6392
Comments (639)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
Krakenandcheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

I sent this to a friend to see if he would agree.

He agreed it sounded irregular the way it was stated by Rand Paul. He didn’t think he was telling the whole story. He said the missing addresses are from witnesses to the absentee ballots (because the voter address is moot, it was sent to that address so they already know it). He said this article explains this wasn’t new or out of the norm. He said it was in place is 2016. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/11/fact-check-wisc-clerks-followed-2016-guidance-absentee-ballots/6253055002/

He said the AP article concerning the issue points out that even before it was made official in 2016 as acceptable, it has been the process for the past 11 election cycles.

https://apnews.com/article/852ac9f03fcbb8a0b407f66b055c9171

He went on to say it’s so tough to untangle tho, because the left leaning media will generally feel that the election was above board, and right leaning media will generally feel that it was fraudulent, with neither side providing real evidence, but relying on hearsay, anecdotes, and loopholes

Lastly he said in the end, it is in our best interest to ensure that elections are fair and accurate, but it’s also in our best interest that once the states electors have been certified by congress, to move on.

Not sure I agree with all of his points though. Let me know what you think?