2020 Presidential Race

#98,237
#98,237
Vol8188 said:
Can anyone explain to me how Georgia went from 6% of mail in ballots being rejected in 2016 to 0.35% this year?

The low reject rates in states like PA and GA seem to be suspicious to me

I’m genuinely curious if there’s a reasonable explanation for this.
Click to expand...
There is. The explanation is it isn’t true.

Link
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#98,239
#98,239
Vol8188 said:
If you keep reading it shows the exact numbers I’m talking about later in the article. The over 6% number for 2016 but it does not provide one for 2020
Click to expand...
Because the number isn’t available. The people making this claim were intentionally or unwittingly sharing bad information.
 
#98,240
#98,240
tvolsfan said:
Because the number isn’t available. The people making this claim were intentionally or unwittingly sharing bad information.
Click to expand...

That article is from December 4th. At this point we should know that info right? I accept this isn’t an original source but the previous numbers seem to be in line.

If that is correct and it went from over 6% in the last presidential election to under 1%, would you agree that’s suspicious?


Election results, 2020: Analysis of rejected ballots - Ballotpedia
 
#98,241
#98,241
Vol8188 said:
That article is from December 4th. At this point we should know that info right? I accept this isn’t an original source but the previous numbers seem to be in line.

If that is correct and it went from over 6% in the last presidential election to under 1%, would you agree that’s suspicious?


Election results, 2020: Analysis of rejected ballots - Ballotpedia
Click to expand...
I actually did just look at that same site after posting that link. If you check the source cited for 2016, it’s not the same as the one cited for 2020. The number Georgia’s Secretary of State cites are 2.9 in 2016, 3.5 in 2018, and the information is not yet available for 2020 (neither are the EAC figures, by the way).
 
#98,242
#98,242
tvolsfan said:
I actually did just look at that same site after posting that link. If you check the source cited for 2016, it’s not the same as the one cited for 2020. The number Georgia’s Secretary of State cites are 2.9 in 2016, 3.5 in 2018, and the information is not yet available for 2020 (neither are the EAC figures, by the way).
Click to expand...

Those aren’t the numbers anyone is talking about. Which is why it’s so odd the fact checkers keep talking about it. Intentionally misleading. That’s what’s so weird about your “fact checkers” they actually quote the source I sent you and provide the same figures. The only difference is your fact check was from December and these numbers are from January.

So it would seem your fact checkers agree with this site. They cited it. They even called it nonpartisan. 066FD174-DB90-487A-B85B-DE15641EE9C3.jpeg
 
#98,243
#98,243
Vol8188 said:
Those aren’t the numbers anyone is talking about. Which is why it’s so odd the fact checkers keep talking about it. Intentionally misleading. That’s what’s so weird about your “fact checkers” they actually quote the source I sent you and provide the same figures. The only difference is your fact check was from December and these numbers are from January.

So it would seem your fact checkers agree with this site. They cited it. They even called it nonpartisan. View attachment 338384
Click to expand...
Ballotpedia itself acknowledged the discrepancy with their 2016 numbers. You can see it when you click the source. The EAC numbers and Georgia SOS numbers do not match for 2016 or 2018. Neither have numbers available for 2020.
 
#98,244
#98,244
tvolsfan said:
Ballotpedia itself acknowledged the discrepancy with their 2016 numbers. You can see it when you click the source. The EAC numbers and Georgia SOS numbers do not match for 2016 or 2018. Neither have numbers available for 2020.
Click to expand...

That alone seems odd. It’s been almost two months and they still don’t have numbers?

Also if there’s an issue with the source your fact checkers used, wouldn’t they acknowledge that in their “fact checking”.

Feel free to screenshot what you’re talking about but it seems to me that they intentionally mislead people about a different number. The 6% and roughly 4% seem to be valid numbers from those elections and then they restricted it in their fact checking to only those with signature issues instead of all rejections.

Even NPR has posted about the dramatic decline in mail in rejections
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, IBlvNTmWrk and Orangeslice13
#98,245
#98,245
Vol8188 said:
That alone seems odd. It’s been almost two months and they still don’t have numbers?

Also if there’s an issue with the source your fact checkers used, wouldn’t they acknowledge that in their “fact checking”.

Feel free to screenshot what you’re talking about but it seems to me that they intentionally mislead people about a different number. The 6% and roughly 4% seem to be valid numbers from those elections and then they restricted it in their fact checking to only those with signature issues instead of all rejections
Click to expand...

The EAC (who provided the 6 percent figure) won’t have numbers for a while, I believe. It looks like the 2016 and 2018 numbers were both published the following year to the new Congress.
 
#98,246
#98,246
tvolsfan said:
The EAC (who provided the 6 percent figure) won’t have numbers for a while.
Click to expand...

Yet ballotpedia still provides a projection of less than 1%. 0.35% to be exact.

It also doesn’t seem like a number that would be that hard to get. How many did you throw out? How many did you accept? Now divide. I don’t understand why almost 2 months later we are pretending that’s unattainable
 
#98,247
#98,247
Vol8188 said:
Yet ballotpedia still provides a projection of less than 1%. 0.35% to be exact.

It also doesn’t seem like a number that would be that hard to get. How many did you throw out? How many did you accept? Now divide. I don’t understand why almost 2 months later we are pretending that’s unattainable
Click to expand...
They aren’t pretending. They’re hiding it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, hog88, StarRaider and 2 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top