6039
Comments (152)
sorted by:
257
D0ntdrugtest 257 points ago +258 / -1 (edited)

Noooo you can’t check those. Check only these we set aside for you. Racist 🤣

129
r_u_srs_srsly 129 points ago +129 / -0

fascinating that these idiots can't even cheat right.

If you're going to commit treason, why not follow through and have 100 pre-selected "random" ones that check out?

sadly, that's probably exactly what they did and there was STILL fraud in there.

60
Bizz 60 points ago +60 / -0

At the absolute worst, all we’re doing in these state legislature hearings is teaching them where to cover their tracks.

30
ClownTamer 30 points ago +30 / -0

That’s my main worry. That they just collect all our data and use it to inform their next fraud. We can’t give up on this. We need to hold the line and then lockdown the vote so hard it hurts. Voter ID, Blockchain, in person only, no illegals voting.

25
Bluestorm83 25 points ago +25 / -0

Fuck Block Chain. I don't know what it is, I don't want anything new. I want a paper ballot, I want it to be counted by a person with two observers sitting over his shoulder to confirm that Option A is chosen. When all three have agreed that Option A is chosen, the two people watching over each of their shoulders will confirm that Option A is chosen. If any of those SEVEN people have any issues, that Ballot is set aside, all their names are attached to it, and a team of Guardsmen will convene with them all to determine what about it is fuckety.

Anyone who casts a vote will have their entire Right Hand dipped in ink that will not disappear until after Inauguration Day, to prevent multiple voting. To be sure that Ballots are real, they will be made out of the same paper as US currency, and each ballot will have a watermark, a hologram, a magnetic strip with a Unique Serial Number embedded in it, and any other anti-counterfeiting technology. Voter ID will be mandatory. In Person Voting or Confirmed, Notarized Absentee as has been done since time immemorial, but now with even more stringent checks upon it. Everyone who votes Absentee will be sent a Confirmation of their vote, and they will then have to mail back a Confirmation that they received their Confirmation and that everything is correct. When their Confirmation is received, they will receive a Final Confirmation, and their vote will be counted.

And the most important thing: Anyone caught attempting to enter fraudulent votes will be hanged from the neck until dead.

15
MAGAA2020 15 points ago +15 / -0

What's sad is that you're describing election reforms that already exist... in India.

Agreed with the paper ballots. It reminds me a lot of the cash vs bitcoin argument. I don't want anything fancy--I just want to be able to take out my wallet, pull out some bills, and pay for my crap in a way that also preserves my privacy and anonymity.

12
Sporadica 12 points ago +12 / -0

I've heard people say that the USA is too large to hold elections like that and only "small" countries can do that. India is the largest voting democracy in the world and they managed paper ballots and inking.

2
Slippinjimmies 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah but how do you get leftist shitholes to abide by those laws? They just flagrantly break the law and nothing is done.

3
HereComesTrouble 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sent the military in. They oversaw elections in Iran (or was it Iraq?) to ensure a fair election. The same can be done here. Any ANTIFA fucks that show up to start trouble get a .50 cal in the head. A couple of those and those fuckers will go away.

1
ClownTamer 1 point ago +1 / -0

We’ll be able to say if you didn’t vote then you ain’t black because you didn’t get your whole body dipped in 3 months worth of sharpie.

2
TrumpDynastyForever 2 points ago +2 / -0

You're forgetting the part where we've learned our lesson and this shit never happens again. Voter ID, paper ballots, manual counts, livestreamed, etc. THIS bullshit, NEVER EVER EVER happening again.

3
Sporadica 3 points ago +3 / -0

The USPS has the technology to photograph every single letter and parcel with your address on it, we have the tech to scan and upload every single ballot.

We should be able to go into any county and be able to see every single ballot as filled out and be able to verify the count. Why is it a handful of people get to see the ballots? Fuck that, the entire country should be able to watch every single ballot.

2
ClownTamer 2 points ago +2 / -0

Depends on whether we stand up now. If we don’t, they’ll never let that happen. 1776 part 2 needs to happen in whatever forms that takes.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
ClownTamer 1 point ago +1 / -0

That’s going to be hilariously sad if we lose the revolution because we spent all our time dunking on leftists on the internet as it went down.

20
Numaeus 20 points ago +20 / -0

They think they're so much better and smarter than everyone else, that's why.

10
braveContrarian 10 points ago +10 / -0

well they did intentionally hire people that were too lazy to check signatures the first time.

they probably got paid pretty well to just pass anything through without checking the first time and didnt get yelled at lmao.

5
residue69 5 points ago +5 / -0

they probably got paid **extra **to just pass anything through without checking

5
DelrayFitness 5 points ago +5 / -0

Which means 3% fraud rate is the lowest they could possibly show when they rigged the check.

Imagine the real fraud rate if we get a legitimate check. It could be double-digits. Trump probably won AZ in a landslide and they’re struggling to scrounge up enough legit Biden votes for a 100-ballot audit.

4
CocaineRimJob 4 points ago +4 / -0

I imagine this like the plot of a Austin Powers movie..its literally so comically bad Dr. Evil could of done it

32
deleted 32 points ago +32 / -0
14
KudzuKing69 14 points ago +14 / -0

Yup

20
anon2468 20 points ago +20 / -0

Can someone explain the 3% figure to me? They say 3, but than only mention 2 ballots. Why isn't it 2%? 2 out of 100 is 2. The original yesterday also said 3%.

55
Cincinattus1776 55 points ago +55 / -0

1 vote for Trump wasn't counted at all.

1 vote for Trump was taken AWAY from Trump, and then given to Biden.

Trump lost 2 votes, Biden gained 1 vote.

16
anon2468 16 points ago +16 / -0

Thank you. I don't know why I didn't think of it!

7
Geeee 7 points ago +7 / -0

Math is scary and confusing.

7
ProfessorRomendev 7 points ago +7 / -0

And racist

1
anon2468 1 point ago +1 / -0

Can be. I was good in math. Took up to Calc 2. I just wasn't thinking in terms of that extra step.

1
SmolPedeBestPede 1 point ago +1 / -0

I get why it’s this way but it’s still weird. Like; if 50% of the ballots were incorrectly marked for Biden, then we’d say 100% of the ballots were are tainted? And if 100% of the ballots were incorrectly marked for Biden we’d say 200% of the ballots were tainted?

20
MexicanBeerFlu 20 points ago +20 / -0

1 ballot was switched from Trump to nothing. 1% error. 1 ballot was switched from Trump to Biden. 2% error because the net result was -1 Biden +1 Trump. Total swing from a 100 vote sample was 3%.

6
anon2468 6 points ago +6 / -0

Thank you. I don't know why I didn't think of it!

13
Bizz 13 points ago +13 / -0

Trump 0 - Biden - 0
1 T vote excluded
1 T vote switched to Biden
Trump -2 - Biden +1
3 point difference

5
anon2468 5 points ago +5 / -0

Thank you. I don't know why I didn't think of it!

10
Bizz 10 points ago +10 / -0

All good. Any switched T vote is essentially 2 B votes... it’s a way of keeping vote totals down and gives them room to cheat since they’re working with X amount on voter rolls.

93
kanyewon 93 points ago +93 / -0

martial law paper ballot re-do entire election

48
UID__Here 48 points ago +48 / -0

Candidly, I would not trust a full paper ballot re-do at this point without some real validation capabilities (e.g., voter ID, individual ballots uniquely tied to the voter, required poll worker review, etc. etc.).

At minimum, the same amount of validation done for anyone getting on a commercial flight should be done when voting - in person, with ID, clear declarations under penalty of law (and enforce the penalties).

13
TickleMissle 13 points ago +13 / -0

I won't trust any sort of ballot election until I see the heads of Soros/Clinton/DNC/GOP machines on pikes outside my precinct.

13
magastrophysicist 13 points ago +13 / -0

Wait, I want their heads on pikes outside of MY precinct!

How will we ever resolve this? KEK

3
hotdogsforsale 3 points ago +3 / -0

King David has your answer ;)

2
magastrophysicist 2 points ago +2 / -0

2 Samuel 4:12?

2 Samuel 4:12.

3
gaijin_ronin 3 points ago +3 / -0

Build a great wall out of the commies. Send a warning to the rest.

1
DebbieinDallas 1 point ago +1 / -0

Death penalty

25
deleted 25 points ago +25 / -0
22
nrjk1 22 points ago +22 / -0

Look at us we are the sand people now.

12
Skippy_theSwampBeast 12 points ago +12 / -0

TOP KEK

9
ModernKnight 9 points ago +9 / -0

"We'd better get indoors. American sand people are not easily startled, and keep you pinned down with small arms fire until they can gather greater numbers."

3
Nezock_theKnight 3 points ago +3 / -0

A wretched hive of scum and villainy.

14
deleted 14 points ago +15 / -1
13
the_bird 13 points ago +13 / -0

Declare Marshall Law and audit the entire election under fair circumstance. Confirm chain of custody for every vote and let the chips fall where they may.

5
RedJive 5 points ago +5 / -0

Just fyi, it’s “martial law” as in military. It means the armed forces are the police

1
the_bird 1 point ago +1 / -0

I do know this. Bring in the military to secure the ballots and have a fair audit under their watch. Either side cant trust the other to count. The only way to restore trust for both sides.

1
DemigoD 1 point ago +1 / -0

hes saying you spelled martial "marshall"

1
the_bird 1 point ago +1 / -0

I was driving...cheers!

0
novanleon 0 points ago +1 / -1

I know you’re probably saying this tongue-in-cheek but this is a terrible, terrible idea. Unfortunately I’ve heard lots of people here suggest similar measures.

7
LurkerGonnaLurk 7 points ago +7 / -0

Because sometimes, you need to beat someone twice for them to know they're beaten.

5
FireannDireach 5 points ago +5 / -0

I wouldn't take it off the table. Unlikely, though. i think Team Trump can get this done without going there.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
70
PEPEpeepee 70 points ago +71 / -1

100 ballots =/ Liberals wouldn't accept that as a study size because it's too small. I don't know if we got lucky finding 3 or they got lucky we ONLY found 3%

59
PatriotHiwi 59 points ago +59 / -0

We want a full audit, They are the ones wanting the small sample size. Shows how disingenuous they are.

18
zooty 18 points ago +18 / -0

"But that's only two ballots"

18
deleted 18 points ago +18 / -0
11
FireannDireach 11 points ago +11 / -0

And when they fail that, they'll attack some other aspect of it. They know they're caught, and the implications. This is the battlefield. They'll attack every aspect of the audit, and try to poison it.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
28
deleted 28 points ago +28 / -0 (edited)
9
Foxbat 9 points ago +9 / -0

They chose a sample that spanned several different types of ballots. Some mail in some early, some on election day. Good thing there are still some honest judges.

7
My2SonsAreMarines 7 points ago +7 / -0

It's a very representative example of the fraud, actually. (1) Switched vote Trump to Biden, (1) falied to record Trump vote, (1) misallocated vote to Biden.

That's almost like randomly hitting three lemons on the one-armed bandit and winning the jackpot!

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
3
Rusty_Bungus 3 points ago +3 / -0

Bad analogy as hitting the jackpot is hard...finding pervasive voter fraud is easy.

4
My2SonsAreMarines 4 points ago +4 / -0

You missed the point. What were the chances of finding the 3 most representative varieties of election theft in one sampling of the ballots? I am sure that larger samplings will easily reveal more evidence of fraud, and likely at >3%.

1
Rusty_Bungus 1 point ago +1 / -0

You missed my point. There was so much fraud (>>>3%) that it was extremely easy to find.

28
UID__Here 28 points ago +28 / -0

They should - the likelihood of 3% fraud in such a small sample size out of a population of millions of votes is very small... unless there really is rampant fraud.

Surprised the MSM is not covering this /s. nO eViDeNcE /drool.

12
FireannDireach 12 points ago +12 / -0

3% fraud in ANY election is unacceptable. Not even .03%. ANY fraud is unacceptable. Every vote counts. ANY ballot that gets fucked with means someone's ass goes to jail.

5
Indianslost3-1lead 5 points ago +5 / -0

Hangs. You mean Hangs. Right?

11
BeefChucker 11 points ago +11 / -0

I find it fucking hilarious they couldn’t put together 100 clean ballots.

9
Sumarongi 9 points ago +9 / -0

This. I’d bet the actual number is 20%

61
entwickelnden 61 points ago +61 / -0

Odd, its always in 1 direction...

23
BornAgainPatriot 23 points ago +23 / -0

boy bands on suicide watch

9
entwickelnden 9 points ago +9 / -0

LOL

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
51
Shakakka99 51 points ago +51 / -0

one Trump vote arbitrarily excluded.

You spelled intentionally wrong.

37
suckmycorona 37 points ago +37 / -0

Why would any vote be changed? Why is this even a thing? Why is this even up for question? Fucking hell.

36
deleted 36 points ago +36 / -0
19
suckmycorona 19 points ago +19 / -0

Rhetorical. I’m well aware of the fraud going on. I’m just more amazed that it’s gone on this long and this time so egregious. Anytime i here a dem badmouth another pol using the word a threat to democracy I know they are lying. You know how I know they are lying, their mouth is open.

22
deleted 22 points ago +22 / -0
17
Loc12 17 points ago +17 / -0

Yeah, it's like the GA recount. The people that did the recounting also did the cheating in the first place

12
J_Von_Random 12 points ago +12 / -0

They couldn't even sanitize 100.

9
that_sound 9 points ago +9 / -0

I bet that they tried. I bet they did. The fraud is so huge it's hard to hide.

21
phanourius 21 points ago +21 / -0

I recently read, "there is no fraud. This was the most secure election in history." If this evidence of fraud turns out to be true, are we allowed to publicly execute the people who said this? I mean legally, not some crazed lawless lynching.

8
DeadOverRed 8 points ago +8 / -0

Stupidity, lying, cheating, stealing . . . not capital offenses. You'd have to prove they did it for a foreign power, and were traitors.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
16
fapoo 16 points ago +16 / -0

2500 ballots next.

9
ModernKnight 9 points ago +9 / -0

All the ballots next.

13
deleted 13 points ago +13 / -0
3
TexasOutlaw 3 points ago +3 / -0

IT'S MA'AM!

12
LRRP 12 points ago +12 / -0

We will allow you to look at 10 more ballots we select.

7
Obeah 7 points ago +7 / -0

COVID is estimated 1% mortality rate and they close entire countries for it. 3% for the presidential election of the most powerful country in the world is a big deal

1
FormerGraveheart 1 point ago +1 / -0

Closer to 1% of 1% in reality.

7
IPMang 7 points ago +7 / -0

We pretty desperately need ONE of these states to go in our favour to start the ball rolling.

I really feel like it's AZ.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
7
Rreidy8286 7 points ago +7 / -0

Fuck it just accept being called a racist. Were gonna be called that NO MATTER WHAT!!! So we may as well make it count. We know who and what we are who gives a fuck what they call us?

5
DeadOverRed 5 points ago +5 / -0

They couldn't find even 100 legit ballots? LOL

5
Weallseethetruth 5 points ago +5 / -0

Fuck yeah baby!!! They know when we get to actually check these ballots how many fraudulent ones they're going to find!!! They know!!.... Why else would they be fucking fighting it so hard!!!.... Right now is when we need to put EVEN MORE pressure on these faggots!!!! Call them, protest them gather outside their fucking homes!!!! Let's kick their fucking asses!!!!!!!

4
SoldierofKek 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wow, that's like a corrupt food inspector getting paid to ignore health code violations by just taking sampling one little bit and getting a big ole rat turd right in the middle.

4
pacalis128 4 points ago +5 / -1

This set up was total BULLSHIT math. I'm glad it backfired. If they really want to detect a 0.05% difference at a 95% confidence, they need a sample size of approximately 313,952 ballots.

https://clincalc.com/stats/samplesize.aspx

To detect anything at a sample of 100 means that insane fuckery ensued.

6
stjimmy92 6 points ago +6 / -0

There’s only 28,000 to look at. This isn’t for all votes, it’s specifically for duplicated ballots in Maricopa County.

1
2blackbirds 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why bother looking anymore, they tried to hide the fraud only counting 100. 2 votes is enough to say there was fraud, mainly because they already know. They know. Very few don't know. But they know.

3
Okiedoked2 3 points ago +3 / -0

And fake Faux news will have to retract their call that started all of this fucking mess, when they prematurely and falsely called Arizona for Biden. They started this whole fraud!

3
DJTLandSlide2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

BLM - Ballot Lives Matter!

3
estebxx 3 points ago +3 / -0

Its disgusting that they only used 100 votes to determine this, the sample should have been at least a 1000. they must have thought they would get away with it but the fraud was so big that it appeared even in such a small sample.

3
jdog 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sounds like they are actually talking to the voters. How else would they now a Trump vote was discharged?

5
Foxbat 5 points ago +5 / -0

Because it was clearly marked as a trump vote. The tabulated result did not match the paper record in 2 out of 100 ballots.

1
jdog 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ah, ok

2
LACommiefornia 2 points ago +2 / -0

But it’s been debunked this is the safest election in world history.. hahaha they are fighting the last stand the know they are in a corner and the truth shall set you free.. I wonder who will turn into a canary first someone is going to start singing..

2
Shamb3 2 points ago +2 / -0

Speaking of Audits.

Do we know which election workers counted which ballots? (I bet the answer is no)

I bet if that kind of information was kept then it would discourage some of this fraudulent behavior and make finding more ballots they cheated on easier.

2
jcpapillon 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't understand. How do they know how 100 random ballots were tabulated?

I mean, I assume there is a pile of ballots and a total for that pile but the only way they can know how each one was tallied is if it is a very small pile, or if the software keeps an image of each ballot and also the software interpretation of how it was tallied.

So I am guessing the software has feature where you can see each scanned image and "audit" that ballot.

If this is the case, then they are testing the accuracy of the optical recognition system. But they are not testing the accuracy of the tallying, or any algorithms, or ballot stuffing, or dead voters, or manufactured ballots, or mismatched signatures, or harvested ballots.

This would be only the tip of the iceberg. Am I reading this right?

More important, this is a very small sample and if this is all they verify, there is no guarantee it will reverse things - They need a hand recount and a forensic audit of all ballots and envelopes.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
jcpapillon 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not sure if you are agreeing with me.

I think you are saying the barcode links to a scan, and the software tells how that ballot was tallied. Otherwise there is no way to know which votes in the total come from which ballot.

Even if they go through the pile and get the physical ballot, it should be no different from the scan. All they are checking is the scan, and how it is read. Not the algorithm, etc. They are still relying on the software to self report.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
TrumpDynastyForever 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's HAPPENING!!! This shit is going to start the BIG dominoes falling.

2
VonBustacap 2 points ago +2 / -0

A 100 vote sample is a joke. The 3% they found is going to be small potatoes compared to what they're going to find with a larger sample. That, or the next sample will be less "random".

2
latsbruh 2 points ago +2 / -0

COVID death rate :0.001% LOCK THE COUNTRY DOWN Ballot fraud: 3% SHUT UP FASCIST YOURE STEALING THE ELECTION

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
DasBurt 2 points ago +2 / -0

They probably hand selected ones they thought weren't bad, like Hillary did with her emails, and still got caught.

2
myswedishfriend 2 points ago +2 / -0

3% based on this one method of fraud.

1
TGNX 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trump won the nation in a landslide.

Change my mind.

1
Margincrew 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’ll believe it when it is done properly.

1
Headline_Correction 1 point ago +1 / -0

LOL - the revenge of the 3% ...

tadum tissss

1
FattyWatt 1 point ago +1 / -0

BIDEN CAN'T EVEN CHEAT RIGHT!! BIDEN COMMITTED TREASON in ARIZONA 1st, we want reparations of DEMENTIA JOE Yelling, "TRUMP WOOOOON 2020!!"

1
Jubes1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Next time just check 1 ballot.

"This ballot looks ok... guess no fraud"

HONK HONK

1
owlcreekbridge 1 point ago +1 / -0

2,500 more ballots VOLUNTEERED by the County -- but who's pickin' em? I am suspicious.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Slippinjimmies 1 point ago +1 / -0

How can you check if there was fraud on only 100 ballots!!! That makes NO SENSE

1
123breadman 1 point ago +1 / -0

It was impossible odds, and they still found fraud.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
Pilotaaron1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Proud to call Gosar my rep.

1
Sumarongi 1 point ago +1 / -0

I bet no those 100 were picked to hide the fraud too

1
MythArcana 1 point ago +1 / -0

That is an extremely small sampling rate. The actual fraud is probably closer to 68%.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
br1337 1 point ago +1 / -0

The one Colonel has said the acceptable error rate in the standards is 1/250,000.

Here you have 3/100... uh what?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
gaijin_ronin 1 point ago +1 / -0

Math is a bitch to lefties. Cause you know, the thing.