THE ELECTION FRAUD THREAD

Sharing, I agree that not enough votes would change to change the election, which makes the effort to change them look even more a poor tactic.

Greg pay attention. There is no evidence that any court has seen to support the lawsuits. If such evidence exists I do believe it would have been presented and acted on by the courts. If a court is not acting then I must conclude they see no evidence.
 
bbfreeburn said:
Sharing, I agree that not enough votes would change to change the election, which makes the effort to change them look even more a poor tactic.

Greg pay attention. There is no evidence that any court has seen to support the lawsuits. If such evidence exists I do believe it would have been presented and acted on by the courts. If a court is not acting then I must conclude they see no evidence.
Click to expand...

Most of the lawsuits, even tho not enough to change the results, are still legit and worth filing. ANY illegal action during our voting process is worth the effort. BUT, the computer tampering and software manipulation IS enough to change the votes, as seen in Wayne County. Now, that same software was used in 47 Michigan counties and 30 other states. THAT is significant and CANNOT be allowed to happen.
 
bbfreeburn said:
Sharing, I agree that not enough votes would change to change the election, which makes the effort to change them look even more a poor tactic.

Greg pay attention. There is no evidence that any court has seen to support the lawsuits. If such evidence exists I do believe it would have been presented and acted on by the courts. If a court is not acting then I must conclude they see no evidence.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. The court could simply not act if they don't want to set precedence or there isn't a legal remedy without supression of legal votes.


There is evidence that observers were allowed or allowed close enough. A judge could say there is evidence here but there isn't anything a judge could do legally with those votes.

Again, dangerous. No legal ramifications for fraud.
 

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Reading this article makes the most sense. Whether this is what happened or not I don't know.

The scanner is programmed per ballot. It looks like the collection software wasn't lined up with the new tables that the scanners had.
 
Djarum300 said:

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Reading this article makes the most sense. Whether this is what happened or not I don't know.

The scanner is programmed per ballot. It looks like the collection software wasn't lined up with the new tables that the scanners had.
Click to expand...

And those machines had been "updated" the day before. Unacceptable. Those updates need to be a month in advance and tested extensively before operation.
 
bbfreeburn said:
Sharing, I agree that not enough votes would change to change the election, which makes the effort to change them look even more a poor tactic.

Greg pay attention. There is no evidence that any court has seen to support the lawsuits. If such evidence exists I do believe it would have been presented and acted on by the courts. If a court is not acting then I must conclude they see no evidence.
Click to expand...
Dear bbfreeburn:

Don't you realize how slow the court system usually operates?
 
Greg T. said:
And those machines had been "updated" the day before. Unacceptable. Those updates need to be a month in advance and tested extensively before operation.
Click to expand...

We had ballots change a week beforw election because someone dropped out of a county race.

It doesn't have to happen a month before. It also appears the real issue was the collection and reporting software which exists outside the machine.
 
bbfreeburn said:
Slow enough to have thrown out 10 or more of trumps lawsuits already
Click to expand...
Dear bbfreeburn:

In your apparent view of justice, you must love the two-tiered system that goes after Republican wrongdoing but totally gives "free passes" to Democrats, no matter how guilty they may be.
 
Regarding the votes totals not being enough to sway the election results, it's worth noting that any misdirected votes (to Biden from Trump) are actually doubled in terms of their effect on overall totals.

For example, if the vote count is off by 6000 misdirected votes (Trump to Biden), when the error is corrected, the vote swing is 12,000 votes (6000 away from Biden and added to Trump).

Exemplar, assuming 25,000 votes:
Biden 56% (14,000 votes)
Trump 42% (10,500 votes)
Biden +3,500 votes

3000 'misdirected' votes changes thus:
Biden (14,000 - 3000 = 11,000 votes) - 44%
Trump (10,500 + 3000 = 13,500 votes) - 54%
Trump +2,500 votes

So if you say, "Well, 3000 votes isn't enough to change the outcome of the election," you may be correct. However, 6000 votes (plus all of the votes across 47 counties and 30 states) is easily enough enough to change the outcome of the election.

The problem is that Joe has been coronated by the media. If it is determined that the software was tampered with and made to intentionally sway the election in Joe's favor, Trump retains the presidency.

The entire fucking world explodes because 'Republicans stole the election'.

If things are allowed to go without being challenged, then the entire fucking world explodes because Republicans will know that Democrats stole the election.

So it doesn't matter what happens. The entire fucking world is going to explode.

Enjoy.
 
Scolai said:
Regarding the votes totals not being enough to sway the election results, it's worth noting that any misdirected votes (to Biden from Trump) are actually doubled in terms of their effect on overall totals.

For example, if the vote count is off by 6000 misdirected votes (Trump to Biden), when the error is corrected, the vote swing is 12,000 votes (6000 away from Biden and added to Trump).

Exemplar, assuming 25,000 votes:
Biden 56% (14,000 votes)
Trump 42% (10,500 votes)
Biden +3,500 votes

3000 'misdirected' votes changes thus:
Biden (14,000 - 3000 = 11,000 votes) - 44%
Trump (10,500 + 3000 = 13,500 votes) - 54%
Trump +2,500 votes

So if you say, "Well, 3000 votes isn't enough to change the outcome of the election," you may be correct. However, 6000 votes (plus all of the votes across 47 counties and 30 states) is easily enough enough to change the outcome of the election.
Click to expand...
Dear Scoloai:

You're obviously correct. In any sport, if two competing teams play each other, the winning team gets a net positive differential of 2 games in the standings.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top