You can't harm the election system any more than it already is

You absolutely can.

It's straight up gah-bage

> Many of these conspiracy theories rely almost entirely upon ignorance of the election processes.

And it's not by accident.

And these people are taking advantage of that and that's what the shameful part is.

Strange, considering Biden is going to be a lame duck president.

How can it get any worse?

Biden could not be a lame duck president?

It can always get worse.

As Karl Rove said Americans love a comeback story but they hate a sore loser. Trump now falls into that latter category.

Damn I hate it when you cite fart blossom.

If you're presupposing even half of this nonsense is true, of course it looks that way. But people who do would have done so anyway.

It's actually much worse than what Karl Rove is saying.

The free-for-all we have now is diabolical

At this point something somewhere would have gained traction.

The last thing I wanted from this election is a repeat of 2016.

If there had been any truth to it God forbid someone looks into it themselves...

If you look at it honestly I it's just not that easy to scale the type of election fraud that they're alleging.

No signature checks in PA = straight garbage

It's just not.

@Zuluzeit What exactly did you mean when you said that all they had to do was say it out loud regarding these people have never known what a local server is?

Litigating to keep rolls dirty in GA = garbage

Trump knew he was losing in his internal polls and they cooked this s*** up a long time ago for some reason it's not to try to win the presidency. And I don't think it has anything to do with raising money either.

Litigating to make signature checks impossible in GA = garbage

It probably has more to do with Trump becoming the head of an alternative party.

That's the real power play

Yeah back in 05 when Carter warned about absentee ballots

Man it's almost like we should have used the 4 years prior to fix these sorts of things.

How have you looked into the Pennsylvania numbers? @busillis

the Kremlin?

They were litigated this summer

> @Zuluzeit What exactly did you mean when you said that all they had to do was say it out loud regarding these people have never known what a local server is?
@Lorinda They needed only say it, not prove it. It has exactly the same effect on those who are susceptible to claims which fit their construct. That's what confirmation bias is.

**this** summer when their polls weren't doing too well.

I didn't look into the numbers per se but I looked into the process it seems unlikely that someone would be able to conduct fraud at the scale.

This is a law server?

Democrats are the ones that brought the suits. all this stuff was in the name of Corona virus. This was not around 4 years ago.

Organizations don't let people look on the inside without being forced even if they're not doing anything.

The basis for what they claim is false. They asserted that the data feed from Edison Research NEP to NYT showed an accurate, timestamped representation of the votes as they are tabulated. It does not. In fact, the method for Edison gathering election night results is fairly manual. You can see the process that is used here: http://www.edisonresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Web-Entry-Team-Handout-2020.pdf

So, if you read that document, you begin to see that the data feed to the NYT is not intended to be 100% accurate. They are constantly having to consolidate and correct manually entered data throughout the night. So, the interface between NEP and NYT is trying to make these corrections without highlighting the mistakes.

Then, they make a blanket assertion about how rare it is for a batch of votes to be more than 75% for a particular candidate, but do absolutely nothing to account for the unique dynamic of this particular election - the fact that for 6 months before the election, Trump urged his supporters to vote in person and not via mail.

So, a good data scientist would have made an effort to normalize the data across the same election. It would only be statistically relevant if it was anomalous in this context of this election. Meaning, that they should have compared the GA mail-in results to (a) the percentages of the in-person voting in GA; (b) the percentages of mail-in voting in other traditionally red states; and (c) the percentages of in-person voting in red states.

Also, they should analyze the patterns in places like FL and TX where mail-in ballots were counted first and showed massive leads for Biden until the in-person votes were counted and his lead "miraculously" disappeared.

It all comes down to integrity and what was presented today was lacking in that area.

Let's see just take a bunch of ballots from dirty rolls and submit them after removing observers. Easy

Yes... it's just this easy.

Lmao