Election

[sggatecl]

what tantrum? this is one of less than a handful of posts I've made on this topic and I haven't made any claims about the impact on the outcome of the election. I've said this and more about election integrity in the past. I think now and in the past there has been more than enough evidence for this to be taken seriously and investigated and I find it strange that the Dems fight so hard against any efforts to do it. If it's not a problem, they should have nothing to fear from it being investigated.

It wasn't meant as a specific description of you but I guess I worded that poorly.

Should we look into cases of voter fraud? Every time, no doubt. I'm not referring to that when I say tantrum. But when the president and his cult are floating EVERY SINGLE THEORY on Twitter, sharing every outrageous claim from Breitbart and OAN, and doing everything they can do undermine a democratic election in America WITHOUT PROOOF? That's a tantrum. Especially when it's clear they aren't even serious about it. You'll never convince me that Rudy Guliani, a guy who is actually been dis barred recently, is the face of a team that is seriously trying to save Trump's presidency. There are dozens of ways they could've gone about this and they've done it in the most MAGA way possible.

I don't see how losing the presidency while gaining in the house and maybe holding on to the senate is proof of anything, let alone support for the legitimacy of the election. And what does Clinton losing have to do with it? If you're basing your argument on coincidences and other nonsensical arguments like down ballot outcomes, then how do you explain how a guy who couldn't get 20 people to show up for a campaign event somehow gets more votes than any presidential candidate in history.

It isn't PROOF of anything, I don't pretend that happenstance (even if it's logical) is proof of anything. That's what a conspiracy theorist (or in this case, a Trumpet) does. But I'm not the one making accusations about voter fraud on a scale as large as this. The burden of proof is on the accuser. I used Clinton and the down ballot examples just to retort the theory with the question, "If you're going to cheat on page 1, why not cheat the whole test?"

And no, one can't argue that because the polls have been more wrong than you think. Reagan outperformed the polls by 3.75% in 1980, Clinton underperformed vs. polls by 5.99% in 1992 & 2.77% in 1996, McCain beat the polls by 3.64% in 2008 so Trump's +4.09% in 2016 shouldn't come as such a big surprise. Clearly, polling has not always been fairly reliable, especially when you look at the last 3 elections where the media has been promising a blue wave, yet consistently disappoints themselves. One could actually argue that the polls are not consistently reliable and are more of a media tool for influencing elections. Seems so odd that the team that argues voter ID laws are a form of racist voter suppression would be so incredulous about this.

Today I learned! Why do you think such a big deal has been made about polling since 2016 then? I don't recall people ever being so shocked by it before that. Just another media thing?

 

[sggatecl]

Here's an example of why it's so hard to detect. If you click on "U.S. President" under the "Precinct by Precinct Reports" section you will get the "The Statement of Votes Report" for Wayne County. The vast majority of precincts in Detroit had between 12 and 18% turnout on election day across 503 precincts. For the rest of the county, especially the presumably pro Trump sections, it's 22-28%. if you include the Absentee Vote Counting Board those percentages shoot up well north of 80%, but you can't compare that to Detroit because they didn't include AV votes by precinct.

If you go all the way down to page 117, you see Detroit pop up again with Absentee Vote Counting Board 1 thru AVCB 134 which don't include registered voter data. This accounts for about 173k absentee ballots cast which are unverified as to whether they actually came from a registered voter. This only happened in Detroit - every other Wayne County municipality reported AVs by precinct - every one, but not a single one of Detroits 503 precincts did. Of those 173k AVs, almost 150k showed up in one dump at 4am of which it's been reported that 97% went for Biden - that's virtually impossible, Trump could probably get more than 3% of the Chinese Communist Party to vote for him if they were allowed. So you have 173k unaccounted for ballots - not linked to a registered voter that can't be or simply weren't verified as belonging to registered voters, unlike 100% of the other precincts in Wayne county. Then you have people who challenged the authenticity of the ballots and the count were threatened, denied access to observe and ultimately they hung cardboard on the windows to prevent them from being observed. Witnesses who saw the 4am ballot dump and say it was counted in an impossibly small amount of time. Eye witnesses have also said they saw vote counters tampering with the tabulators. Many of these eyewitnesses signed affidavits as to what they saw. Also, as of four days ago, both Republicans who were doxed and received death threats until they flipped their votes to validate the election, are seeking to rescind their votes to certify.

That, in your mind is ZERO evidence of potential large scale voter fraud because the people accused of it say it didn't happen and anyone who challenges the legitimacy of the elections in districts where stuff like this happened is a lunatic conspiracy theorist.

If everything you typed was factual truth, yes. That's egregious and something should be done.

Having said that, there's a few things I'd take issue with. Gulo covered one of them in the post above mine, I also couldn't find anything about a 4am ballot dump. Concerning the 'cardboard over the windows' thing, I'm surprised that's still being floated around. Unless the 100+ republicans that were already inside were in on everything too. The real error was having sensitive voter information that close to windows in the first place. If you were watching on election night, many of the places were done in big warehouse type building where tabulating and verification weren't 10 feet from a window.

You say it's virtually impossible that Trump receive such a small amount of mail in ballots. The guy railed against mail in balloting for weeks on end and you're surprised his mail in numbers were small? It's not that only 3% voted for him, it's that only 3% decided to mail in their ballots despite what the guy they're voting for said. The MAGA cult is more about show than substance. How will they display their 'Trump 2020/Fuck your feelings/Thin Blue Line/Don't Tread On Me/Confederate flags if they're voting at home?

 

[tinselwolverine]

Trump Authorizes GSA to begin “transition.”

 

[Spartanmack]

It wasn't meant as a specific description of you but I guess I worded that poorly.

Should we look into cases of voter fraud? Every time, no doubt. I'm not referring to that when I say tantrum. But when the president and his cult are floating EVERY SINGLE THEORY on Twitter, sharing every outrageous claim from Breitbart and OAN, and doing everything they can do undermine a democratic election in America WITHOUT PROOOF? That's a tantrum. Especially when it's clear they aren't even serious about it. You'll never convince me that Rudy Guliani, a guy who is actually been dis barred recently, is the face of a team that is seriously trying to save Trump's presidency. There are dozens of ways they could've gone about this and they've done it in the most MAGA way possible.

The existence of conspiracy theories is not reason to dismiss every charge of potential fraud. And the idea that Trump admin's credibility is being called out by the opposition after they spent 4 years doggedly pursuing a proven obvious conspiracy theory and to this day still act as though it had merit is the ultimate irony. Anyone accusing Trump of temper tantrums who hasn't disavowed Pelosi, Schiff, Schumer, former heads of the CIA and senior FBI officials is the one with the credibility issue.

It isn't PROOF of anything, I don't pretend that happenstance (even if it's logical) is proof of anything. That's what a conspiracy theorist (or in this case, a Trumpet) does. But I'm not the one making accusations about voter fraud on a scale as large as this. The burden of proof is on the accuser. I used Clinton and the down ballot examples just to retort the theory with the question, "If you're going to cheat on page 1, why not cheat the whole test?"

I'm not saying it's proof of anything - and it's not what I'm doing. I wasn't even aware of Sydney Powell or her angle on voter fraud. By the way, i'm not saying she's a crackpot conspiracy theorist either - I haven't paid much attention to the issues she's brought up. I'm focussed on all the shenanigans that went on in primarily urban districts in MI, PA, GA, etc. Where I think these things have gone on for years if not decades.

Today I learned! Why do you think such a big deal has been made about polling since 2016 then? I don't recall people ever being so shocked by it before that. Just another media thing?

Because it's become a common belief among conservatives, with decent evidence to support it, like lots of other things (unconfirmed dossiers, anonymous sources contradicted by open sources, outrageous 30 year old claims of sexual assault by a then teenager, etc, etc) polls have become a tool by pollsters and the media to intentionally mislead voters. And even if that's not the case, many conservative voters are quietly conservative preferring not to have to defend themselves against absurd charges of bigotry or risk losing their jobs or businesses for the sin of thinking differently from the left. We're not living in the days of Reagan, either Bush or even Clinton. In today's world having a different opinion is an unredeemable thought crime.

 

[sggatecl]

Well, on the bright side. In 57 days the GOP can go back to caring about the defecit and executive overreach again. Maybe even pretending to care about morals and values.

That's the GOP I've voted for in some previous elections.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Well, on the bright side. In 57 days the GOP can go back to caring about the defecit and executive overreach again. Maybe even pretending to care about morals and values.

That's the GOP I've voted for in some previous elections.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7R_3IxXNSrw

 

[Spartanmack]

If everything you typed was factual truth, yes. That's egregious and something should be done.

Having said that, there's a few things I'd take issue with. Gulo covered one of them in the post above mine, I also couldn't find anything about a 4am ballot dump. Concerning the 'cardboard over the windows' thing, I'm surprised that's still being floated around. Unless the 100+ republicans that were already inside were in on everything too. The real error was having sensitive voter information that close to windows in the first place. If you were watching on election night, many of the places were done in big warehouse type building where tabulating and verification weren't 10 feet from a window.

You say it's virtually impossible that Trump receive such a small amount of mail in ballots. The guy railed against mail in balloting for weeks on end and you're surprised his mail in numbers were small? It's not that only 3% voted for him, it's that only 3% decided to mail in their ballots despite what the guy they're voting for said. The MAGA cult is more about show than substance. How will they display their 'Trump 2020/Fuck your feelings/Thin Blue Line/Don't Tread On Me/Confederate flags if they're voting at home?

Many of the Republican observers claim they were denied re-entry because they hadn't signed out when they left - they claim there was nowhere close to an equal or even adequate number of observers, that Republican observers were threatened for challenging improper procedures. Several eyewitnesses including the Taxpayer Party candidate have said they saw the 4am dump. She herself, a native Detroiter said it was counted in an impossibly short period of time, said she saw officials tampering with the tabulators and she signed an affidavit to that effect.

The idea that the boarding of the windows while all this other stuff is going on is simply to protect the privacy of the data seems a bit of a stretch.

Why would railing against mail in ballots result in an impossibly small % of the vote for Trump? Look at the document from the link - mail in ballots in solid Trump portions of Wayne county were 2x and 3x the in-person votes and Trump didn't get such a low % of mail in ballots in other precincts.

Even if all your excuses are valid, how do you explain 173k votes in a district of 505k registered voters aren't verified as having come from registered voters? That's the biggest smoking gun, that should make everyone ask wtf? But you've completely ignored it.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven. And this isn't a new issue - the opportunity for large scale voter fraud particularly in large urban districts dominated by a single party is undeniable and it's been a potential problem for years. The fact that it's so aggressively defended by only one side ought to be another indication that something's not right - why wouldn't they want there to be no doubt? As for the claims that there is no evidence, well the only way there's no evidence is if you completely ignore the mountain of actual evidence. The excuses that are made and that people buy are shameful and embarrassing but it works and these shameless crooks somehow convince otherwise reasonable people that they're the bad guys - victims of white supremacist voter suppression.

 

[Spartanmack]

Well, on the bright side. In 57 days the GOP can go back to caring about the defecit and executive overreach again. Maybe even pretending to care about morals and values.

That's the GOP I've voted for in some previous elections.

that was hopefully the focus of a second Trump administration - it was his administration and R's in Congress that reign in the $3T second round of bailouts the Dems were pushing so if that's the reason you voted for Biden you're likely to be very disappointed.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Why would railing against mail in ballots result in an impossibly small % of the vote for Trump? Look at the document from the link - mail in ballots in solid Trump portions of Wayne county were 2x and 3x the in-person votes and Trump didn't get such a low % of mail in ballots in other precincts.

1) You haven't provided a source for your 97% number. Or your 150k @ 4am.

2) Population density trends strongly with rep/dem voting tendencies.
3) Generally speaking, the high number of voters per voting location in urban places does stink to high heaven, but not for the reason you think. Detroit's not as bad as other places though.

 

[Spartanmack]

1) You haven't provided a source for your 97% number. Or your 150k @ 4am.

1) kinda like what you did in points 2 & 3 below? Thanks, except I mentioned in my post that the Taxpayer Party candidate is one of the people who signed an affidavit detailing what she saw.

2) Population density trends strongly with rep/dem voting tendencies.
3) Generally speaking, the high number of voters per voting location in urban places does stink to high heaven, but not for the reason you think. Detroit's not as bad as other places though.

2) 97/3 strongly? where's your source for that?
3) We don't know the numbers of voters per location in Detroit because not a single AV was linked to a precinct where that voter was registered. Not one.

so even is the 97% isn't an exact number, it shouldn't matter. What should matter is that 100% of those AV's should be verified as having come from a legitimately registered voter and not a single one was. Just a heads up, people who tell you it's a bullshit conspiracy completely discredited because the 97% isn't properly sourced so the unchecked registrations don't matter think you're stupid.

 

[Gulo Blue]

1) kinda like what you did in points 2 & 3 below? Thanks.

Those aren't stats. And particularly in the case of #2, feel free to claim you don't already know that.

 

[Spartanmack]

Those aren't stats. And particularly in the case of #2, feel free to claim you don't already know that.

no, they're generalizations that prove nothing. refer to my edits in my previous post.

 

[Gulo Blue]

no, they're generalizations that prove nothing. refer to my edits in my previous post.

They are alternate explanations. Reasons things may appear different from other polling locations. Without evidence of voter fraud, it's useful to consider alternate explanations.



I'm not going to go down some rabbit hole with this 97% number when you won't say where it came from. Why are you evasive about it?

 

[tigermud]

What’s kinda funny are the constant cries of where is the proof! Where is the proof! Do you really think she doesn’t have it?

While there is a bit of disinformation out there you’ll note not all you see floating around out there are included within the alleged listings.

NCSWIC

 

[Spartanmack]

They are alternate explanations. Reasons things may appear different from other polling locations. Without evidence of voter fraud, it's useful to consider alternate explanations.



I'm not going to go down some rabbit hole with this 97% number when you won't say where it came from. Why are you evasive about it?

perhaps without evidence but there's ample evidence.

Good that you're not going down the rabbit hole over another one of your pedantic nits coupled with false accusations about me being evasive while you evade the most significant issue and point out generalizations to claim there's no evidence of voter fraud. I and I'm guessing some other readers will appreciate that.

 

[Gulo Blue]

false accusations about me being evasive

Where can I find go learn about that 97% number?

 

[Gulo Blue]

What’s kinda funny are the constant cries of where is the proof! Where is the proof! Do you really think she doesn’t have it?

While there is a bit of disinformation out there you’ll note not all you see floating around out there are included within the alleged listings.

NCSWIC

Just in case it isn't clear, I'm not expecting proof to appear on this board; that would be a really high bar. If there's proof that could be found by someone on this board, you'd expect it to already be plastered all over the news by either someone in the Trump admin or some journalist. But just asking someone where they got the numbers they are using here is really not much to ask.

 

[Michchamp]

What?s kinda funny are the constant cries of where is the proof! Where is the proof! Do you really think she doesn?t have it?

...
NCSWIC

Yes. That's why all their lawsuits are getting dismissed or voluntarily withdrawn and not re-filed.

 

[tigermud]

Just in case it isn't clear, I'm not expecting proof to appear on this board; that would be a really high bar. If there's proof that could be found by someone on this board, you'd expect it to already be plastered all over the news by either someone in the Trump admin or some journalist. But just asking someone where they got the numbers they are using here is really not much to ask.

Nor should anyone expect such.. I can?t speak for spartanmack. I can only offer advice to him.. which would be do not feel you need to prove anything to anyone. For such is not for us here to prove

 

[Michchamp]

Trump's claim the election was stolen from him is as bullshit & evidence free as Hillary's cries of "Russian influence" delivering the election to Trump.