Reply #73: strawmen aside,

[foo_bar]

I agree with most of your bullet points (although the reported DRE vote-switching was ES&S/Sequoia iirc), but a list of things-that-aren't-conspiracy-theories doesn't explain how TIA can prove JFK was assassinated by a cabal using only Excel. Similarly, Kerry's "99.8% probability of winning" and subsequent revisionism belongs with the "Flight 93 was a missile!" crowd (IMO), who also shift the burden of proof when pressed for a logical explanation (usually in the form of the strawman, "So you believe the official version?").

So no, I don't believe the official version of the election either, but that doesn't prove Bigfoot stole Florida, or that it was accomplished with mind control lasers or what have you. In fact, it can't hurt to take your advice about "presuming fraud" even where unsourced, non-peer reviewed urban legends are concerned.

(edit: bad link and missing prepositional phrase)