Yawn, none of the three states I refer to are PA, although PA's irregularities were also rampant. On the contrary, it is Biden's win that is the fluke. In the absence of the pandemic to create a cover for widespread distortion of the voting process, it is far more likely the swing states would have gone against Biden.
Yawn, none of the three states I refer to are PA, although PA's irregularities were also rampant. On the contrary, it is Biden's win that is the fluke. In the absence of the pandemic to create a cover for widespread distortion of the voting process, it is far more likely the swing states would have gone against Biden.
Meant to point out that first time mail voters have historically made about 3X the number of errors as those who have done it before. Overall rejection rate appears to be dramatically below historical precedent when it should have been much higher .
1) Mail in ballots ran 2-3 to 1 in favor of Biden and first time mail in voters leaned heavily in that direction as well. Toss out a bunch of ballots (that would have been tossed in years past) and they are going to be overwhelmingly for Biden.
2) Irregular processing of ballots ("curing" not adhering to signature standards, etc., happened largely in heavily Dem areas. Even ignoring the possibility of bias (which we should not do), the odds still indicate that ballots that should not have been accepted (or cured) would have been heavily in favor of Biden.
As an example, in Madison WI, local officials took it upon themselves to take drop boxes into various parks and gathered votes there. This was contrary to WI law and broke rules of chain of control. This represents a reported 10000 ballots which should have been thrown out. How many people in the parks of the People's Republic of Madison voted for someone other than Biden. Maybe a handful of write-ins for Bernie.
It did answer the question - you either can't follow it or don't like the answer.
We know that the 3 states in question (GA, AZ, and WI) were carried by very narrow margins. We know that the irregularities favored mail voters and were most common in heavily Dem localities.
Do the math and it tells you that the tallies were most likely inaccurate when accounting for the irregularities and that would have favored Biden. I don't have to figure out why the people of those states voted the way they did (my answer would take pages and would just piss you off) I just have to make a rational case that the tally was most likely wrong.
"In the absence of the pandemic to create a cover for widespread distortion of the voting process, it is far more likely the swing states would have gone against Biden"
That's your statement and you won't expand on it. Instead it's all about voting irregularities, not the WHY. You're saying there was no reason for Biden to win, at all.
I suspect you won't because it falls back on all of the conventional reasons an incumbent President should get re-elected. Trump defied convention in winning, why not in losing?
So, I assure that I won't bother to explain this again. In the absence of the distortion, the irregularities would not have happened and the data supports that the irregularities favored Biden.
My personal politics and judgment is that one must be slow-witted to have voted for Biden but many people have been successful preying upon that constituency. Yet, that has nothing to do with the reality of the irregularities and the data that surrounds them.
I'm no fan of Biden and I'm not disgusted by Trump - but I can understand that there are people that were. Just as there are people that were delighted with Trump. Such are the mysteries of life.
Just for clarity - the issue of irregularities is paramount, and had Trump won, his victory would also be tainted?
Probably not. If the irregularities were disproportionate in conservative communities and related to in-person voting, you could make that case. That was not the case.
Yawn, none of the three states I refer to are PA, although PA's irregularities were also rampant. On the contrary, it is Biden's win that is the fluke. In the absence of the pandemic to create a cover for widespread distortion of the voting process, it is far more likely the swing states would have gone against Biden.
Why would they have been so likely to go against Biden?
Meant to point out that first time mail voters have historically made about 3X the number of errors as those who have done it before. Overall rejection rate appears to be dramatically below historical precedent when it should have been much higher .
1) Mail in ballots ran 2-3 to 1 in favor of Biden and first time mail in voters leaned heavily in that direction as well. Toss out a bunch of ballots (that would have been tossed in years past) and they are going to be overwhelmingly for Biden.
2) Irregular processing of ballots ("curing" not adhering to signature standards, etc., happened largely in heavily Dem areas. Even ignoring the possibility of bias (which we should not do), the odds still indicate that ballots that should not have been accepted (or cured) would have been heavily in favor of Biden.
As an example, in Madison WI, local officials took it upon themselves to take drop boxes into various parks and gathered votes there. This was contrary to WI law and broke rules of chain of control. This represents a reported 10000 ballots which should have been thrown out. How many people in the parks of the People's Republic of Madison voted for someone other than Biden. Maybe a handful of write-ins for Bernie.
That doesn't answer the question, you are addressing the mechanics of what you already have assumed.
Why would those states have been more likely to vote for Trump rather than Biden? Please.
It did answer the question - you either can't follow it or don't like the answer.
We know that the 3 states in question (GA, AZ, and WI) were carried by very narrow margins. We know that the irregularities favored mail voters and were most common in heavily Dem localities.
Do the math and it tells you that the tallies were most likely inaccurate when accounting for the irregularities and that would have favored Biden. I don't have to figure out why the people of those states voted the way they did (my answer would take pages and would just piss you off) I just have to make a rational case that the tally was most likely wrong.
"In the absence of the pandemic to create a cover for widespread distortion of the voting process, it is far more likely the swing states would have gone against Biden"
That's your statement and you won't expand on it. Instead it's all about voting irregularities, not the WHY. You're saying there was no reason for Biden to win, at all.
I suspect you won't because it falls back on all of the conventional reasons an incumbent President should get re-elected. Trump defied convention in winning, why not in losing?
So, I assure that I won't bother to explain this again. In the absence of the distortion, the irregularities would not have happened and the data supports that the irregularities favored Biden.
My personal politics and judgment is that one must be slow-witted to have voted for Biden but many people have been successful preying upon that constituency. Yet, that has nothing to do with the reality of the irregularities and the data that surrounds them.
I'm no fan of Biden and I'm not disgusted by Trump - but I can understand that there are people that were. Just as there are people that were delighted with Trump. Such are the mysteries of life.
Just for clarity - the issue of irregularities is paramount, and had Trump won, his victory would also be tainted?
Probably not. If the irregularities were disproportionate in conservative communities and related to in-person voting, you could make that case. That was not the case.