Arizona Election Audit

#5,451
#5,451
mrMet said:
Can somebody confirm or deny my question about there being over 16,000 duplicate ballots in the audit?
Click to expand...
The WSJ explained it. They counted it as duplicate every time a Mr. Jones voted with the same birth year. The states audit checked addresses and names . The ninjas did not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Septic, clarksvol00, AshG and 3 others
#5,453
#5,453
Orangeslice13 said:
You got a link?
Click to expand...
I can't find anything to the full report. However, I've been reading what is out there, and I've seen nothing which references separate totals which account for provable fraud. I tend to think that such figures would be noteworthy from this report.... I also don't think that's an avenue that the Ninjas have wanted to go down. They want to imply that fraud may have occurred, but they are not interested in having to prove that it did occur.
 
#5,454
#5,454
BowlBrother85 said:
I can't find anything to the full report. However, I've been reading what is out there, and I've seen nothing which references separate totals which account for provable fraud. I tend to think that such figures would be noteworthy from this report.... I also don't think that's an avenue that the Ninjas have wanted to go down. They want to imply that fraud may have occurred, but they are not interested in having to prove that it did occur.
Click to expand...

Without the full report there’s no methodology and no context.
Both sides are throwing out parts without context and claims that may or may not be true.
We will see. This is likely the muller report all over again but we will see.

Edit: an audit doesn’t seek to prove anything. The audit lists what happened.
 
#5,455
#5,455
volfanhill said:
The WSJ explained it. They counted it as duplicate every time a Mr. Jones voted with the same birth year. The states audit checked addresses and names . The ninjas did not.
Click to expand...

This is just a shenanigan to keep the die hard Trump supporters / far righters fired up. It's becoming more and more apparent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic, volfanhill and AshG
#5,456
#5,456
BowlBrother85 said:
No, you really didn't. There was no separate tally for fraudulent items, Short Bus.
Click to expand...

Starting to think that you and lost sheep may be the same.

You have almost the same syntax and do the whole , insert stupid insult name like short bus or child or boy etc.

Just find it odd.
 
#5,458
#5,458
NEO said:
Starting to think that you and lost sheep may be the same.

You have almost the same syntax and do the whole , insert stupid insult name like short bus or child or boy etc.

Just find it odd.
Click to expand...
Because I did it once? When addressing a poster who frequently refers to me by stupid insult names? Okay.
 
#5,459
#5,459
BowlBrother85 said:
Because I did it once? When addressing a poster who frequently refers to me by stupid insult names? Okay.
Click to expand...

I am not saying you are or insulting you.

Not intending to at least.

Lost sheep could be a troll account of yours that you purposely dumb yourself down on and just try to annoy people.

It just caught my attention is all.
 
#5,461
#5,461
Orangeslice13 said:
Without the full report there’s no methodology and no context.
Both sides are throwing out parts without context and claims that may or may not be true.
We will see. This is likely the muller report all over again but we will see.

Edit: an audit doesn’t seek to prove anything. The audit lists what happened.
Click to expand...
This isn't a typical audit. This is a high profile audit of a Presidential Election. If the Cyber Ninjas were to state that voter fraud on a widespread scale had occurred, they know that they would be expected to explain their rationale.
 
#5,463
#5,463
BowlBrother85 said:
This isn't a typical audit. This is a high profile audit of a Presidential Election. If the Cyber Ninjas were to state that voter fraud on a widespread scale had occurred, they know that they would be expected to prove it.
Click to expand...
High profile doesn’t change the necessity to operate with in an expected framework. If anything it increases the need.
Again…..let’s see the report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#5,464
#5,464
NEO said:
Fraud happened. It happens every election in some aspect.

It is just to what degree and did it actually change an outcome.
Click to expand...
That’s just it.
Even if widespread fraud is proven it doesn’t change anything. The EC elected the president not the popular vote. The only thing the audit would prove is the need to tighten up election security.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol, AM64 and whodeycin85
#5,465
#5,465
Orangeslice13 said:
That’s just it.
Even if widespread fraud is proven it doesn’t change anything. The EC elected the president not the popular vote. The only thing the audit would prove is the need to tighten up election security.
Click to expand...

This is honestly out of my knowledge realm.

I would think if a state sent electoral votes that were suddenly decertified it would remove those votes from the EC count but I am totally going by what I think is the rational thing and honestly don’t know what would be constitutional.

This I believe would be argued at the state level and then if not agreed to head to the SC to either be reviewed or left standing based on the states ruling.

I do know that if enough fraud was found that it clearly showed the EC votes were given to the wrong person then we have a major problem and it could destabilize our entire democracy.

You will have a large enough bulk of states whose population will no longer consider the system honest and will also not view the current presidency as legitimate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#5,466
#5,466
Orangeslice13 said:
That’s just it.
Even if widespread fraud is proven it doesn’t change anything. The EC elected the president not the popular vote. The only thing the audit would prove is the need to tighten up election security.
Click to expand...
Or give states cover to pass a law allowing state legislatures to decide who the electors should be if there are "questions" about the results.

Yeah. Thats right, I'm the new Q.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#5,467
#5,467
clarksvol00 said:
Or give states cover to pass a law allowing state legislatures to decide who the electors should be if there are "questions" about the results.

Yeah. Thats right, I'm the new Q.
Click to expand...
The audit would be irrelevant to that. States should decide on and update their process as the see fit. I still take issue with some states operating outside their own laws and constitution for this election but that’s up to the people of those states to resolve.
 
#5,470
#5,470
Orangeslice13 said:
The audit would be irrelevant to that. States should decide on and update their process as the see fit. I still take issue with some states operating outside their own laws and constitution for this election but that’s up to the people of those states to resolve.
Click to expand...
That's naive. There currently are Republican-controlled state legislatures pushing for more of these Cyber Ninjas-style audits so they can justify taking more control over the selection of electors. It's a very transparent attempt to circumvent the popular vote.
 
#5,472
#5,472
AshG said:
It will be up to the legislature how to proceed on that front.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that we should be OK with someone benefitting from fraudulent acts if legislators waffle? Granted there is a difference in stealing a ballot and stealing from a bank, but a bank thief doesn't get to keep the money. I can't figure out why violent crime is a no go, but white collar crime is negotiable even when it can destroy lives as surely as a violent crime.
 
#5,473
#5,473
Orangeslice13 said:
The audit would be irrelevant to that. States should decide on and update their process as the see fit. I still take issue with some states operating outside their own laws and constitution for this election but that’s up to the people of those states to resolve.
Click to expand...

In the world of my hypothetical conspiracy theory, the audit is pretext for state legislatures to pass laws allowing them to overturn the state popular vote. "We think as a majority of state representatives that there are irregularities based on whatever, so we, as the elected assembly of various gerrymandered regions, should choose the electors ourselves."

Edit: that part about gerrymandering goes for red and blue states by the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#5,474
#5,474
clarksvol00 said:
the audit is pretext for state legislatures to pass laws allowing them to overturn the state popular vote.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The audit is not only relevant to this goal. It is an essential feature. That is why we will see even more of them in states where an audit doesn't seem necessary... Texas? Hello?
 
#5,475
#5,475
Hunerwadel said:
Who audits the auditors?
Click to expand...

The FBI ultimately or the DOJ? Don't worry; the bureaucrats are in control, and they won't be found in the wrong. Remember all those heads rolling from the Russia probe and the funky FISA stuff? Don't worry, neither do the rest of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top