If a voter in Precinct_A mails their ballot in, and it gets added to the tally for AVBC_1, then does it not get added to the Precint_A total, thus showing a lower turnout in Precint_A and contributing to the indeterminable ratio of AVBC_1? Why wouldn't all the ballots counted in AVBC_1 have the votes tallied in the respective precincts, so that the turnout ratios would make sense?
Doesn't that seem like a scheme to allow for fraud? If Precint_A has 1000 registered voters, and 700 of them mail in their ballots, then turnout in _A cannot be greater than 30%. If among the remaining 300 half voted in person, then turnout would be 15%. Ergo, we would expect to see very low turnout in most precincts under the theory that most people mailed in their ballots. Meanwhile, in AVCB_1, ballots are mixed together from many precincts (see in the document you linked: "A jurisdiction that uses AV counting boards must establish an AV counting board for each precinct. (Jurisdictions of 250 or more precincts are exempt.)", so there are no numbers of registered voters available to constrain the maximum possible number of registered voters, so any number of votes can be counted in AVCB_1, whether real or fraudulent, and if there is no way to trace each ballot back to a legitimate registered voter, then there is no legitimacy to the vote counts at all.
"Determine the legality of the ballot by checking the signature on the absentee ballot return envelope against the voter’s absent voter ballot application and checking the ePollbook to confirm that the voter has not voted in person at the election (these steps are optional forAVCBs)."
"Cell Phones: Challengers and poll watchers may not be in possession of or have access to cell phones or other communication devices in an AVCB during the sequestration period. The enforcement of this policy is critical to the integrity of the election process."
So, what I glean from all of this, is that an AVCB is a black hole, where no one can record what is going on, and no one can validate the number of votes counted vs the number of legitimate registered voters (because large precincts can be combined), and where no duplicate votes or fraudulent signatures can be detected (because AVCB's are not required to do so).
Sounds like complete bullshit to me. Do you not agree?
At the bottom, it says: "Hold a few ballots back for late ballot processing". Can you or anyone explain what in the fuck would be the reason for doing that?
If a voter in Precinct_A mails their ballot in, and it gets added to the tally for AVBC_1, then does it not get added to the Precint_A total, thus showing a lower turnout in Precint_A and contributing to the indeterminable ratio of AVBC_1? Why wouldn't all the ballots counted in AVBC_1 have the votes tallied in the respective precincts, so that the turnout ratios would make sense?
Doesn't that seem like a scheme to allow for fraud? If Precint_A has 1000 registered voters, and 700 of them mail in their ballots, then turnout in _A cannot be greater than 30%. If among the remaining 300 half voted in person, then turnout would be 15%. Ergo, we would expect to see very low turnout in most precincts under the theory that most people mailed in their ballots. Meanwhile, in AVCB_1, ballots are mixed together from many precincts (see in the document you linked: "A jurisdiction that uses AV counting boards must establish an AV counting board for each precinct. (Jurisdictions of 250 or more precincts are exempt.)", so there are no numbers of registered voters available to constrain the maximum possible number of registered voters, so any number of votes can be counted in AVCB_1, whether real or fraudulent, and if there is no way to trace each ballot back to a legitimate registered voter, then there is no legitimacy to the vote counts at all.
Does that make sense to you?
Here's another gem from that document:
"Determine the legality of the ballot by checking the signature on the absentee ballot return envelope against the voter’s absent voter ballot application and checking the ePollbook to confirm that the voter has not voted in person at the election (these steps are optional forAVCBs)."
Also:
"Cell Phones: Challengers and poll watchers may not be in possession of or have access to cell phones or other communication devices in an AVCB during the sequestration period. The enforcement of this policy is critical to the integrity of the election process."
So, what I glean from all of this, is that an AVCB is a black hole, where no one can record what is going on, and no one can validate the number of votes counted vs the number of legitimate registered voters (because large precincts can be combined), and where no duplicate votes or fraudulent signatures can be detected (because AVCB's are not required to do so).
Sounds like complete bullshit to me. Do you not agree?
And lastly, I note this glaring and bizarre piece of information:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EhUddpcDns&t=7m40s
At the bottom, it says: "Hold a few ballots back for late ballot processing". Can you or anyone explain what in the fuck would be the reason for doing that?