem seats. I think this is probably the main issue here.

On edit:

Of course election fraud is the MAIN issue, but the gerrymandering has been proven beyond any doubt and no one can argue with it.

fall apart. Thats why they keep making it about faith and beliefs, it keeps the voters ignorant of the issues and facts.

You can't change what someone believes, but you can challenge what they think.

Never talk in belief, talk about what you know, then how you know it.

Talk about how believing facts incorrectly is wrong, even when you think you are right. If we keep pounding this point people will have to focus on where they are being misslead.

Focus on their language and structure your to force people to think.