6939
posted ago by RatioInvictus ago by RatioInvictus +6939 / -0

I knew the moment that I compared voter turnout in CO and found that primary voter turnout from 2016 to 2020 increased by over 140% despite population increasing less than 5% that something was off. Now, I'm digging into all the connections, but it's a lot.

The more I dig, the more shit bothers me.

E.g.

All of these companies' employees, BTW, donate almost exclusively to ActBlue, Biden, Warren, etc, though some hide it (e.g. Monica Childers donated and the FEC log says she said she was unemployed, but her LI profile said she was employed by Democracy Works in that same timeframe).

Anyway, could use some help.

Comments (363)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
17
pneuma_462 17 points ago +17 / -0

I definitely thought CO would be closer to red. I lived in Boulder county and now reside in Weld county and the state is certainly red except for a few areas. Given that, any type of fuckery perpetrated by the software was done so with the assumption that Denver has turned the state blue and most that don't live here would believe it. Anecdotally, I don't think that's the case. MSM called the senate race for Hickenlooper so quickly that perhaps Biden winning CO handily wouldn't make folks take pause.

Additionally, risk limiting audits are supposed to test meaningful populations from the entire universe. However, I believe they're simply testing for accuracy and calling it risk limiting. My experience would lead me to believe they would test samples from the reciprocal population (a la choosing votes from the machine) and trace them back. Since elections are supposed to be anonymous, that test cannot be satisfied, so I am not entirely sure why people refer to what happens as risk limiting.