Who do you tip to win the US presidential election

[Kidlicious]

Do you find that educational?

[Ming]

So I need to start posting stuff from Websters for you?

[Kidlicious]

Whatever you want to do. I don't have any other comment on my post.

[Ming]

I'm more concerned about the GOING IN BIAS of the expert that's going to be looking.
Will he be neutral
Expecting Vote Fraud so stretching anything to fit the premise
Expecting No Vote Fraud and willing to overlook things...
So if it's a Trump Guy, I would question what they find and would like somebody else to review it.

Because we all know how all of Trumps EXPERT witnesses have done so far... laughed out of court.

[Proteus_MST]

"The number of ballots cast is not necessarily going to match up exactly with the number of all the voters who voted, Murren said. Still, the number of ballots on the state's website should be considered a rough estimate of the number of people who voted, she said.

"We have to keep in mind those people whose ballots were cast and not counted," she added. "That's going to be one of the differences. And there are people who cast a ballot and don't vote—not a lot, but it happens.""

This is not surprising ... especially republicans usually are very eager weith throwing bllots out thsat have been cast.
Just remember Trumps attempts at throwing all the ballots out thzat had been cast via mail

[Kidlicious]

This is not surprising ... especially republicans usually are very eager weith throwing bllots out thsat have been cast.
Just remember Trumps attempts at throwing all the ballots out thzat had been cast via mail

I think they need to say what is going on. They need to actually explain the difference. This is totally unacceptable. If you work for a private company you have to account for everything. You have to show your employer immediately where all the assets are.

[Proteus_MST]

I think they need to say what is going on. They need to actually explain the difference. This is totally unacceptable. If you work for a private company you have to account for everything. You have to show your employer immediately where all the assets are.

Depends on what´s the reason for casting out ballots.

Example:
A person made 2 crosses (except for the alloweded one) in his ballot ... this ballot would be cast out ... and rightly so ... after all is would violate voting rule.
But nevertheless I guess this ballot would copunt towards the number of ballots cast.

But I agree that attempts at casting out valid ballots just because of alleged conspiracy theories, like Trumpts attamepts to disqualify cast votes for early voting or vote via mail are totally unacceptable. Fortunately these attempts have been stopped by the judges in the states that were targeted by Trump.

[Kidlicious]

Depends on what´s the reason for casting out ballots.

Example:
A person made 2 crosses (except for the alloweded one) in his ballot ... this ballot would be cast out ... and rightly so ... after all is would violate voting rule.
But nevertheless I guess this ballot would copunt towards the number of ballots cast.

But I agree that attempts at casting out valid ballots just because of alleged conspiracy theories, like Trumpts attamepts to disqualify cast votes for early voting or vote via mail are totally unacceptable. Fortunately these attempts have been stopped by the judges in the states that were targeted by Trump.

Maybe you didn't understand my point. They need to say how many ballots have been thrown out for legitimate reasons. And they need to have those ballots available to be verified. They can't just say the numbers could be off because some ballots might be soiled. That's horrible and whoever is running that is suspected of fraud. You don't run things like that unless you are cheating.

[Proteus_MST]

Maybe you didn't understand my point. They need to say how many ballots have been thrown out for legitimate reasons. And they need to have those ballots available to be verified. They can't just say the numbers could be off because some ballots might be soiled. That's horrible and whoever is running that is suspected of fraud. You don't run things like that unless you are cheating.

I agree with this.
But my understanding is, that actually those ballots were available for recount and validation, up till the date when the electoral college convened and determined the president elect. Which, after all, was more than 1 month after voting. Ample time in order to bring any doubts with the election process to court and do multiple recounts (something that AFAIK had been done in multiple states ... AFAIK in Georgia even 2-3 times)

[Jon Miller]

First that is not fraud. Second, they understand the possible associated errors and have even looked at them in some jurisdictions in Wisconsin for this election I believe ( might be another state ). The counts can possible change by a couple hundred ( based on the numbers ). This is not enough to change the result.

they don’t automatically do such audits because it costs money they don’t have

JM

[Jon Miller]

That's right, Georgia did a hand recount for their 2nd or 3rd recount.

They can do another one, it is useful information for future elections. But it doesn't impact this one. Just like the later recount that had Gore ahead of Bush didn't impact the election of 2000 because the relevant count was the one that existed on December 8 (or their day that was the same as our December 8).

You could probably have given Florida a couple of more days, but not past December 14.

JM
(I think that Gore was not ahead by December 14, but sometime later, after a more complete recount)

[Jon Miller]

I find it both hilarious and scary that many Republicans are now arguing that Gore was just a chump for not refusing to count Florida's votes for Bush and instead counting some alternative set of votes in January of 2001. They believe he had that option and that it is right for him to have had that option.

JM
(unlike for Trump, Gore was within 2000 votes in one state and had reason to believe that a complete recount would have showed him ahead with the win)

[Kidlicious]

I agree with this.
But my understanding is, that actually those ballots were available for recount and validation, up till the date when the electoral college convened and determined the president elect. Which, after all, was more than 1 month after voting. Ample time in order to bring any doubts with the election process to court and do multiple recounts (something that AFAIK had been done in multiple states ... AFAIK in Georgia even 2-3 times)

The voter histories are not complete.

"But Murren in her statement and in interviews with Just the News revealed that, even as the year comes to a close nearly two months after the election itself, the state is still ultimately not in possession of the exact number of voters who cast a ballot in Pennsylvania this year. "

So no one has all the information needed to know if the election was done fairly and without fraud. That's why she isn't giving exact numbers. This is bad because it gives people reason to rightfully suspect fraud.

Now we have dueling electors in all of the contested states. Congress must now decide which electors should count. I'm not saying that Trump has a good chance but this is all besides the point. The important issue here is that this whole thing is horrible government and Biden can not be legitimate.

[Jon Miller]

There isn't dueling electors. There is one set that has been signed off by the secretary of state's and the governors to have followed the rules.

You have a group of people who lost and lost by a lot who are being seditious. It is not Biden or anyone form Biden's camp.

JM

[Kidlicious]

First that is not fraud. Second, they understand the possible associated errors and have even looked at them in some jurisdictions in Wisconsin for this election I believe ( might be another state ). The counts can possible change by a couple hundred ( based on the numbers ). This is not enough to change the result.

they don’t automatically do such audits because it costs money they don’t have

JM

I didn't say it was fraud. I claimed that they should be suspected of fraud because the system should be set up and executed so that people know who won, and no people do not know that Biden won. You're just saying that you trust the election officials despite the fact that there is reason to suspect them.