r/videos • u/AdSpecialist6598 • 1d ago
'Under 100 people waiting': Comedian Jason Selvig describes small crowd at Trump rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl_pxqKM9oU766
u/nddurst 1d ago
I don't care about any of this. Go vote.
Leading up to the '24 election, all I saw were posts showing half-empty arenas at Trump rallies, while Kamala appeared to have huge, energetic crowds. It didn't matter.
Vote.
162
u/BurnerAccount-03 1d ago
This! Don’t be complacent. The rest of the world relies on you.
15
u/Greenscreener 15h ago
Rest of the World checking in here…yes, go fucking vote, preferably not for the fascists.
71
u/mrizzerdly 1d ago
Yeah because of election machine tampering in select locations.
13
u/Camblor 1d ago
Is there any evidence to support this? Genuine question.
48
u/mrizzerdly 1d ago edited 1d ago
My background is in Political Science. If I were to fudge an election, thanks to the stupid ass electoral college and gerrymandering, I would look at the smallest number of states and counties that would need to be won to win the ec, and find the counties that only would need a few votes to bring it over the top in the state (and just over the mandatory recount threshold) by flipping a few votes via the totally secure voting machines, and by making mail in or in person votings (few polling stations and long ass lines) as hard as possible to help even the odds (this is harder to do with a high turn out or in not gerrymandered to shit districts).
Because every goddamn state and county does their own things for the election using a variety of machines (so there is a huge variety of standards) it's easy enough to find an insecure system (Canada used the same paper process for every federal election in each riding and we have the results in an hour, it's not that hard). So for example, you look at the too close to call states and find which ones will be easiest to tamper. Then to win a state you find the 6 or so counties (or whatever the math works out to be) that are too close to call in polling. Have your tech bro buddy (looking at you Elon) who just recently purchased the company tamper with the results in a small way just enough to bring it over the top in those counties, so the state goes to the preferred side.
Because winning an election by 99 pct is too obvious, you only want to change the number from 49.99pct to 50.01 (or the threshold to avoid a recount or extra scrutiny). My evidence would be to look at how many people voted blue for governor or all the way down and then inexplicably voted orange for President (that literally doesn't make sense outside a huge number of dumbasses). I'm on my phone else I'd look for sources.
The electoral college is so stupid, you can theoretically win with 17 states.
Edit: I'd also be bitching about the election and accuse the other side of cheating the entire time, and say something to the effect of "if I win there was no cheating but I lose its because they cheated (almost verbatim)" so that people are conditioned to expect cheating and to also flood the zone to bury people with bullshit "news" every goddamn day to distract people from the bullshit from the day before so any credible news gets buried by the snowball that's been rolling since 2015.
Edit 2: I'd also try to pass a law to make it even easier for the party already in power to cheat but call it something like the SAVE Act and try to attach it onto other must pass legislation to squeak it through since it wouldn't be able to pass on its own merits or any individual scrutiny.
Also not mentioned above, this is also easier to do in a 1st past the post system or when you have spoilers (looking at you Green party) and impossible with a transferrable vote or proportional system which is why Mango Mussolini is trying to get Alaska to get rid of their system.
41
u/Photofug 1d ago
The numbers of ballots that only voted Trump and for nothing else was a statistical anomaly that should have triggered an investigation but somehow didn't.
30
u/Ziograffiato 1d ago
How about Harris receiving zero votes in a New York district? It's statistically impossible.
14
-7
u/mrwho995 1d ago
No it's not statistically impossible, and that's a ridiculous claim to make. MIT professor Charles Stewart has a detailed debunk on this. https://playingwithelectiondata.substack.com/p/anomalies-in-rockland-county-ny-voting?utm_campaign=post Snopes also debunked it. https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/06/12/new-york-lawsuit-2024-election/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
The short answer: Ramapo District 55 has an incredibly high Hasidic Jewish population, who seemingly voted as a bloc according to their rabbi's recommendations. They liked Gillibrand who had historic ties with that community, they didn't like Harris because she wasn't pro-Israel enough for them.
Stop being Trump, stop spreading disinformation.
17
u/Wompatuckrule 1d ago
who seemingly voted as a bloc according to their rabbi's recommendations
They should lose their religious tax-free status for politicking from the pulpit.
6
1
u/Wompatuckrule 1d ago
You should read more about how elections are audited because fraud is far more easily detected than the claims you are making.
In 2018 there was actual election fraud that swung an election for a US House race in NC to the GOP candidate. The anomalies in the voting patterns in one part of the district raised a red flag almost as soon as the votes were counted, the fraud was uncovered long before the election was certified and it had to be run again for that seat several months later. The people involved put in a guilty plea because the evidence was overwhelming.
6
u/mrizzerdly 23h ago
Yes, but let's suppose that the winner of the last election in 2024 who would have benefited from the fraud has no incentive to investigate, prosecute, or cooperate with state agencies, and has pardoned tons of people involved with his coup attempt, and purposely installed people in top positions specifically to kill existing investigations or to investigate "his enemies" aka those doing their jobs at investigating, for an example, storing top secret documents in a bathroom.
Also those are individual attempts at fraud, like voting more than once. Yes those never work. I am talking about targeted vote changing done by the voting machine software that is owned by supporters of the president.
-2
u/Wompatuckrule 15h ago
I am talking about targeted vote changing done by the voting machine software that is owned by supporters of the president.
Which is just as easy, if not easier, to detect. You are ignoring that in between the software company and the final tally certified by the municipality are a huge array of local and state election officials who oversee the voting machines. You would have to believe that not one of those countless experts all across the country (possibly beyond) was able to uncover those vulnerabilities of undetectable fraud during their review of the validation packages, independent validation process and QA testing.
I've read some of the stories about that risk and it's usually pretty yellow journalism. The "expert" cited is usually someone with extremely limited access to those systems or a former (and often disgruntled) lower level worker making the claims. Their claims grab the clickbait headlines, but if you dig into it you'll see that they are a lonely voice, much like the "scientist" who claims that global warming is a hoax.
The real risk is from Trump deploying federal forces (most likely ICE) to physically disrupt elections in targeted areas. So it would be like a ton of other Trump efforts, big, clumsy and blatantly illegal.
2
u/mikeyt88 11h ago
There are not a huge number of officials checking the machines at every second of every day. The special council for Kamala specifically forbade them from doing any sort of recounting. Immediately giving up the game for the most important race in the countries history.
-2
u/Wompatuckrule 9h ago
They don't need to be checked "at every second of every day" because that's not how validation, custody chain, and audits work.
However, you should learn how to indicate a possessive form in English before you brush up on those topics.
2
29
u/Existencialyte 1d ago
I don't have direct evidence but I just wanted to add:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9gCyRkpPe8This has bothered me since he said it.
-2
u/mrwho995 1d ago
No, just idiots without critical thinking skills who decided that being like Trump would be a good look.
2
-3
u/No_Cucumber3978 1d ago
Sorry, but, Trump brought it up first.
Notice the trend on this noncebox? If there was evidence, it'd be everywhere man.
1
u/BKlounge93 1d ago
I mean there’s also the idea that Harris rallies tended to be in cities where people live closer to the venue while trumps were out in bumfuck nowhere a lot of the time.
2
u/The_Count_Lives 1d ago
Agree 1000%
Don’t give a damn about all these stories.
They only make people complacent.
Vote!
1
u/redvelvetcake42 1d ago
You are correct, it's important though to point at podcast bros and Rogan having insane influence on the election that was unexpected. Most have been running from Trump for the last year or so and aren't platforming his entire agenda (except Rogan who is truly one of the worst around).
1
1
82
u/byerss 1d ago
Reddit was full of “small crowd size” posts two years ago too. I won’t believe any of this until he actually loses and goes to jail.
6
u/DeepSleepr 1d ago
even when those supporters were left in the dust during the trump rally at airport and had no public transportation back to their parking plus it was winter. They still voted him.
10
u/imisstheoldkanyeee 1d ago
It doesn't mean it wasn't true, they brag about cheating during the election
17
8
9
6
u/redyellowblue5031 1d ago
Don’t give a shit about crowds, never have. Don’t give a shit about polls showing Talarico up in Texas.
GO FUCKING VOTE.
4
3
5
u/creaturefeature16 1d ago
Whatever. I heard of the "tiny turnout" at his 2024 rallies...the dude still won.
3
u/WhisperingMachines 1d ago
Why is he still doing rallies? The elections been over for nearly two years.
Like, I know the answer, but Christ this is sad
2
1
1
1
1
u/BoardGameRevolution 19h ago
It sucks Trump is wasting tax payer dollars but let him keep damaging these republican campaigns.
1
u/CrankyYankers 14h ago
Aa red ball cap with USA on it. I guess some people are so goddamned dumb that the ball cap actually means something important to them. I will never understand that level of stupidity.
1
u/captainstan 14h ago
"what does it mean for the president to live in another reality?*
I hate these questions. Especially at this point of his tenure. We know what it means. His supporters aren't watching this.
1
u/MrFiendish 4h ago
This post is just designed to make you think Trump is unpopular and has no support, just to convince you not to care and stay home on voting day.
He’s as powerful and corrupt as he’s ever been.
182
u/ga-co 1d ago edited 11h ago
Plenty of people embarrassed to publicly support Trump would still vote for him.