Election Do-Over!!! (2 Viewers)

[moke123]

So do the scanners determine if there vote is Republican or Democrat? Do they store a photocopy? What happens to ballets after they are scanned? Do they destroy them so no one can check anything?

They are stored for 2 years.
"do the scanners determine if there vote is Republican or Democrat?" The vote or voter? The scanners only count the votes there is nothing that identifies the party of the voter.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Can you point to these mistakes?

The federalist

both Michigan and Wisconsin, vote dumps early Wednesday morning showed 100 percent of the votes going for Biden and zero percent—that’s zero, so not even one vote—for Trump.

As reporters and commentators went to bed early Tuesday morning, all three states were too close to call, but President Trump led former Vice President Joe Biden by comfortable margins—far beyond what had been predicted in the polls. None of the networks called these states because enough mail-in ballots remained uncounted that it could swing either way, but Trump’s position looked good.

Then, something strange happened in the dead of the night. In both Michigan and Wisconsin, vote dumps early Wednesday morning showed 100 percent of the votes going for Biden and zero percent—that’s zero, so not even one vote—for Trump.

In Michigan, Biden somehow got 138,339 votes and Trump got none, zero, in an overnight vote-dump.

When my Federalist colleague Sean Davis noted this, Twitter was quick to censor his tweet, even though all he had done was compare two sets of vote totals on the New York Times website. And he wasn’t the only one who noticed—although on Wednesday it appeared that anyone who noted the Biden vote dump in Michigan was getting censored by Twitter.

This was flag as propaganda by Tweeter.

 

[Jon]

What do the Democrats say about this as a defence?

 

[moke123]

Most if not all "mistakes" in the counting benefited only one side, it's a statistical improbability.

both Michigan and Wisconsin, vote dumps early Wednesday morning showed 100 percent of the votes going for Biden and zero percent—that’s zero, so not even one vote—for Trump.







View attachment 87257

This was flag as propaganda by Tweeter.

538 says this:

These FiveThirtyEight graphs don’t prove voter fraud

President Donald Trump has asked for a recount in Wisconsin, where the Associated Press has declared Democratic presiden

www.politifact.com

 

[AccessBlaster]

538 says this:

These FiveThirtyEight graphs don’t prove voter fraud

President Donald Trump has asked for a recount in Wisconsin, where the Associated Press has declared Democratic presiden

www.politifact.com

Did you hear that Jimmy Hoffa really isn’t missing? His whereabouts are just unknown.
Maybe he’s hanging out on a Pacific Island with Amelia Earhart. She isn’t missing either. It’s just unknown where she is.

This is the sort of nonsense the fake fact checkers at Politifact expect the public to swallow.


It might be funny if Politifact only spent its time debunking alien and ghost claims. Instead, fake fact checkers at Politifact are obscuring and hiding vulnerabilities in our voting system on the eve of an election.

 

[moke123]

Your sources are relying on the graph from 538 which 538 explains. Look closely and you can see the red line under bidens.

Here's reuters specifically fact checking the federalist.

Fact check: Biden vote spikes and county recount do not prove Democrats are trying to steal the election in Michigan and Wisconsin

Social media users are sharing an article which cites examples of two large spikes in Biden votes, a county recount and late mail-in voting to prove that Democrats are trying to steal the election in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Although the details surrounding...

www.reuters.com

 

[Pat Hartman]

Jon, Here's a link to Sydney Powell's lawsuits. I don't know if there is a website for the Trump team or any of the other lawsuits. Reading through the summaries of the affidavits tells how wide ranging the anomalies are.

Defending the Republic – Sidney Powell's Legal Defense Fund

From what I've read is when the people who were processing the ballots were done they were going home and the media and other people thought it was done and left also. The scanners were not done and stayed to finish. Looks to me from his twitter is that he tweeted at 10:30
and again at 10:59.

So, the woman with the dreadlocks goes over to where the "observers" and the press are kept and says something to the room. She turns and leaves and everyone starts packing up. Don't believe your lyin' eyes. There's nothing to see here. Of course the fact that the observers left is unimportant. They were kept from observing the entire time. They may as well have never been there since they were never allowed close enough to even see the printing on a ballot let alone see a signature. Talk about lip service. That's what you get from people whose intention is to commit a crime. If they were not afraid of being observed, they would have allowed the observers to actually observe.

Why does everyone assume that the people left in the room scanning ballots are all democrats? Do republicans not participate?
It would seem to me that whoever hires all these workers would tow the HR line of diversity and inclusion. Or is everything a conspiracy against Trump the victim?

Surely you jest.

I watched the video of the official explanation of the boxes but they did not show the custody of the boxes. They showed them being placed under the table, we all knew they got there somehow. They didn't reference a time frame. WHEN where the boxes placed there? Show is where the boxes were packed and the walk from tblA to tblB if they were verified at tblA, we should see the whole chain of custody.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Your sources are relying on the graph from 538 which 538 explains. Look closely and you can see the red line under bidens.

Here's reuters specifically fact checking the federalist.

Fact check: Biden vote spikes and county recount do not prove Democrats are trying to steal the election in Michigan and Wisconsin

Social media users are sharing an article which cites examples of two large spikes in Biden votes, a county recount and late mail-in voting to prove that Democrats are trying to steal the election in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Although the details surrounding...

www.reuters.com

The post above is being disputed;

Who Is Fact Checking The Fact Checkers?​

Fake News: Newspaper fact checkers were once a rarity. Now they're in a position to determine what people can read online, despite their own checkered past. So, who keeps the fact checkers honest?​

In the past, fact checkers tended to focus mainly on debunking urban myths or clearly false claims made by political leaders. But lately, fact checkers have appointed themselves as arbiters of the credibility of news outlets. And now, giant tech companies like Google and Facebook have enlisted these "experts" to weed out "fake news."​

 

[AccessBlaster]

I could do this all day long, but this is Sunday and football is on

 

[Vassago]

An unbelievably arrogant closed minded viewpoint. To say that one does not have to probe "obviously false information" just reeks of dismissing anything that is contrary to your viewpoint. A definition from the "Ministry of Truth"? How would one know "false" information unless one examines it? Those who adhere to the scientific method would recommend investigating.

I am reminded of an "old" joke. A person was accused of murder when that person shot someone. The murder charge was dismissed as the stated cause of death, for the victim, was "blood loss". Obviously, this person murdered someone, but the use of selective facts to the exclusion of other facts can lead to erroneous conclusions. The teaching lesson of this joke, supposed "facts" may not tell the whole story and need to be examined.

Vs saying something and basically saying "this agrees with my viewpoint whether it's true or not. I'm too lazy too see of it's true, but since I agree with it, I'm posting it.".

The person posting something should take care to check the facts, don't you think? How would one know false information unless they exam it? Shouldn't the person posting it examine it? That's how this bullshit spreads. Lazy article posters who can't be bothered to do an inch of research.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Lazy article posters who can't be bothered to do an inch of research.

Since the "fact" checkers look only for "facts" that confirm their opinion, there is no neutral source. There are only biased sources.

 

[moke123]

They may as well have never been there since they were never allowed close enough to even see the printing on a ballot let alone see a signature. Talk about lip service. That's what you get from people whose intention is to commit a crime. If they were not afraid of being observed, they would have allowed the observers to actually observe.

Poll watchers are not there to read the ballots. I thought you were big into secret ballots. They cannot challenge ballots.
They are there just to observe and report. They are required to stay in a certain area. It doesn't mean they can hover over someones shoulder.

From Pa.'s law re: Pre-canvas and Canvas activities:

Authorized representatives (which includes poll watchers that have been designated by a candidate or political party to serve as authorized representatives during the pre-canvass or canvass) may not challenge an absentee or mail-in ballot during the pre-canvass or canvass of the ballots. Absentee and mail-in ballot applications may only be challenged prior to 5:00 pm on the Friday prior to the election, and only on good faith grounds that the applicant was not a qualified elector. No other challenges are permitted. Authorized representatives may not engage in, attempt to intimidate, nor interfere with the pre-canvass or canvass of the absentee and mail-in ballots. Challenges to mail-in or absentee ballots, based on signature analysis, are not permitted at any time.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Lazy article posters who can't be bothered to do an inch of research

That's what we been telling the left for 4 years remember?

 

[moke123]

Jon, Here's a link to Sydney Powell's lawsuits. I don't know if there is a website for the Trump team or any of the other lawsuits. Reading through the summaries of the affidavits tells how wide ranging the anomalies are.

this has a list of the lawsuits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-..._the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
And here's the pre-election lawsuits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-e..._the_2020_United_States_presidential_election

So, the woman with the dreadlocks goes over to where the "observers" and the press are kept and says something to the room. She turns and leaves and everyone starts packing up.

Please point to a source that indicates she spoke to media and poll watchers. From all I read she told poll workers, who were done with their work, to go home.

Don't believe your lyin' eyes. There's nothing to see here.

What do you believe? You dont believe anything someone tells you. You dont believe anything you read. You dont believe anything you see.

Here's the guy from the tweet you posted:

 

[AccessBlaster]

If your fact checkers missed the Russia hoax they are not fact checkers, they are leftwing stooges.

 

[moke123]

 

[Steve R.]

Dershowitz explains how Supreme Court could get involved in Georgia election challenge

Attorneys Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr appeared on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” to discuss recently revealed evidence of possible voter fraud in Georgia, and explained the possible processes for how the Trump campaign could use it in their effort to reverse the result of the presidential election in that state.

Perhaps, the "big takeaway" of this article is Dershowtiz belief that investigating the election results is justified through "probable cause".

 

[Jon]

How can you tell if a Democrat is lying? Their lips are moving. Sorry guys, it was a cheap shot!

 

[Jon]

I like Dershowtiz. He comes across as genuine, but it is a strange thing. He is a Democrat but seems does a lot to defend Trump. Not sure what his political position was in the past. But didn't he defend Mike Tyson?

 

[Steve R.]

I like Dershowtiz. He comes across as genuine, but it is a strange thing. He is a Democrat but seems does a lot to defend Trump. Not sure what his political position was in the past. But didn't he defend Mike Tyson?

The obvious response, he has put politics behind him and uses the US Constitution as the basis for his opinions. Additionally, he perceives Trump as being a victim of illegitimate use of US "power of the state" by Democrats to unjustly persecute Trump as these actions do not fall under legitimate governmental actions allowed under the US Constitution.