Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:00 pm
Judge: "Rudy, do the pants thing, do the pants thing!"
Octopus Overlords
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/
Election integrity and the transfer of power
Page 38 of 137
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:03 pm
I wonder if Rudy has won the election for Trump yet? Apparently his initial filing has licenses that are expired and or don't exist so that's a good start. Sometimes I think this is a big joke and we're all going to be amazed by the punchline.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:06 pm
Speaking of con men... (thread)
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:08 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:19 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:20 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:23 pm
I know we're all waiting to hear about Rudy tucking his shirt in, but look at this:
"A staffer for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger said Tuesday that he participated in a controversial phone call with Sen. Lindsey Graham and said he heard Graham ask if state officials could throw out ballots."
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:30 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:45 pm
Man, if you told me before the election that we'd be counting on the integrity of GA's Republican SoS for part of the outcome, I'd have said that we were fucked.Smoove_B wrote: ↑Tue Nov 17, 2020 3:23 pm I know we're all waiting to hear about Rudy tucking his shirt in, but look at this:
"A staffer for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger said Tuesday that he participated in a controversial phone call with Sen. Lindsey Graham and said he heard Graham ask if state officials could throw out ballots."
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:11 pm
Apparently there are tech issues and the hearing is paused. There were 8,000 people on the line when it dropped.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:16 pm
No wonder Agolf hasn't tweeted yet today. He is waiting for Rudy's triumphant march from the courthouse (after the case is dismissed) in order to claim, SO MUCH WINNING! TOTAL FRAUD PROVEN!
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:19 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:27 pm
Nice. I pity the kids who don't know what you are talking about.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:19 pmAndy Kaufman still has 2 months to tear off the Trump mask and laugh in our faces.
"I'll fight any woman here!"
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 4:39 pm
Kaufman popping out would be more believable than this crap. I do get joy out of the fact that I honestly think Trump goes into these cases thinking he's going to win. 
I said this to my wife this week. Trump saw this presidency as his ultimate shot to show how amazing and great he is. And he didn't only not accomplish it he had people CHEERING in other countries to his failure. For a person that cares so much about what people think about him this is devastating more than anyone can probably even imagine. I legit think he should be on suicide watch. And have the nuclear codes changed like someone said. I wouldn't be surprised to see him toss a nuke at China because they made him look bad. How many days left?
I said this to my wife this week. Trump saw this presidency as his ultimate shot to show how amazing and great he is. And he didn't only not accomplish it he had people CHEERING in other countries to his failure. For a person that cares so much about what people think about him this is devastating more than anyone can probably even imagine. I legit think he should be on suicide watch. And have the nuclear codes changed like someone said. I wouldn't be surprised to see him toss a nuke at China because they made him look bad. How many days left?
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 5:10 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 6:00 pm
His new defense is that in Canada they don't use voting machines. It's brilliant! 4D chess in action!
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 8:04 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 9:33 pm
A third GA county found another "pack" of votes. This is a lot of finding for a recount based on how close the election was - not based on allegations of mishandled ballots. I'm afraid that this outcome could effect other court cases - "Look how many thousands of votes were just laying around in GA before we looked for then, Your Honor".
I also just read that IN Wanyne County, MI they can't balance the poll books to the vote tallies. They are (so far) refusing to certify along party lines.
I don't know MI rules but where I'm from the state can ignore this and certify anyway.
I also just read that IN Wanyne County, MI they can't balance the poll books to the vote tallies. They are (so far) refusing to certify along party lines.
I don't know MI rules but where I'm from the state can ignore this and certify anyway.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:47 pm
Trump was tweeting out celebration about this and Hannity and McEnany were whooping and hollering when the deadlock was broken and the vote was certified. More later but they took a shot at trying to swing Michigan outside the court system.
Edit: Here is a video of Ned Staedbler from the Board of Canvasser's eviscerating the two Republican board members for trying these shenanigans. It is in the middle of the discussion so it might take a second to get oriented but he essentially lays out the case that their decision here was ... biased ... and deviated from previous decisions they took as a board. Heck he compared them to Bull Connor!
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:30 am
Wayne County certificated (as noted above) with 28% of the ballots not reconciled to the books - a practice that happens in that country normally.
I read that the 2 democrats both doxXed (on social media) and threatened (on camera) the 2 republicans to the point of were a case for coercion could be made by any garden variety local solicitor. We need to avoid this kind of unforced error if we want this election result to stand. SCOTUS does not need to see zoom videos of local level party folks calling each other racist for wanting to balance the books.
When my shift at Greasy's Burger Shoppe is over I have to balance my register till with the POS take. If I'm off - we need to take notice of it BEFORE we make the bank deposit so we don't try to put money in the bank that we don't have in the bag. How much more important is one vote than one dollar? How long would I keep my job (3rd shift Assistant Submanager) if was off by 25%, 28%, etc shift after shift? At least at Greasy's the bank will sum up the deposit again. I'm not sure that anyone at the state level has access to the logs at all to balance back to anything.
Yes, Wayne County certified but it looks like a castle build on sand that Sidney Powell could kick over without even pausing as she storms up the shingle in her $800 heels. People are paying so much attention to Trump snorting and yelling that are they running right off the cliff into his trap of a hasty and improperly reconciled election total. Wayne County needed to be a bulwark of accountability and accuracy, instead it appears that we gave Trump video proof of strong-arm coercion and documentation of out-of-blance numbers. The is the opposite of how we close this election down by Jan.
I read that the 2 democrats both doxXed (on social media) and threatened (on camera) the 2 republicans to the point of were a case for coercion could be made by any garden variety local solicitor. We need to avoid this kind of unforced error if we want this election result to stand. SCOTUS does not need to see zoom videos of local level party folks calling each other racist for wanting to balance the books.
When my shift at Greasy's Burger Shoppe is over I have to balance my register till with the POS take. If I'm off - we need to take notice of it BEFORE we make the bank deposit so we don't try to put money in the bank that we don't have in the bag. How much more important is one vote than one dollar? How long would I keep my job (3rd shift Assistant Submanager) if was off by 25%, 28%, etc shift after shift? At least at Greasy's the bank will sum up the deposit again. I'm not sure that anyone at the state level has access to the logs at all to balance back to anything.
Yes, Wayne County certified but it looks like a castle build on sand that Sidney Powell could kick over without even pausing as she storms up the shingle in her $800 heels. People are paying so much attention to Trump snorting and yelling that are they running right off the cliff into his trap of a hasty and improperly reconciled election total. Wayne County needed to be a bulwark of accountability and accuracy, instead it appears that we gave Trump video proof of strong-arm coercion and documentation of out-of-blance numbers. The is the opposite of how we close this election down by Jan.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:38 am
It's 28% of the precincts, not 28% of the vote.
367 votes when Trump lost by 200k is why it's ridiculous not to certify.Detroit Free Press wrote:Of Detroit's 503 Election Day precincts, 66 recorded unexplained discrepancies in the vote totals as did 94 of the city's 134 absent voter counting boards. The majority of Election Day precincts and absent voter counting boards that were not in "balance," recorded discrepancies of three votes or less. Ten Election Day precincts and 43 absent voter counting boards recorded discrepancies of four or more votes or more. The discrepancies amount to roughly 367 votes. Detroit's unofficial election results show roughly 150,000 Detroiters voted in November's election.
...
Wayne County’s unofficial election results, which were posted Nov. 5, showed former Vice-President Joe Biden received 587,074 votes — 67.99% of the votes cast for president in Wayne County — while President Donald Trump received 264,149, or 30.59%.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:46 am
"We've gotta keep this traffic flowing and accept a little sin..." - John McCreastessier wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:38 amIt's 28% of the precincts, not 28% of the vote.
367 votes when Trump lost by 200k is why it's ridiculous not to certify.Detroit Free Press wrote:Of Detroit's 503 Election Day precincts, 66 recorded unexplained discrepancies in the vote totals as did 94 of the city's 134 absent voter counting boards. The majority of Election Day precincts and absent voter counting boards that were not in "balance," recorded discrepancies of three votes or less. Ten Election Day precincts and 43 absent voter counting boards recorded discrepancies of four or more votes or more. The discrepancies amount to roughly 367 votes. Detroit's unofficial election results show roughly 150,000 Detroiters voted in November's election.
...
Wayne County’s unofficial election results, which were posted Nov. 5, showed former Vice-President Joe Biden received 587,074 votes — 67.99% of the votes cast for president in Wayne County — while President Donald Trump received 264,149, or 30.59%.
I hear what you are saying and I suspect that the DNC lawyers will begin with de minimis arguments. The problem is when the other side masses a large list of 'small' errors and then points out that in those areas that WERE audited more was found with each pass. We need to finish cold and calculating, not fast and approximate or we give Trump that large list.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:49 am
Uh, no we don't? You understand that this is totally normal, right? Like, it's impossible to process 140 million ballots and have everything reconcile. Heck, with all the tech we have now, this is probably the closest we've ever gotten to getting it right.Yojimbo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:46 am"We've gotta keep this traffic flowing and accept a little sin..." - John McCreastessier wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:38 amIt's 28% of the precincts, not 28% of the vote.
367 votes when Trump lost by 200k is why it's ridiculous not to certify.Detroit Free Press wrote:Of Detroit's 503 Election Day precincts, 66 recorded unexplained discrepancies in the vote totals as did 94 of the city's 134 absent voter counting boards. The majority of Election Day precincts and absent voter counting boards that were not in "balance," recorded discrepancies of three votes or less. Ten Election Day precincts and 43 absent voter counting boards recorded discrepancies of four or more votes or more. The discrepancies amount to roughly 367 votes. Detroit's unofficial election results show roughly 150,000 Detroiters voted in November's election.
...
Wayne County’s unofficial election results, which were posted Nov. 5, showed former Vice-President Joe Biden received 587,074 votes — 67.99% of the votes cast for president in Wayne County — while President Donald Trump received 264,149, or 30.59%.
I hear what you are saying and I suspect that the DNC lawyers will begin with de minimis arguments. The problem is when the other side masses a large list of 'small' errors and then points out that in those areas that WERE audited more was found with each pass. We need to finish cold and calculating, not fast and approximate or we give Trump that large list.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:52 am
I think you may be under the mistaken impression that it's possible to have a 100% accurate count under our current system. 367 out of 150k is a 99.8% accuracy rate. Elections are largely carried out by volunteers, under difficult circumstances, with disparate rules and systems across locations and even within locations from one election to the next. If the discrepancies are nowhere near the level it would take to cast doubt on the actual outcome, we're done here. #cavejohnsonYojimbo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:46 am"We've gotta keep this traffic flowing and accept a little sin..." - John McCreastessier wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:38 amIt's 28% of the precincts, not 28% of the vote.
367 votes when Trump lost by 200k is why it's ridiculous not to certify.Detroit Free Press wrote:Of Detroit's 503 Election Day precincts, 66 recorded unexplained discrepancies in the vote totals as did 94 of the city's 134 absent voter counting boards. The majority of Election Day precincts and absent voter counting boards that were not in "balance," recorded discrepancies of three votes or less. Ten Election Day precincts and 43 absent voter counting boards recorded discrepancies of four or more votes or more. The discrepancies amount to roughly 367 votes. Detroit's unofficial election results show roughly 150,000 Detroiters voted in November's election.
...
Wayne County’s unofficial election results, which were posted Nov. 5, showed former Vice-President Joe Biden received 587,074 votes — 67.99% of the votes cast for president in Wayne County — while President Donald Trump received 264,149, or 30.59%.
I hear what you are saying and I suspect that the DNC lawyers will begin with de minimis arguments. The problem is when the other side masses a large list of 'small' errors and then points out that in those areas that WERE audited more was found with each pass. We need to finish cold and calculating, not fast and approximate or we give Trump that large list.
Drat; stessier beat me to it.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:56 am
Trump claimed Michigan again. Damn it we were so close! Twitter really should just f'n ban his account, but I know they won't. 
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:10 pm
Part 5 (Energy)
Sun Tzu said: The control of a large force is the same principle as the control of a few men: it is merely a question of dividing up their numbers. That is, cutting up the army into regiments, companies, etc., with subordinate officers in command of each. Tu Mu reminds us of Han Hsin's famous reply to the first Han Emperor, who once said to him: "How large an army do you think I could lead?" "Not more than 100,000 men, your Majesty." "And you?" asked the Emperor. "Oh!" he answered, "the more the better."
Fighting with a large army under your command is nowise different from fighting with a small one: it is merely a question of instituting signs and signals.
What I do understand is that every large corporation in the world keeps track of millions of dollars. And yet they have audit standards that are very stringent. They use Accounts and Cost Centers to divide up responsibility into smaller and smaller groups with accountability at the local level (per Sun Tzu). When court cases happen (and they do often) approximation is not looked upon favorably. And, more importantly, the person who signed the books goes to jail in almost every case - not the CEO. I know a lady who did actual prison time because her boss told her to sign a 941 that had a few thousand dollars of improperly categorized money on it. This was out of hundreds of millions of USD. What you get used to signing off on locally and what an actual Court will consider "de minimis" are two different things. If its that hard to reconcile (as you suggest) it needs to be broken down into smaller groups with divided responsibility - until it is "manageable". I would wager when the laws were passed to do this at the county level the populations were a fraction of what they are today and it was manageable at that level in the way back when.
Its very easy for outsiders to cheer these local folks on, because (like the CEO) we are not going to prison.
Sun Tzu said: The control of a large force is the same principle as the control of a few men: it is merely a question of dividing up their numbers. That is, cutting up the army into regiments, companies, etc., with subordinate officers in command of each. Tu Mu reminds us of Han Hsin's famous reply to the first Han Emperor, who once said to him: "How large an army do you think I could lead?" "Not more than 100,000 men, your Majesty." "And you?" asked the Emperor. "Oh!" he answered, "the more the better."
Fighting with a large army under your command is nowise different from fighting with a small one: it is merely a question of instituting signs and signals.
What I do understand is that every large corporation in the world keeps track of millions of dollars. And yet they have audit standards that are very stringent. They use Accounts and Cost Centers to divide up responsibility into smaller and smaller groups with accountability at the local level (per Sun Tzu). When court cases happen (and they do often) approximation is not looked upon favorably. And, more importantly, the person who signed the books goes to jail in almost every case - not the CEO. I know a lady who did actual prison time because her boss told her to sign a 941 that had a few thousand dollars of improperly categorized money on it. This was out of hundreds of millions of USD. What you get used to signing off on locally and what an actual Court will consider "de minimis" are two different things. If its that hard to reconcile (as you suggest) it needs to be broken down into smaller groups with divided responsibility - until it is "manageable". I would wager when the laws were passed to do this at the county level the populations were a fraction of what they are today and it was manageable at that level in the way back when.
Its very easy for outsiders to cheer these local folks on, because (like the CEO) we are not going to prison.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:17 pm
Every corporation has a minimum amount that needs to be reviewed for invoices/expenses. And it's not $1.Yojimbo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:10 pm Part 5 (Energy)
Sun Tzu said: The control of a large force is the same principle as the control of a few men: it is merely a question of dividing up their numbers. That is, cutting up the army into regiments, companies, etc., with subordinate officers in command of each. Tu Mu reminds us of Han Hsin's famous reply to the first Han Emperor, who once said to him: "How large an army do you think I could lead?" "Not more than 100,000 men, your Majesty." "And you?" asked the Emperor. "Oh!" he answered, "the more the better."
Fighting with a large army under your command is nowise different from fighting with a small one: it is merely a question of instituting signs and signals.
What I do understand is that every large corporation in the world keeps track of millions of dollars. And yet they have audit standards that are very stringent. They use Accounts and Cost Centers to divide up responsibility into smaller and smaller groups with accountability at the local level (per Sun Tzu). When court cases happen (and they do often) approximation is not looked upon favorably. And, more importantly, the person who signed the books goes to jail in almost every case - not the CEO. I know a lady who did actual prison time because her boss told her to sign a 941 that had a few thousand dollars of improperly categorized money on it. This was out of hundreds of millions of USD. What you get used to signing off on locally and what an actual Court will consider "de minimis" are two different things. If its that hard to reconcile (as you suggest) it needs to be broken down into smaller groups with divided responsibility - until it is "manageable". I would wager when the laws were passed to do this at the county level the populations were a fraction of what they are today and it was manageable at that level in the way back when.
Its very easy for outsiders to cheer these local folks on, because (like the CEO) we are not going to prison.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:18 pm
Reviewed <> Balanced and Reconciled.noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:17 pm Every corporation has a minimum amount that needs to be reviewed for invoices/expenses. And it's not $1.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:19 pm
At this point I literally wouldn't be surprised if he declared he's creating a new 51st state called Trumptopia, which as it turns out carries 75 electoral votes.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:25 pm
He's just crashing symbols and banging loud drums as far as I can see. His MO is well established; bluster and braggadocious so the other guy can't make his free throw (or putt if you will).
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:31 pm
*cymbals
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:33 pm
Ok, pony up the money to make it work.Yojimbo wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:10 pm Part 5 (Energy)
Sun Tzu said: The control of a large force is the same principle as the control of a few men: it is merely a question of dividing up their numbers. That is, cutting up the army into regiments, companies, etc., with subordinate officers in command of each. Tu Mu reminds us of Han Hsin's famous reply to the first Han Emperor, who once said to him: "How large an army do you think I could lead?" "Not more than 100,000 men, your Majesty." "And you?" asked the Emperor. "Oh!" he answered, "the more the better."
Fighting with a large army under your command is nowise different from fighting with a small one: it is merely a question of instituting signs and signals.
What I do understand is that every large corporation in the world keeps track of millions of dollars. And yet they have audit standards that are very stringent. They use Accounts and Cost Centers to divide up responsibility into smaller and smaller groups with accountability at the local level (per Sun Tzu). When court cases happen (and they do often) approximation is not looked upon favorably. And, more importantly, the person who signed the books goes to jail in almost every case - not the CEO. I know a lady who did actual prison time because her boss told her to sign a 941 that had a few thousand dollars of improperly categorized money on it. This was out of hundreds of millions of USD. What you get used to signing off on locally and what an actual Court will consider "de minimis" are two different things. If its that hard to reconcile (as you suggest) it needs to be broken down into smaller groups with divided responsibility - until it is "manageable". I would wager when the laws were passed to do this at the county level the populations were a fraction of what they are today and it was manageable at that level in the way back when.
Its very easy for outsiders to cheer these local folks on, because (like the CEO) we are not going to prison.
Where I worked, ballots came in packs of 100. These were machine counted - and they were wrong about 30% of the time. Sometimes there were 99, sometimes there were 101. We had to count the pack as we opened it and have it verified by a second person. So let's say we counted this pack twice and came up with 99. Then say that we reached that count because there was a sticky ballot and there was really 100. Now say that stack was completely consumed. We are now screwed - the number of ballots opened will never match the number of ballots scanned.
This is the system the state paid for. No amount of recounting after the fact is going to fix that discrepancy - you have to pay up front to come up with a different way that CAN be reconciled. Your large corporation tracking millions spends millions tracking it with hundreds of people focused solely on that task. This is from South Carolina's Election Commission from 2016-2017
You want a more professional election, fund and staff it that way. Otherwise, this is the best we can do.Agency Funding
Critical issues continue to impact the SEC budget. A breakdown of previous budget requests and the
status of funding is listed below:
Supervise and Audit Counties
Act 196 of 2014 required the SEC to supervise the conduct of county boards of registration and elections
and conduct county compliance audits to ensure compliance with state and federal laws and agency
policies and procedures. Full funding was provided in FY2017-18.
Voter Registration System and Election Infrastrncture Security
The SEC requested $370,000 in FY2017-18 for voter registration system and election infrastructure
security, but funding was not provided. The SEC strives to remain vigilant in the protection of the
state's election infrastructure. In this quickly evolving environment, no one knows the specific threats
we may face in the coming years, but the challenges are ce1iain. Adequate funding and continued
paiinerships with state, federal and private organizations will be essential to protect South Carolina's
election infrastructure.
Poll Worker Pay Increase
In the FY2017-18 budget request, the SEC received $300,000 to provide for a poll manager increase.
Poll managers will receive an additional $15 for the day of work with the pay for training and the
paperwork day remaining at $60 per day.
Increase County Boards of Voter Registration and Elections Board Member Stipend
The SEC requested $150,000 in recurring funding in the FY2017-18 budget request for an increase of
$500 per member in county board of voter registration and election members stipends. Board member
stipends are currently $1,500 per yeai· and have not been increased since FY2000. Funding was not
provided in the FY2017-18 budget request for this initiative.
New Statewide Voting System Replacement Fund
The current statewide voting system was implemented in 2004/2005 with a life expectancy of 12 - 15
years. Over the past six fiscal years, the Agency has made budget requests to build a fund over several
years to replace the state's aging voting system. The SEC requested $5M in seed funding in the 2017-
18 request, but funding was not provided. To date, $IM has been placed into an account for the new
system with the Department of Administration until such time as a new voting system is available for
purchase by the SEC.
Refresh of Current Statewide Voting System
The SEC also requested $7.5M in non-recurring funds in the FY2017-18 budget request when it was
dete1mined by the vendor of the voting system that the system could be refreshed to extend the life of
the system for approximately five yeai·s. Funding was not provided for the refresh in the FY2017-18
budget.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:35 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:38 pm
Palmer and Hartmann (the new Erlichman and Haldeman) tipped their racist hand when they said they would certify the vote in predominantly white areas that had a higher percentage of errors.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:44 pm
It didn't even have to be racism -- though it very well might have been -- it could have been misguided loyalty. We have seen enormous pressure to change results. That some might have succumbed to pressure in service to the party or just went rogue under influence from Trump is what concerns me.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:46 pm
Racism was a sufficient but not necessary condition.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:51 pm
I think you got to the very heart of the situation above.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:33 pm No amount of recounting after the fact is going to fix that discrepancy - you have to pay up front to come up with a different way that CAN be reconciled. Your large corporation tracking millions spends millions tracking it with hundreds of people focused solely on that task. This is from South Carolina's Election Commission from 2016-2017
I'm not a fan of large government but votes matter a lot more than dollars - this would be an area that I could see tax dollars going to without heartburn. In my old job we had a saying 'edits belong at the point of entry'. With the implication that they be done BY the entry user itself.
I think the evolution of GAAP (or IFRS or similar) happened over time with an idea of accountability to the stakeholders. I think maybe our voting systems have not evolved in a similar fashion. If the talk about 'totalization' happening in Spain or Germany are true they may be evolving in a wrong direction.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:55 pm
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:22 pm
My sense is that the racism is a side effect of the main partisan purpose. They're trying to find ways to change things so that Republicans win. Race is part of it because there are correlations between race and partisan identity, at least at the moment.malchior wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:44 pmIt didn't even have to be racism -- though it very well might have been -- it could have been misguided loyalty. We have seen enormous pressure to change results. That some might have succumbed to pressure in service to the party or just went rogue under influence from Trump is what concerns me.
Which doesn't make it any less despicable, of course, and there's inevitably going to be some bleedover between the partisanship and the racism.
Re: Election integrity and the transfer of power
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:26 pm
Only in Trump America is this an actual headline:
I legitimately hope there are an army of lawyers standing by looking to counter-sue the Trump campaign and the Nevada Republican party for all kinds of money. This is beyond absurd.Trump Campaign Sues Homeless Nevada Presidential Elector in Latest Push to Challenge Results
The lawsuit, which was jointly filed by the Trump campaign and the Nevada Republican Party, seeks to award the state's six electoral college votes to the president or annul the election result there.
If successful, the suit would invalidate tens of thousands of votes, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
D'Ayr was chosen as a Democratic presidential elector at convention elections earlier in 2020. She said she only found out she was named as a defendant when she was contacted by the Review-Journal.
"I'm a homeless veteran, and the Trump campaign is suing me for doing my civic duty," she told the newspaper on Tuesday.