Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)

[Satinavian]

I refer you to the Clark County case above. What do you make of that? Was that dirty republicans trying to get the vote thrown out? Or were those bona fide irregularities that throw the result of the election into question? And what's the difference between the irregularities Trump's team points out and the ones found here?

I might bother checking when someone who has not a history of piling on baseless hoax stories on the other and shifting the topic when they get disproven says, it is worth checking out. And when the source is not random guys on Twitter.

So far, i assume that this story is probably just wrong and/or misrepresented. That is based on your personal credibility and my experience with this thread, not on my opinion about Republicans.

 

[Silvanus]

When did I say that Act 77 was alleging fraud?

Do you know the difference between the Act 77 lawsuit and the lawsuits filed by Trumps team?
You know they were filed by two different groups right?
I think you're getting them confused.

That's funny, the distinction didn't seem to matter one iota to you here;

It's all essentially the same. [...]

Unconstitutional, fraud, whatever you want to call it, the outcome is the same: Trump wins.

------

I would think that the spirit of the law is more important than the letter of the law.

The fundamental spirit of electoral law, of course, is that every citizen of appropriate age should have their vote counted equally. And since this suit does not allege fraud (as you've said yourself), it solely seeks to discount the votes of eligible voters, based on how they voted.

So, a technicality. The letter of the law used to discount the votes of eligible, good-faith voters. And if you're pursuing some purely technical argument like that above, then you have absolutely zero grounds to whine about it being thrown out on a technicality.

But you and I both know-- as does everyone else reading this thread-- that this isn't about the principle of the matter at all to you. The sole end goal for you at this point is (to use your own words)...

Trump wins.

 

[SilentPony]

 

[gorfias]

No, they looked at all the vote updates (reports over time) in the reporting and found that four updates in particular were extremely anomalous in a couple of important ways.

Some interesting things I'm reading:

1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers
2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio
3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions
4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures
5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’
6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing
7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes
8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law
9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.
Will the USSC over-turn the election in Trump's favor around mid-December? We'll see.
You've probably read this a million times but when the dust settles, regardless of who wins, 1/2 the nation will be convinced the election was stolen. It's going to be a long 4 years.

 

[Hades]

1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers

But Trump was always going to be comfortably ahead before the mail in ballots got counted. Because Trump had utterly rejected mail in voting while Biden did not. The physical votes were always going to be counted first. I think this also factors in to many of the other points you made. Biden specifically getting a lot of support in later batches is precisely because they were mail in votes which Trump trained his base not to use. Trump being ahead when the physical votes are counted and losing that lead when the mail in votes come in isn't suspicious. It was the inevitable result of mail in ballots inherently favoring Biden because Trump ensured they would favor Biden.

I do wonder one thing though. Mail in voting typically goes through the postal service which is under Trump's direct control. Trump even installed a corrupt crony with the express intent to sabotage mail in voting as much as possible. So how could any evil agency manipulating the mail in ballots get through Trump's crony? We know he's not involved in any ''plot'' since he's a fierce Trump loyalist, picked precisely because he's a Trump loyalist.

You've probably read this a million times but when the dust settles, regardless of who wins, 1/2 the nation will be convinced the election was stolen. It's going to be a long 4 years.

Yes and that's on Trump. If he had just conceded after the election things would already be a lot better.

 

[Silvanus]

So, they dropped the specific allegations of fraud in PA to avoid having to reach the standard of proof expected of that allegation... but kept vague references to fraud in the other allegations, in an attempt to bolster their case there without having actually having to prove or establish it happened.

Yeah, I see what the court meant by it being a "Frankenstein's Monster" now. It's cobbled-together in a vain attempt to avoid meeting their legal responsibilities.

 

[Houseman]

That's funny, the distinction didn't seem to matter one iota to you here;

That's right, it didn't, and still doesn't matter to me, but it mattered a great deal to Crimson.

The fundamental spirit of electoral law, of course, is that every citizen of appropriate age should have their vote counted equally

In that case, why not open mail-in voting for everyone? Why restrict it at all? If spirit of the law is to allow everyone to vote, then why does, like, every state have a mail-in/absentee provision, and why aren't these provisions open to absolutely everyone regardless of whether or not they are able-bodied or not?

Either the spirit of the law has been abused in years prior, with the restricting of mail-in ballots, or the spirit of the law is being abused now, with Act 77. Which is it?

 

[Avnger]

I know you won't see this cause you've blocked me but...

In that case, why not open mail-in voting for everyone? Why restrict it at all? If spirit of the law is to allow everyone to vote, then why does, like, every state have a mail-in/absentee provision, and why aren't these provisions open to absolutely everyone regardless of whether or not they are able-bodied or not?

Because making voting easier for everyone is something the Republican party is very much against. You'll notice how it's been almost exclusively conservatives railing against mail in voting this year. They're also the group that heavily invests into voter suppression strategies.

Either the spirit of the law has been abused in years prior, with the restricting of mail-in ballots

It's this one. Obviously.

 

[Silvanus]

In that case, why not open mail-in voting for everyone? Why restrict it at all? If spirit of the law is to allow everyone to vote, then why does, like, every state have a mail-in/absentee provision, and why aren't these provisions open to absolutely everyone regardless of whether or not they are able-bodied or not?

Either the spirit of the law has been abused in years prior, with the restricting of mail-in ballots, or the spirit of the law is being abused now, with Act 77. Which is it?

Mail-in voting should indeed be open to everyone. The spirit of equal representation has been abused by numerous barriers and pointless restrictions to voting. Of course, you primarily have the Republican Party to thank for that.

This is irrelevant to the legal argument, of course. This may be an argument for "levelling up"- opening these avenues to more people to bring about equal access. But the Trump campaign has pursued an argument to "level down" instead-- to argue that since some people have easier access to voting, their votes (in the millions) should be disregarded.

As Judge Brann has already clearly stated, and as the Appeals court has already upheld, that's not how the constitution works. There's no provision in it to pursue "levelling down" all the way to disenfranchisement. Its legally and constitutionally illiterate.

 

[Houseman]

But Trump was always going to be comfortably ahead before the mail in ballots got counted. Because Trump had utterly rejected mail in voting while Biden did not. The physical votes were always going to be counted first. I think this also factors in to many of the other points you made. Biden specifically getting a lot of support in later batches is precisely because they were mail in votes which Trump trained his base not to use. Trump being ahead when the physical votes are counted and losing that lead when the mail in votes come in isn't suspicious. It was the inevitable result of mail in ballots inherently favoring Biden because Trump ensured they would favor Biden.

Assuming that "the democrats" DID conspire to steal this election, they would have had to do it through mail-in ballots. Fraud is too hard to commit in-person.



All they did was change the narrative on the safety and security of mail-in ballots. In the past, they were considered unsecure and ripe for fraud.

Why Do Most Countries Ban Mail-In Ballots?: They Have Seen Massive Vote Fraud Problems by John R. Lott :: SSRN

Thirty-seven states have so far changed their mail-in voting procedures this year in response to the Coronavirus. Despite frequent claims that President Trump’s

papers.ssrn.com

Opinion | Heed Jimmy Carter on the Danger of Mail-In Voting

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.’

www.wsj.com

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” That quote isn’t from President Trump, who criticized mail-in voting this week after Wisconsin Democrats tried and failed to change an election at the last minute into an exclusively mail-in affair. It’s the conclusion of the bipartisan 2005 report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

From 2012- http://web.mit.edu/supportthevoter/www/files/2013/09/VTP-Voting-Technology-Report.pdf

In the midst of positive hopes such as these, we noted potential pitfalls that led us to be cautious about the rise of convenience voting, especially when it was bought with the relaxation of absenteeballot regulations. A decade later, our concerns have only grown. For reasons we make clear below, states would be wise to roll back no-excuse absentee balloting— except for individuals with disabilities and UOCAVA voters—while expanding opportunities for in-person early voting

They needed the public to forget about this so A) people would feel comfortable using them, and B) So that they can point back to how "safe and secure" they are when inevitably challenged, and C) as a smokescreen to commit fraud.

And as a result, we see an unprecedented amount of mail-in ballots.

What sort of security changes have happened since 2000 to improve the safety and security of mail-in ballots? What changed since they said that "absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud"?

Mail-in voting should indeed be open to everyone.

As I stated above, the experts from MIT don't think so, not because they want to disenfranchise people, but because of security reasons. So besides the narrative, what changed?

 

[Generals]

So besides the narrative, what changed?

I have heard there was a pandemic

 

[Silvanus]

As I stated above, the experts from MIT don't think so, not because they want to disenfranchise people, but because of security reasons. So besides the narrative, what changed?

So, you've provided links to articles discussing the potential for fraud. If we were to accept this, the remedy would be to legislate in advance of an election. Not to wait until you've lost, then retroactively try to get ballots thrown out regardless of their legitimacy. For that, you need to prove fraud occurred, not just to argue it was possible, because you can't change the fact that the law allowed voting in that way.

 

[SilentPony]

I have heard there was a pandemic

A pandemic FROM CHINA! And what else is from CHINA? Dominion Ballot machines, programed by George Soros himself! And what has this CHINESE pandemic done other than allow Democrats to get unwed teenage ballots into the election? Kill more Americans than the Vietnam War. And who fought in Vietnam? Soldiers! And who was a solider at one point? BEAU BIDEN! Coincidence?! I THINK NOT! OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE!

 

[Agema]

So besides the narrative, what changed?

Part of the issue here is pragmatism. There is a necessity to hold a presidential election, and a duty to ensure people can vote.

The pandemic has caused an unprecedented problem, with little time to fully prepare systems to cope. Not helped, of course, by the general dicking around of politicians who held stupid game-playing ahead of election rigour. In the middle of a pandemic, in-person voting is a form of disenfranchisement, because people may not take the risk of infection to vote. The concept of mail ballots existed, and was easily adaptable to circumstances and the best answer. If we therefore take the concept of what is the best thing to do in the time available, it was done. Inevitably, it would magnify any potential errors. But actually, I don't believe this election is really any worse than 2016, or 2012, or 2008, 2004, 2000. It's just that this year we have a fraud narrative that has been carefully constructed and aggressively pushed as a political tactic.

Let's bear in mind, this shitshow is in large part the Republicans' own design. Firstly, from their general pandemic complacency, and secondly because they'd seen the poll numbers and had decided well in advance that it suited them to make the election look suspect. I could also say in their defence that a total overhaul of systems in under six months would be a tough ask at the best of times, never mind under the pressure of the pandemic. But honestly, fuck them, in the sense that they wanted this and conspired to create it.

Why should we gratify them complaining about electoral problems they deliberately worked to create? Fuck them: malicious, deceptive, sore losers.

* * *

I am actually totally in favour of the USA going away and fixing a better, 21st century solution to their elections - four years to the next presidential election is plenty of time. They won't, though, will they? I want to credit many people overseeing elections in the USA, who have diligently tried their best, and many improvements have been made over the years. But overall, the USA is shit at elections and too much of the process is neglected, because it suits the arseholes who run the place to do so. The response to this isn't actually going to be a root and branch reform to make voting as easy and secure as possible. It's going to be the same ton of bullshit it always is where arseholes try to fiddle things here and there to administratively disenfranchise voters to slice themselves half a percent here and half a percent there, because they don't really care about your vote counting, they care about winning. And that's what the Republican narrative here is about: delegitimising Biden on the one hand for political obstructionism, and trying to generate public pressure to pass reforms that benefit them being elected rather than the purest expression of American voters' will.

 

[Houseman]

I have heard there was a pandemic

Yeah, that's a real witty zinger, but the pandemic didn't magically make mail-in ballots more secure, which was what I was asking about. What changed to make mail-in ballots more secure?

For that, you need to prove fraud occurred, not just to argue it was possible,

Trump's lawyers are trying, but judges won't let them present their evidence, so they have to hold "hearings" to convince state legislators to take back the power to appoint electors, until their cases get to the Supreme Court.

It's just that this year we have a fraud narrative that has been carefully constructed and aggressively pushed as a political tactic.

We also have a "voting by mail-in ballot is safe and secure" narrative that has been carefully constructed and aggressively pushed, perhaps as a smokescreen to commit widespread fraud?

 

[Silvanus]

Trump's lawyers are trying, but judges won't let them present their evidence, so they have to hold "hearings" to convince state legislators to take back the power to appoint electors, until their cases get to the Supreme Court.

Bollocks are they trying. They've been given every opportunity, over thirty times over, and have provided nothing but hearsay and second-hand hearsay. Giuliani even removed the count of fraud from the PA lawsuit so that he didn't have to meet the standard of evidence required.

 

[Houseman]

Everyone's favorite Matt Braynard again:

 

[Agema]

We also have a "voting by mail-in ballot is safe and secure" narrative that has been carefully constructed and aggressively pushed, perhaps as a smokescreen to commit widespread fraud?

How long has the USA had mail-in ballots? Decades? They didn't magic up a brand new system just for this year. So the argument here is that state legislatures - including Republican legislatures in states like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia - sat around and let a fundamentally unsafe voting system pollute their elections year after year. (To be fair to the state legislatures, they don't appear to think it was unsafe.) All these Republican voters happily tolerated it, year after year. Suddenly it's now a massive problem because Trump lost an election. Uh-huh.

For reasons supplied above, any Trumpistas who pursue this nonsense can go blow a goat. It's the same old tedious conspiracy theory bullshit, wasting everyone's time.

 

[Houseman]

How long has the USA had mail-in ballots? Decades?

And how long have they been limited in capacity and only available to a select few people whose circumstances make it impossible for them to vote in person?
And why didn't the government just open up mail-in voting to everyone until 2020? What reasons did they have to restrict it?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

And how long have they been limited in capacity and only available to a select few people whose circumstances make it impossible for them to vote in person?

A quarter of the votes in the 2016 election were a "select few"?