1107 Ramsland Affidavit - 19 Michigan precincts exceeded 100% of their statical voters. Estimated that there are 431,951 excess ballots processed. The Dems were so far behind that they had to produce almost half a million fraudulent votes. (media.patriots.win) posted 144 days ago by LosPepesContra 144 days ago by LosPepesContra +1107 / -0 92 comments share 92 comments share save hide report block hide child comments Comments (92) sorted by: top new old worst You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread. ▲ 25 ▼ – MNMathtic 25 points 144 days ago +25 / -0 A lot of those townships are in Minnesota. I'm not sure if all of them are. A typo using MI instead of MN? permalink save report block reply ▲ 14 ▼ – Kimball_Kinnison 14 points 144 days ago +14 / -0 Correct. This is the notorious "Somebody confused MN with MI" error. permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 17 ▼ – MNMathtic 17 points 144 days ago +17 / -0 What's interesting is the response to this "They couldn't even get MI vs MN right. The rest of the data is false!" To which I say, "You mean if there are any inaccuracies, then we should just throw out all the data? Ok, let's talk about the 2020 election data...." permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 5 ▼ – eddedandedamame 5 points 144 days ago +5 / -0 E X A C T L Y!! permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 2 ▼ – Kimball_Kinnison 2 points 144 days ago +2 / -0 Yes, this is a common tactic: find an error, a weak link, one dodgy association, and use that to dismiss everything. permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 11 ▼ – paradox87 11 points 144 days ago +11 / -0 Hoping its just a typo and its actual statistical data for minnesota. If we did this well in minnesota then the dems are really fucked permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 5 ▼ – bugsbunny 5 points 144 days ago +6 / -1 It is all of them. permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 1 ▼ – cryogen 1 point 144 days ago +2 / -1 Nope permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 1 ▼ – EyesInTheHills 1 point 144 days ago +1 / -0 It's all of them. I just looked every single one of them up. permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 3 ▼ – deleted 3 points 144 days ago +3 / -0
A lot of those townships are in Minnesota. I'm not sure if all of them are. A typo using MI instead of MN?
Correct. This is the notorious "Somebody confused MN with MI" error.
What's interesting is the response to this "They couldn't even get MI vs MN right. The rest of the data is false!"
To which I say, "You mean if there are any inaccuracies, then we should just throw out all the data? Ok, let's talk about the 2020 election data...."
E X A C T L Y!!
Yes, this is a common tactic: find an error, a weak link, one dodgy association, and use that to dismiss everything.
Hoping its just a typo and its actual statistical data for minnesota. If we did this well in minnesota then the dems are really fucked
It is all of them.
Nope
It's all of them. I just looked every single one of them up.