https://twitter.com/llinwood/status/1334000236277198848?s=12 apparently it’s enough for Lin Wood to investigate it further

That certainly wasn't the case the night of the election when they told observers to go home and then continued counting.

Well it would be good to listen again, as there is a lot to listen to and you might have missed their own personal poll observer experiences - it's actually an education and worthwhile if you sit back and listen closely

@TW20, you just advanced to level 6!

I think it is important to know what election observers are supposed to do and not do. The Trump campaign quoted a report by the Carter Center about mail-in ballots from a long time ago, so Trump thinks that they are a good authority on elections. I have to mention this, because if it is not Trump approved, most will dismiss it. Here is a guide to election observer policies in the United States from the Carter Center: https://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/peace/democracy/cc-us-election-observation.pdf

@TW20 why would I listen to the same claims over and over again? If they can verify it that’s great, if they can show how that means votes were actually fraudulent good. Until then it’s still just their view. I could say the same thing , that’s not evidence

^^its different from state to state.*

Not really , everything in the hearings were spoken of before for weeks @yetiCodes

@james j, you just advanced to level 25!

Here is a relevant quote:

*"In the United States, observers are trained to attentively watch **without interfering**. They examine not only Election Day activities, such as the casting of ballots, but also pre-election and postelection processes. Observer groups may watch such activi-ties as voter registration, testing of voting machines, ballot tabulation and recounts, and much more. They gather relevant information about the electoral process and can report back to election officials when problems arise. Following an election, observer orga-nizations that are not affiliated with political parties, whether international or domestic, often produce public reports to share key observations. These reports include recommendations that aim to assist election administrators in improving efficiency and account-ability for future election cycles.
"*

@james j Lol. If they could just get to an evidentiary hearing... haha

These are affidavits, so these are considered serious under the constitution.

If signatures are compared in court for identification purposes is an expert required?


yes or no

I think yes

@yetiCodes they had their opportunity many times. They can present their proof in public. They don’t need gulianni, many of those people on the table filed their claims themselves

How about just returning to normal rejection rates (especially given that it's most people's first time doing mail in ballots)?

@TW20 and yet it isn’t proof of anything , it’s all their perception

@DrSammyD does that come from confused observers or bad actors though? it certainly got sorted in the hand recount

Not necessarily. Twitter is full of misleading info, anyone claiming to have been kicked out or prohibited from poll watching wouldn’t have been heard.

In many cases, poll observers were not allowed to watch anything on the operations or the screen monitors .

Bad actors. Multiple news sources asked election officials why they were stopping counting, and they didn't come up with an answer. Then They continued it on through the night.

That’s just the nature of a crowd sourced platform.

@DrSammyD that can be explained by more vigilance and awareness. In most places people knew they had to vote by mail and they made sure they did it right

You need to understand the issue better to speak intelligently on this subject. The issue isn't precisely the distance, it is **access to observe the ballots**. For example, in grade school you could observe your teachers paper when they put it on that machine that enlarged and projected it on the wall or to a monitor that you were close to. Observers could be 100 feet away if the workers projected each ballot to a high definition monitor that an observer was watching, and the observer had a way to object, etc.

Similarly, an observer could be 6 inches away but not allowed to object to ballots. This would be equally problematic.

In places where the laws regarding absentee ballot observers were not followed, the ballots must be thrown out. The laws are there to ensure integrity of the process, and to mandate the procedure of processing the ballots. If you dont follow the law, that is a problem.

@yetiCodes just stating it isn’t enough, proving it happened is what is needed

@JonasRobert never mind... I found were you clearly said that six feet is too far.... so per your own logic we have to throw out every single vote at every single polling place that had the six foot rule in place

@JonasRobert if you want to disqualify bunch of ballots you would have to do it equally and the result would be the same

People are people everywhere. 5% rejection rate doesn't suddenly fall to 0.1% because of vigilance.

but the place was still open to observers to watch the night crew so whats the bad action? also they didnt stop counting so its a bit confusing as to why someone would be asking why they stopped counting

Again, judges keep pushing back because of technicalities, so we don’t even get to hear them make the case

Yes I was speaking in generality because I expected you to understand the issue without me typing an essay on the specifics

They literally left, closed up shop, then returned and started counting again.

In the middle of the night

They said they'd be back in the morning.

also some observers seemed to think they should be able to verify signatures when they couldn't thats why info needs more cleared up

The poll workers that interpret the data from the ballots receive what type of training and or certification?

Nothing nefarious happening there for sure,

that description doesn't seem to match what the election workers said

Why not? The kind of people that did it prior were generally older and over sees. Most of the time these abetted ballots aren’t even counted until much later. This year people saw the election has high stakes and mail in would be the only option they had (from their point of view) so they made sure they voted right. No election has been this charged in recent history @DrSammyD

Because Ohio, and Florida, and Iowa and IL had the SAME rejection rates as before.