Even though they're inadequate, if the protocols and safeguards on the election were followed it would make it difficult for a relatively small group of people to significantly alter the election through fraud. Preserving the chain of custody on the ballots, ensuring ballots are counted under adequate observation, keeping voter registration up to date, and only allowing absentee ballots for people who request them and provided photo ID would make it extremely difficult for a few people to change the outcome of an election.
With each safeguard that has been eroded it becomes progressively easier to steal the election, and we're at a point where 4 people could have (most likely did) change the vote totals by hundreds of thousands of votes.
People over the age of 65, or people with associated pre-existing conditions, would be who I would recommend taking the vaccine. I'm skeptical of the value for anyone else.
I think someone with a decent social media presence needs to edit this down to a 60 to 90 minute video where the most impactful testimony was given.
That is the right approach.
If you do your best to challenge a claim and are unable to disprove it you have to accept it as credible.
With that said, I'm not sure many of these people will accept the claims they can't disprove.
In a discussion about corporate document retention it was once explained to me that the loss or destruction of documents would be seen by a competent judge as evidence they were incriminating.
I think the appropriate way to handle a voting machine is to have a kiosk where people select their preferred candidate, it prints out a ballot on paper with security features, and the voter reviews the paper ballot and places it in a locked ballot box.
The kiosk can broadcast a preliminary vote count for rapid results but the paper ballots need to be counted to certify the election.
The same way Nancy Pelosi became house speaker.
I explained to my sister that if the claims of voter fraud were truly baseless the media would devote time to going through each of the claims and debunking them. The fact that they don't do that leads me to believe they know they have merit.
While the volume of fraud shouldn't matter I expect it will in this case.
My guess is Trump will have to demonstrate that there were enough fraudulent or illegitimate votes to make the outcome uncertain in order to de-certify the election in Michigan and/or Pennsylvania.
That got me wondering WHY would someone want to remove their relationship with the company... only answer is to cover something up. So I started to research each one.
If a company I worked for became controversial I would probably remove them from my LinkedIn profile until the controversy blew over.
If you do this can you create a comparable graph for each state?
Can you calculate the standard deviation of the difference in in person and mail in votes by country for each state?
My guess is these would illustrate the unnatural perfection of this dataset.
One thing I wish someone would do with all these discoveries is to create a comparable graph for other counties/states. Seeing how imperfect the distribution is in most states makes it easier to convince others of the fraud.
In simple terms, if they want to preserve the potential defense that there was a software bug that counted votes incorrectly they need to leave the ballots as is. If they're caught manipulating thousands of ballots to cover the fraud it will only prove the initial intent was fraud.
For the past couple of days I have been getting the feeling that there were different groups acting independently to impact vote counts. This may be a blessing because, as a result it may make it easier to overturn the election.
In my opinion, rigging the voting machines seems like it was intended to push close districts to the Democrats on a level that would force their opponents to concede. They likely expected Michigan and Wisconsin to be in recount territory and having Biden win by 2 or 3 points would prevent a dispute, and without a recount the fraud can't be uncovered. They screwed up because they underestimated the Trump vote.
At the same time you have Democrat officials preventing oversight because they're ensuring as few ballots are rejected as possible. They know that in some of these districts 80% of voters will pick Biden and due to their shitty education system a large portion of the voters are functionally illiterate and will fail to fill out their ballots correctly. They are probably hoping to win with these votes and planning on saying Trump stole the election through voter suppression if he gets them thrown out.
Finally, there appears to be groups who manufactured ballots in a rush when it became clear Biden was still losing, and they only produced enough to push him into office.
Why this is a good thing is the margin of victory for Biden is likely smaller than the number of votes manipulated by each of these methods. Getting a clean recount will likely push Trump over the top without needing to throw out any votes, and even if that doesn't work they can likely get enough votes thrown out to push Trump over the top.
Unless the election is corrected there is no point in arresting anyone. In order to catch anyone significant you need to turn lower level people against them, and if Biden becomes president these people will never be convicted and therefore you have no leverage to turn them.