Here in OC, we are down to 13.1%.

That's my understanding.

Checking in;

> @TaLoN132 The will of the voters should not be overruled on a suspicion.
100% agree with you here. I think the current plan being pushed for is if a certain number of legislatures do not select their electors by the safe harbor deadline, it will give time for the cases to push ahead while neither candidate reaches 270. GA may be an exception to this rule, and to be honest, I think they have enough evidence on the table to switch their votes. According to their state law, they have to send electors, should they opt to follow it. Even Guliani argued that they can sort of rule to do whatever they like in regards to selecting electors, though, so they may break state law and opt for a constitutional power.
In PA, the electors gave their power over to the governor to do this, again by state law. Scotus is in position to hear if the judiciary ruling broke their own constitution, I think there's a strong case that the safe harbor deadline isn't as relevant as the assembly of electors is on the 14th.
WI, NV, MI, and AZ I think may or may not opt to do this, whatever they publicly say or not. "Read my lips; no new taxes" may be the name of the game, and then the Trump team et. all gets a new date that the state legislatures then have the ability to send electors of their choosing.

Just closing something places. For 2 3 weeks while the cases go "down"

Exactly, no one that is being reasonable is making an argument to overrule the will of the people. Those cases will go no where.

I think it's fairly reasonable to say "Shit, we may not know the will of the people, but lets let things play out and find out." by not issuing electors by Dec. 8th.

Right? But hopefully it doesn’t come to that. There is plenty of time and there mechanics still at play to alleviate that burden. Looking at Dec 9th and January 3rd for key dates.

There are means to correct the issue by Jan. 3rd, but I don't think people will be too happy if they come to find out another month later "Oh shit there was fraud!" because I think people assume that the electors choose the next president and it's a done deal.

@Recalibar The longer it takes the worse the consequences. The problem is the two sides are doubling down with money they don’t have.

https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2435972/somalia-force-posture-announcement/

Clearly the actions of a tyrant.

Honestly I voted for him specifically to end foreign conflicts. Glad I got what I asked for.

The law of unintended consequences?

Trump out lefts the left on foreign policy.

Democrats...

I wanted the partisan court system to be balanced out which has been accomplished. Unfortunately I know of no way to “unpartisan” the courts so that was the next best thing.

My point about needing a mastermind is that to successful pull off something like this requires planning and coordination. So far, no one has been caught red-handed. Nobody has been arrested... and believe me, we would know. There would be a POTUS tweet nanoseconds after the arrest. So, to be decentralized they would all have been able to pull it off equally as well.

Now... keep in mind that a small team of operatives with extensive experience were unable to successfully break into the Watergate Hotel to remove evidence without getting caught - and the whole MAGA Nation was not alerted ahead of time that they were going to do it, where it would happen, and standing around in force waiting for it to happen. But... regular people fueled by their hatred of Trump somehow summoned their inner-ninjas and pulled it off with nobody getting caught.

And that is more likely than the possible confirmation bias that would cause people to assume malfeasance where they otherwise would never have considered.

A decentralized approach to ballot Fraud would included loosened laws and rules to identifying if voters are legal or not, making it harder for honest workers to throw out ballots they think are illegal, and removing scrutiny from 3rd parties over these processes.

You're a blind partisan if you think none of this happened.

Not only that, but it happened most in the states with the smallest margins

I think you know better than that...

The question is really at what scale?

@Corndog The Burden isnt on people to show fraud didn’t occur. I’m not sure how you got there. I just look at what’s being presented and so far amounts to nothing of significance.

Massive ballot fraud doesn't scale well.

Especially coordinated fraud at the alleged levels.

I outlined my thoughts starting here: https://discordapp.com/channels/760945067107680286/771201221145919499/784832307219136612

I disagree, I think you may be misunderstanding how a decentralized system works. Planning and coordination is not a requirement in a decentralized system. While that may take place, it is not the way you would expect to see it looking from centralized point of view, which is certainly easier to prosecute because everyone understands it without explanation. You will find these things equivalent to AI code, or the way the Apache society functioned for example.

@TaLoN132 is a phisher of users?

Correct and I think that state legislatures are going to look to the court to see if they have ruled that yes indeed there was election fraud and there was enough of it to bring the popular vote into question. So far I don't think we've seen that and it gets less likely every day that passes that we will see that. So I suspect that when the electors meet in December Joe Biden will have enough electoral votes to become president. Then the question will be whether evidence will come out afterwards that's powerful enough and persuasive enough to cause the Congress to act. Again I count this as long odds from what we've seen so far. This is why the Senate races in Georgia are so important.

An example of this is the summer where all the "peaceful protests" took place. This was very loosely organized and certainly not centralized but nevertheless got many people to act across the country.

It might be fun to see what the Democrats actually will do when in full control. My prediction would be nothing in the interest of people.

Im not placing that burden on you. I am saying we don’t know enough information. You said show me proof and I said that makes no sense but you are free to support your claim that we know enough to make that call. I am not arguing the point opposite yours where I hold an equal burden of proof.

It can also be seen in the massive number of people who have stepped up to inspect data, watch places that are under order not to detroy possible evidence, etc. That came from a call on Twitter. Much of what Sidney's team or Rudy's team has done deeper investigation on came from the vast number of worker ants that went out everywhere and began hunting.

@DisenchantedTruth, you just advanced to level 8!

Ted Cruz covers that in his video

There is a difference between multiple people acting independently to achieve the same goal... And multiple people acting independently to commit crimes in a manner that none of them were caught in the act.

This level thing is kind of annoying.

Yes there is, your point being?

It happens less frequently the higher you go.

If one person needs to fraud up 20,000 ballots, that would be no problem. I can coordinate that on my way to work one day.

It should be obvious... The former is possible. The latter is nearly impossible.

I think the DOI is investigating the possibility of it being an organized effort. You merely have to turn on any TV to see the consensus of news that might imply this as a factor. Social media companies acting as arbiters of truth is not a good sign.

Why is that obvious? Why is this relevant?