Article: "Newsmax finally calls election for Biden amid Electoral College vote"

[Vico]

Vico:

The CEO did not show that Mr. Ramsland was grievously mistaken.

The CEO said:

Several of the allegations from the report are false and easily verifiable, Poulos said.
…

You should check your sources.

That “ranked choice voting was enabled” and “This allows the user to apply a weighted numerical value to candidates and change the overall result. The declaration of winners can be done on a basis of points, not votes.” in the report does not say that it was configured with points, but that it was a capability of their software, which is an important distinction.

The report stated: “machines have the ability to be connected to the internet” and “Because certain files have been deleted, we have not yet found origin or destination; but our research continues”.

The report stated: “we have not yet determined where the bulk adjudication occurred or who was responsible for it.”

 

[whatistrue]

That “ranked choice voting was enabled” in the report does not say that it was used but that it was a capability of their software.

That’s not what “enabled” means when talking about software. It means essentially the same as “turned on”.

Please stop. The accusations were shown to be false in several ways. Trump lost.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

That “ranked choice voting was enabled” in the report does not say that it was used but that it was a capability of their software.

That’s not what “enabled” means when talking about software. It means essentially the same as “turned on”.

Please stop. The accusations were shown to be false in several ways. Trump lost.

Stopping now.

 

[whatistrue]

Wow. Reading comprehension levels low. Deliberately obtuse? Or something else?

ETA: To be very blunt, please stop regurgitating the unwarranted and repeatedly debunked falsehoods about the election. It was free, fair, and according to the rules, and Trump lost. I don’t particularly care if you respond or not to me, but it is a waste of your time to try to convince anyone not already on board with the fake that there was anything seriously wrong with the results.

 

[Dovekin]

The report was provided for application in four states so is used in a general way to show that certification is questionable. A recount does not prove that adjudication was correctly done either.

It can show that certification MAY BE questionable. That is not sufficient for any remedy other than checking as with an audit or manual recount. Such an examination might show the vote should be overturned, or it might not. I assume audits have verified the accuracy of the count.

Ramsland thinks any adjudication is improper. Everyone else thinks examination for intent by party representatives is proper.

In Georgia, there is no way to tie the signatures to the ballots, so only total ballots to registrations can be compared.

Secret ballots are used everywhere, not just GA. That means votes are separated from IDs like signatures.