They were always allowed to. The problem is now the deep state is allowed to join in.

Biggest cheer leader for the Iraq war

Watermarked ballots are nonsense, but blockchain is a technology that could be applied to support secure online voting with verifiable, auditable results available in realtime. It could also support additional features like being able to vote early and change your vote up to election day, so we wouldn't have to pretend to trust polls.

Tbf how much credence would anyone give a scientific study written in crayon!

I guarantee it's not the last time.

I watched his recent video about unfortunate truths about the us voting system. I'm an engineer at a big company and do analysis of our software to understand the edge cases that are only present at very large scale. I create visualizations of data all the time to see patterns in the statistics. His presentation had several problems.

1. He makes hypothesis about the relationship between the % of vote for Trump in straight party vote and % vote for Trump in individual candidate votes. It's that if you look at a set of precincts, the greater % of straight Republican vote, the % of individual votes for Trump there should be. If you make a scatter plot of precincts in a chart with x as straight ticket % and y as individual candidate % the points should follow an upward slope. Actually, he assumes and implies it should be 45% upward. It's the hypothesis, but it's counter intuitive to me because id expect the % of individual votes to be the same regardless of what % voted straight ticket. Maybe it should even decrease - in a Democrat area expect Trump votes to be just for candidate, in more Republican areas those votes trend toward straight ticket.

2. He plots the data in a needlessly complicated way that makes it more difficult to discern a pattern, let alone one that supports his hypothesis. Instead of just plotting the data and seeing how close to 45% the plot tracks, he does a subtraction that would make it track the x axis if his hypothesis were true. Essentially he's rotating the graph clockwise. Surprise, doing this transformation made the plot track a downward slope.

3. He shows plots for 4 counties and they "detected an algorithm" 3. There is clearly a huge difference in one, a smoking gun for fraud. But if you look carefully at this plot you can see it was created with a different methodology than the other ones. There are points that cannot exist. There is a point at (4, -20) which would indicate Trump got -16% of the individual candidate vote, a nonsense number. So we can't even take the difference in this fourth county as any kind of evidence because it isn't created with the same methodology as the other, or the underlying data is erroneous.

4. If I had his data set I could do an analysis to detect the type of fraud he claims he found evidence of, but he doesn't provide the data set and hasn't responded to my feedback/requests.

So to summarize I think his presentation is so flawed that it can't provide evidence of fraud. It was a great video and I agree with all of the sentiments, but I think it's a flawed hypothesis, he uses the wrong methodology to try to prove it, and doesn't even apply his own methodology correctly.

No, it's thousands

Says who, public key encryption?

I just hope they have actual evidence that a decent portion of lefties will be able to accept.

What is it? Thanks for letting me know there's a new Fleccas

They'd also start wars that kill millions of people. Manufacturing a novel virus that only kills sick and old people but can be used to change the rules of an election to make it easier to steal is basically a stroll in the park to them.

Literally a random tweet. Just because someone else retweeted it doesn't make it true.

Last I heard from other random tweet it was black hats who got the servers.

Also drug use, alcohol included

Don't dems control Congress?

And voting for someone else. Don't forget all these games we see in the national level with Trump and biden previously only played out in the primaries. Media has been picking the candidates for decades.

All the real news quotes scriptures in the first paragraph.

I was chatting with an old friend of mine the other day. He said Trump supporters need to stop being so violent, that banging on cars was not okay. This was after two Trump supporters were murdered in the street.

Does anyone have sources for the facts the "reporter" disputed? I guess I'm asking for a fact check. My understanding is counting stopped in the contested states, but then resumed after observers left.

More hopium

Roosevelt knew ahead of time and key let it happen for justification to enter the war

Yeah they had to wait until after the election to make an announcement. Open the h flood gates, the walls are closing in.

I found a lot of issues with Dr. Shiva's presentation. I'd love to get the underlying data to investigate myself.

Basically they show a scatter plot of data from three counties and try to draw some conclusions from it. The way they construct the scatter plot is odd, needlessly complicated. There's no need to do subtraction to see the features they're looking for, and doing so actually makes them harder to detect with human eyes. They were looking for a downward slope and then made their scatter plot follow the line y=-x. Of course they're gonna find a downward slope on that line! Just plot the data normally and you don't have to discern if the downward slope is in the data or in your presentation of it.

They do compare it to one other county and there is obviously a mistake in their plot of what "no algorithm detected" looks like from that one county. There are points on it that can't exist given their methodology. One example: There's a point at (4, -20), which would mean Trump got -16% of the individual candidate vote. There are also a ton of points at x=0 which would mean multiple precincts with zero % straight ticket Republican. Honestly their "normal" county is much more suspicious.

The fact that both these issues exist in the presentation raises huge questions for be about their competence and honesty.

There's a giant toolbox, of which actually changing votes is just a roll of duct tape.

Hopefully it takes down some rhinos too.

Yes his plan to drain the swamp was to wait for years and then make it look like he lost an election. It's brilliant.

They choose truth over facts