LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
These are likely Democrats who voted for Trump, or people who just said they were Democrats. Also, your link was to a tweet, not to the actual poll where I might read the entire poll.
‘The Steal Is On’ in Pennsylvania: Poll Watchers Denied Access, Illegal Campaigning at Polling Locations
- Status
C
Cathoholic
Guest
. . . Atypical voting patterns married with misses by polling and non-polling metrics should give observers pause for thought. Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted.
The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:
The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:
- Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers
- Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio
- Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions
- The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail-in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures
- Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’
- Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing
- Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes
- Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law
- Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. . . .
R
RootKitWarrior
Guest
T
TMC
Guest
That is all we want. We want Trump to follow the laws. It is Trump who is trying to evade the application of election law.
R
RootKitWarrior
Guest
Most Say Mail-In Voting Worked, But 47% Say Fraud Likely - Rasmussen Reports®
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
discrepancy? Oh yes.
compared to the tweet
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
discrepancy? Oh yes.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Did they? Or did they just stop reporting it? Or did they just knock off for the night to get some sleep?
How does one know, precisely, what is statistically abnormal? Doesn’t that take a statistician?
Perhaps because voters got a chance to heal their ballot, or because the ballot was especially well-designed?
The rest of your list is speculation and allegations, not established fact.
And “spectator”.
V
Victoria33
Guest
Lots more police get killed in the line of duty, back the blue.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
No Leaf. They did not just happen to “knock off for the night to get some sleep” in just these key precincts.
Especially when we have video and eyewitness testimony many remained there and re-started “counting”.
If you want to fool yourself about them knocking off for the night to go catch some “shut-eye” you will have to bamboozle yourself without me included.
This was a fraud. Voter fraud AND election fraud.
At least that’s my opinion.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
The link to the actual poll is in the tweet. You can pursue the reading yourself.HarryStotle:
These are likely Democrats who voted for Trump, or people who just said they were Democrats. Also, your link was to a tweet, not to the actual poll where I might read the entire poll.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Election law requires ballot authentication and chain of custody.Victoria33:
That is all we want. We want Trump to follow the laws. It is Trump who is trying to evade the application of election law.
It is the Secretaries of State and the election boards that did not follow the law and spelled out in the Constitution and their own State Constitutions that created the mess.
T
TMC
Guest
Every court to review the process (like 30 or more at this point) has held either that the process DID follow the law, or that any alleged issues were de minimus. The “mess” we are facing was created by Trump refusing to accept the actual results.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Why not look at the evidence instead of punting to the genetic fallacy? Every source is going to have some bias. Just because you prefer media that aligns with yours does not mean your sources are the only trustworthy ones. Try addressing the evidence presented on its own merits instead of merely deflecting.Victoria33:
Are you sure? Show me the evidence without it being served up by a right-wing media source.LeafByNiggle:
Right-wing allegations? There are thousands of affidavits, that’s valid evidence in a court of law along with many other types of evidence, including video.
B
billsherman
Guest
Fortunately the courts have done that for us.
We can be very proud of our courts, and they usually get things right. Yes, they make mistakes on occasion, but the shear volume of lawsuits Trump and his supporters have brought (across many, many jurisdictions) make it impossible to reasonably say that they have any actual evidence of fraud.
They have lost at every level, and in front of some of the most conservative judges in the country.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Untrue. The courts have — except for just a few instances — used pretexts to not seriously engage with the evidence. Most judges are quite reticent to put themselves and their careers on the line or in the limelight by poking around at where the evidence actually points.
There are now over 2000 sworn affidavits and hundreds of lawsuits across the country — Georgia alone has 250 open investigations into election fraud allegations.
If everything were indeed hunky-dory this level of contention would not exist.
V
Victoria33
Guest
Show me the evidence is wrong. If one votes supportively for Infanticide and abortion for whatever proportional reasons they have, that is hardly trustworthy either
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I found it here. And here is the key question in the poll:LeafByNiggle:
The link to the actual poll is in the tweet. You can pursue the reading yourself.HarryStotle:
These are likely Democrats who voted for Trump, or people who just said they were Democrats. Also, your link was to a tweet, not to the actual poll where I might read the entire poll.
How likely is it that Democrats stole votes or destroyed pro-Trump ballots in several states to ensure that Biden would win - very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely or not at all likely?
However your 20-30% figure for Democrats who think the election was stolen not there.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Because it is not evidence. It is allegations of evidence. Evidence comes from first-hand observation or from a known trusted source.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
So Rasmussen is lying about Rasmussen’s own poll?HarryStotle:
I found it here. And here is the key question in the poll:LeafByNiggle:
The link to the actual poll is in the tweet. You can pursue the reading yourself.HarryStotle:
These are likely Democrats who voted for Trump, or people who just said they were Democrats. Also, your link was to a tweet, not to the actual poll where I might read the entire poll.
How likely is it that Democrats stole votes or destroyed pro-Trump ballots in several states to ensure that Biden would win - very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely or not at all likely?
However your 20-30% figure for Democrats who think the election was stolen not there.
Right, another “conspiracy” to hide the facts from you.
Perhaps the article about the poll doesn’t state everything found in the poll, but the tweet by Rasmussen itself encapsulates the findings?
You might want to think about what this line in the article means…
… i.e., the full demographic breakdown was not spelled out by the article which doesn’t contain the entirety of the data from the poll.
I am certain they are conspiring to hide all of the facts from you so bent upon disputing that 20-30% of Democrats might not agree with your take on the election.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
As in the over 2000 sworn affidavits?HarryStotle:
Because it is not evidence. It is allegations of evidence. Evidence comes from first-hand observation or from a known trusted source.
I see. Those affidavits were from people who allege fraud so they don’t count as evidence because they are only allegations and not evidence despite that they are first hand observations. All of those who allege fraud are ipso facto “not trustworthy.” Gotcha.
This one?
Or…
Or…
Or…
Last edited:
V
Victoria33
Guest
Affidavits are evidence., under penalty of perjury.
Like any evidence, it can be rejected but evidence none-the-less.
Like any evidence, it can be rejected but evidence none-the-less.
Last edited:
- Status