9
handpeople 9 points ago +9 / -0

Yes, used by networks, and could certainly show shenanigans with the media. However, county and state voting data is not a live stream from the machines to a 3rd party.

5
handpeople 5 points ago +5 / -0

Bet a bunch of people in Pakistan and India were hired as their data entry labor.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

Spoiler Alert, the Edison data is not going to court. Hate to play devils advocate, but it doesnt mean shit.

3
handpeople 3 points ago +3 / -0

Its all based on edison research data, a data feed, we have no idea why the votes were off, we know they are not official, its really not much different than a polling company. Its not connected to states or counties or anything like that, we dont know if they use smoothing to as a service to make live data feeds additive, and there are probably 100's of people in India entering the data. IMO, fruit of the poisonous tree.

3
handpeople 3 points ago +3 / -0

More importantly, need to seriously vet the veracity of finding votes flipping from non-official data coming from a non governmental for profit data feed company. It could all be explained away in one press release by the company.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

No, this is definitely the biggest fucking deal in the history of American politics in terms of scale and repercussions.

3
handpeople 3 points ago +3 / -0

I just hope Giuliani knows this first hand and is not relying on twitter feedback loop.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

who got it from another "reliable source". Seems like feedback loop.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

How do we know this is an actual poll worker though?

3
handpeople 3 points ago +3 / -0

Its not a matter of not being able to do this. We could have done this in the 1970's. Its a matter of not wanting to.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why does it get more complicated, then Antifa counting the votes and putting cardboard on the windows? Everything else that we have learned is just gravy. When they say no proof... THATS THE FUCKING PROOF. That is where it all ends. Say it loud and repeat... YOU KICKED OUT THE GOP OBSERVERS AND COVERED THE FUCKING WINDOWS = FRAUD!!!!

3
handpeople 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, you are not. These same judges ruled in favor of these laws which obviously allowed fraud (many at the last minute). GOP took them to the same judges, and lost. Only at SCOTUS level, maybe in MI is there a chance they rule in Trump's favor. These judges already fucked us on the same issue, thats all I am saying.

0
handpeople 0 points ago +1 / -1

I actually trust her. One of the few people I trust. Its beyond obvious. They only sought to overturn presidency in GA because they did not get buy in downballot. They did not want to fend off lawsuits in the house and senate.

5
handpeople 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yes very true. Good news... NSA has the data. Bad news... NSA has the data.

3
handpeople 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, nothing is lost. It ends up in the courts. So many things could happen, that all states may be in play.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

One actual spark of encouragement about all this, we have effectively a dry run on the way SCOTUS would rule on extensions. We had a 4-4 tie which threw it back to the lower court where the extension stood as lawful. SCOTUS later promised a formal review with a full court only 2 days after ACB was sworn in. So we have 4 SCOTUS judges that wanted to rule on this before election day, and its a strong indicator of how they might rule on extensions in general. It would hinge on ACB in such a case. This would rip the entire election away from Joe. Not sure where its going, but it is actual solid material red meat that we have to date.

4
handpeople 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think they can take however long they want to count. Root of problem is extension. Once you know how many votes you need, how are we then to ever trust an election again? Hypothetical question, a candidate wins by 2 votes on election day, does anyone think they will not "receive" enough votes during the extension to overturn this? Its irrational to think this could be fair, all we are arguing about is number (2 vs 200K). On top of it, PA courts threw out requirement for postmark date, ruling a vote is automatically determined to be on time unless there is direct evidence pointing to the fact it is not.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Depends, we get very little news actually. Could be observers who check signatures against voter rolls, check eligibility to vote, voter registration info. I am not aware as to whether or not they will have observers. If not, you are right, same fake number will be tabulated again.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›