2020 Presidential Race

[TheColdVolTruth]

I don't suppose they noticed the same stack of ballots being scanned THREE times.

Since the lead investigator is said to have reviewed all the video and found no evidence of wrong doing, I would suppose they didn't see anyone tabulating the same stack of ballots into the count three times.

 

[Orangeburst]

There's nothing in that mess that looks like things were managed efficiently or legitimately. No sign of organized workflow. Boxes and trays of ballots in what appears to be random order. You'd expect uncounted ballots to be stacked in one area, tabulated ballots clearly in another, and every batch run through the tabulator watched by both the operator and an independent monitor. Just no excuse for the apparent lack of organization and oversight - sloppy beyond comprehension.

I think you missed the context. Just a day at the office by the lady to tabulate the MIB's, but no address on the screenshot of the USPS bin ballot

 

[***RoadVol***]

I hear what you're saying. I have see two options at this point. 1) Someone directly involved with the fraud is flipped and takes a deal and/or 2) The SCOTUS rules in Trump's favor in one or more of these states.

3. There was no fraud.

 

[AM64]

I think you missed the context. Just a day at the office by the lady to tabulate the MIB's, but no address on the screenshot of the USPS bin ballot

I was really replying both to your post and the one above it. That particular ballot should never have been in the box to be counted, and the post above yours shows what appears to be a batch of ballots run through the tabulator three times. If the workflow was done correctly, the ballot wouldn't be in the box and somebody would have called foul on the apparent recounts and supposedly on a ballot(s) with no return address. Whether it was fraudulent or just lazy is hard to say, but the whole process and lack of organization and oversight is appalling. No excuse for incompetence that allows fraudulent or slothful "work".

 

[TechnoVol]

There a lot of information presented through this series of tweets.

 

[Orangeburst]

I was really replying both to your post and the one above it. That particular ballot should never have been in the box to be counted, and the post above yours shows what appears to be a batch of ballots run through the tabulator three times. If the workflow was done correctly, the ballot wouldn't be in the box and somebody would have called foul on the apparent recounts and supposedly on a ballot(s) with no return address. Whether it was fraudulent or just lazy is hard to say, but the whole process and lack of organization and oversight is appalling. No excuse for incompetence that allows fraudulent or slothful "work".

I did not see that until now.

I tell you what, this all better be held accountable.

 

[TechnoVol]

 

[OHvol40]

You heart Kyle Becker.

 

[AM64]

There a lot of information presented through this series of tweets.

I'd really like to know what the negative numbers in the "NEW TRUMP" column mean. I get how the negative lead could show that one person lags the other by using a negative number. Negatives in any other column just don't make sense - we don't have negative votes.

 

[Orangeslice13]

I'd really like to know what the negative numbers in the "NEW TRUMP" column mean. I get how the negative lead could show that one person lags the other by using a negative number. Negatives in any other column just don't make sense - we don't have negative votes.

I keep asking that and so far nobody has an answer.
In fact the number crunchers I know say there’s a problem.

 

[AM64]

I keep asking that and so far nobody has an answer.
In fact the number crunchers I know say there’s a problem.

I tried adding and subtracting in the other columns - there's just nothing about those numbers that make sense.

 

[Orangeburst]

I'd really like to know what the negative numbers in the "NEW TRUMP" column mean. I get how the negative lead could show that one person lags the other by using a negative number. Negatives in any other column just don't make sense - we don't have negative votes.

We had this convo a few weeks ago and had some message com issues. I cannot remember but it came across as projective vs actual vote tab.

 

[Orangeburst]

I tried adding and subtracting in the other columns - there's just nothing about those numbers that make sense.

All Trump neg is enough to attract my attention for such closely contested

 

[AM64]

We had this convo a few weeks ago and had some message com issues. I cannot remember but it came across as projective vs actual vote tab.

Maybe it's the new "new math" that people are having problems with in helping kids. like when 658*14 didn't require 23 lines of calculation to get the answer.

 

[TechnoVol]

I tried adding and subtracting in the other columns - there's just nothing about those numbers that make sense.

They don't make sense because the negative numbers represent votes that were removed from Trump's total. I looked at the raw vote data from the New York Times website and posted about it very early on in this thread after the election. The raw data actually showed votes for Trump disappearing between updates.

 

[Orangeburst]

Maybe it's the new "new math" that people are having problems with in helping kids. like when 658*14 didn't require 23 lines of calculation to get the answer.

Interesting.
To calculate, I would:

6580 +2400+232

 

[BenGrimm]

You heart Kyle Becker.

No clue who he is but based on all the tweets shared on this board I’m quickly learning he is one of the worst bad faith offenders on Twitter.

 

[AM64]

They don't make sense because the negative numbers represent votes that were removed from Trump's total. I looked at the raw vote data from the New York Times website and posted about it very early on in this thread after the election. The raw data actually showed votes for Trump disappearing between updates.

The weird thing is in the first couple of lines if you add the "NEW TRUMP" and "NEW BIDEN" to the Trump and Biden totals, they add up. After that it goes nuts. I saw this a few days ago, and it didn't makes sense then, but I thought perhaps there was some logic behind it all that I was just missing. Looking again it's simply crazy.

 

[AM64]

Interesting.
To calculate, I would:

6580 +2400+232

It works - don't know how you do it that way. We would simply have done 6580 + 2632. And actually would have just shifted the 658 left once to indicate you multiplied by 10 and added the 2632.

 

[Orangeburst]

It works - don't know how you do it that way. We would simply have done 6580 + 2632. And actually would have just shifted the 658 left once to indicate you multiplied by 10 and added the 2632.

I dont follow, but have had a couple. But not 23 yet..lol.

Will reevaulate in a better state. I am three step and you are 2 step. Game changer

 

[TechnoVol]

 

[AM64]

Interesting. They did it all wrong, but "they didn't do anything wrong".

 

[TechnoVol]

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

 

[AM64]

Dims: the party motto "It doesn't matter how you do it, just get it done."