Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

[TurkeysGhost]

I appreciate you taking the time to read it. We will see. I kind of feel, and hope, that the security around elections should be up to positively refuting these claims rather than it simply being a case that they fail to prove them. We will see.....

Many of these claims cannot be disproven.

The burden of proof lies on those challenging the election to show, with convincing evidence, that significant fraud was occurring that would have changed the outcome of the election in these states.

 

[Meadmaker]

Now if you go back to the original claim, there's one example of Biden data that's flagged as suspect. The main deviation visible is that the proportion of 1's and 2's in the distribution is much lower than expected; but this is exactly what would be predicted by a data range too small for Benford's Law to be applicable. Meanwhile, some of the Trump data shown deviates just as much from Benford's Law, but this shows up as an excessive representation of 1's in the data, which is what would be expected from a small data range centred on a value with a leading digit of 1.

What you are describing here is what really struck me about the original link from this thread about Benford's Law. It showed a bunch of graphs and said, "Hey look! These follow Benford's Law, but those don't!" In reality, none of the graphs showed adherence to Benford's Law.

Real scientists often use graphs to illustrate trends in data, but they perform calculations on the raw numbers.

Pseudoscientists use graphs, and skip the calculations.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I think I realize the problem.

The title of the thread is "Allegations of Fraud" not "Make up fan fiction about fraud."

True "Allegation" does not meet the necessary standard of proof of a fact, but it still has to be presented with some evidence beyond "Known idiot liars with an already announced agendas are saying...."

 

[kookbreaker]

"If you don't put up with us with a smile on your face and a skip in your step, that just proves you are biased."

It's just the "Yeah I'm being evil, but you're being dramatic about it" excusejack yet again.

Now that they aren't holding all the cards the Republicans are going to start pearl clutching at every piece of sarcasm, snippiness, or humor thrown their way and it's sad and pathetic.

I'm sorry I spent the last four years being told "Screw your feelings snowflake" so I don't really care if the Republicans are getting some backlash that amounts to 1 in 1000 of what they've been slinging.

And let’s note that all these complaints are just the one side, like when the bully whines that the other kid punched him back. We had this article posted indicating that the GOP came to find voter fraud even if it wasn’t there and were being dicks about the whole thing.

https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-g...s-detroit-poll-challenger-gop-came-make-havoc

 

[Meadmaker]

Not that you care about claims, but here is another similar lawsuit:
https://cdn.donaldjtrump.com/public...rump-v.-benson-w.d.-mich.-complaint-final.pdf

If something substantial doesn't come out refuting the claims from the poll watchers, and nothing comes of this, then I don't see what the purpose of having poll watchers is.

One of the things that has to be pointed out, though, is that the TCF Center is a really big place. (We in Detroit generally still call it Cobo Hall, just in case you've heard of that name.) The last time I was in it, I was there with around 30,000 other people for the First Robotics Championships. It's a convention center.

There were hundreds, literally, of poll watchers. A few have reported problems.

There's a process to be followed, and lawsuits filed, and we have courts for a reason, so by all means have the courts examine the issues, but don't get your hopes up that this is going to blow the lid off the widescale corruption that ended up putting Michigan in the Biden column.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Pseudoscientists use graphs, and skip the calculations.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

A fun diversion for our amateur prognosticators.

How many improper ballots do you think will be discovered in this process? It's a big system involving lots of human input, undoubtedly some ballots will have passed through that ought not to have.

Tens? Hundreds, or even thousands? place a wager and we'll see who has the divine touch.

For the state of Michigan, my guess is that they find 161 ballots that got counted (for anyone) that should not have been. No reason other than it's a lucky number.

Again, Biden leads Michigan with over 150,000 votes.

 

[shuttlt]

Many of these claims cannot be disproven.

The burden of proof lies on those challenging the election to show, with convincing evidence, that significant fraud was occurring that would have changed the outcome of the election in these states.

You have different things going on here.
1. I believe they have something like 70 witnesses claiming similar things. Normally that would go a long way to at least asking the question of whether maybe rebuttal evidence might not be required.

2. As I said, the aim should probably be to have sufficient security such that claims like "they were adding names to the database, or registering ballots against different people" can be positively refuted rather than having the precinct folding their arms and saying "prove it". I hope that such evidence exists.

 

[pgwenthold]

"If you don't put up with us with a smile on your face and a skip in your step, that just proves you are biased."

It's just the "Yeah I'm being evil, but you're being dramatic about it" excusejack yet again.

Now that they aren't holding all the cards the Republicans are going to start pearl clutching at every piece of sarcasm, snippiness, or humor thrown their way and it's sad and pathetic.

I'm sorry I spent the last four years being told "Screw your feelings snowflake" so I don't really care if the Republicans are getting some backlash that amounts to 1 in 1000 of what they've been slinging.

There was a twitter thread by an election worker in Michigan. After being generally pissy for a while, eventually the the republican poll watcher just started challenging every ballot, for no reason at all. Just to snag the process of counting.

But no, you can't get mad at them. After 50 challenges in a row...

"I challenge that ballot"
"Oh shut up"
"Oooo, she was mean to me. Voter fraud!"

 

[johnny karate]

I appreciate you taking the time to read it. We will see. I kind of feel, and hope, that the security around elections should be up to positively refuting these claims rather than it simply being a case that they fail to prove them. We will see.....

What evidence - or anything legally compelling - is there to believe this lawsuit won’t fail?

 

[shuttlt]

One of the things that has to be pointed out, though, is that the TCF Center is a really big place. (We in Detroit generally still call it Cobo Hall, just in case you've heard of that name.) The last time I was in it, I was there with around 30,000 other people for the First Robotics Championships. It's a convention center.

There were hundreds, literally, of poll watchers. A few have reported problems.

There's a process to be followed, and lawsuits filed, and we have courts for a reason, so by all means have the courts examine the issues, but don't get your hopes up that this is going to blow the lid off the widescale corruption that ended up putting Michigan in the Biden column.

Why would the size of it make a difference?

Also, I do appreciate what you are saying. The main thing that offends me about the attitude of the forum is that after having taken at face value every "unnamed" newspaper source about Trump, the forum now actively hostile to considering these claims and has suddenly developed high standards about supporting evidence before a claim should even be discussed. It may all come to nothing, I know that.

 

[shuttlt]

What evidence - or anything legally compelling - is there to believe this lawsuit won’t fail?

That's a bit of a pointless question at a point where the lawsuit has only just been filed, we haven't seen the evidence and I don't think any of us are relevantly qualified lawyers. We will see.

 

[JoeMorgue]

There was a twitter thread by an election worker in Michigan. After being generally pissy for a while, eventually the the republican poll watcher just started challenging every ballot, for no reason at all. Just to snag the process of counting.

But no, you can't get mad at them. After 50 challenges in a row...

"I challenge that ballot"
"Oh shut up"
"Oooo, she was mean to me. Voter fraud!"

And again (I will beat this dead horse into powder) this is straight up an old Woo Slinger tactic.

"Where's Bigfoot?"
"Well we can't find him."
"Well then he's not there."
"No because we haven't looked behind every single tree on the entire North American Continent."

 

[johnny karate]

You have different things going on here.
1. I believe they have something like 70 witnesses claiming similar things. Normally that would go a long way to at least asking the question of whether maybe rebuttal evidence might not be required.

I’m sure that at least 70 people believe they’ve been abducted by aliens or in the existence of Bigfoot.

What does it matter how many people are making a claim if none of those claims are supported by evidence?

2. As I said, the aim should probably be to have sufficient security such that claims like "they were adding names to the database, or registering ballots against different people" can be positively refuted rather than having the precinct folding their arms and saying "prove it". I hope that such evidence exists.

Why does evidence need to be provided to disprove a claim made without evidence?

 

[johnny karate]

That's a bit of a pointless question at a point where the lawsuit has only just been filed, we haven't seen the evidence and I don't think any of us are relevantly qualified lawyers. We will see.

No evidence then, thanks.

What specifically do you find legally compelling about this lawsuit that you’ve just acknowledged has no evidedence to support it?

 

[CORed]

A fun diversion for our amateur prognosticators.

How many improper ballots do you think will be discovered in this process? It's a big system involving lots of human input, undoubtedly some ballots will have passed through that ought not to have.

Tens? Hundreds, or even thousands? place a wager and we'll see who has the divine touch.

For the state of Michigan, my guess is that they find 161 ballots that got counted (for anyone) that should not have been. No reason other than it's a lucky number.

Again, Biden leads Michigan with over 150,000 votes.

I predict that when all is said and done, the count will be changed by ~500 votes.

Last night, I heard somebody on CNN say that the fraud allegations are the new Birtherism. I think they were right on the money. Republicans have just reached the interview with Obama's grandmother stage, with fake birth certificates from various places in Africa just around the corner.

 

[wareyin]

You have different things going on here.
1. I believe they have something like 70 witnesses claiming similar things. Normally that would go a long way to at least asking the question of whether maybe rebuttal evidence might not be required.

70? I'm not even going to bother checking that number. Let's assume that for once you're presenting a valid number. 70 partisan poll watchers from various states around the country are claiming after their candidate lost that there was some sort of vast conspiracy to count more Democratic votes in heavily Democratic areas. #1, how many people claim to have seen bigfoot or have been abducted by aliens? More than 70 in each case. Does this now mean we have to have an open mind that maybe bigfoot is really an alien abducting all these people? Of course not. Why then do you think we should treat claims of a vast conspiracy to effect votes in areas that already favor Democratic candidates but not in areas that would be far more beneficial like Republican areas and not well enough to take the Senate or even prevent a loss of House members?

2. As I said, the aim should probably be to have sufficient security such that claims like "they were adding names to the database, or registering ballots against different people" can be positively refuted rather than having the precinct folding their arms and saying "prove it". I hope that such evidence exists.

You wish people to prove a negative. That's rather difficult.


Eta: damn, double ninja'd on the bigfoot stuff!

 

[johnny karate]

Why would the size of it make a difference?

Also, I do appreciate what you are saying. The main thing that offends me about the attitude of the forum is that after having taken at face value every "unnamed" newspaper source about Trump, the forum now actively hostile to considering these claims and has suddenly developed high standards about supporting evidence before a claim should even be discussed. It may all come to nothing, I know that.

“The forum” is not a monolithic entity. It is made up of individuals.

If you’re going to insinuate some kind of hypocrisy, you’ll need to come up with something better.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

At least one of the challengers is a Covid truther that shared the Plandemic video on social media.

These people will see whatever the Trump campaign tells them to see. I find the fact that some lawyer could get affidavits from 70 partisan cranks pretty uninteresting.

 

[pgwenthold]

At least one of the challengers is a Covid truther that shared the Plandemic video on social media.

These people will see whatever the Trump campaign tells them to see. I find the fact that some lawyer could get affidavits from 70 partisan cranks pretty uninteresting.

See the article by the Michigan poll watcher above. She reports that republican poll watcher violated the rules by talking directly to the inspectors, as opposed to the supervisor, as required. That is intimidation.

They really don't want to go down this road....it's a waste of time.