NOT MAKING HEADLINES: AZ Audit Could Not Find the Identity of 86,391 Voters

BartenderElite said:
You're sure about that? You're talking about a very sophisticated operation to know exactly where to identify those areas - and they would need people on the ground in each area. There is a lot of guesswork there, no matter how certain some variables are.

You sure something like that on a national level could be a "very small number of folks?" What are you basing that on?
Click to expand...

Yes, I am sure that something like that could be a "very small number of folks". I base it on my experience being a poll judge and how these things are run, which counties that they happen in, and an understanding of what can happen.

In this case, in one county in a swing state nearly 90K imaginary voters cast a ballot and their votes were enough to overturn the election result for an entire state.
 
Damocles said:
However it will be ignored, even by folks that pretend that election integrity matters to them.

This is evidence of fraud, on a "just large enough" scale to change things. It doesn't have to be "widespread" it only has to happen in enough swing states' larger cities in order to overturn an election. In some of the closer ones it doesn't even have to be this large. If election integrity is important, then who votes matters. Just "count all the votes" is a great bumper sticker but if I vote 360,000 times you shouldn't count them just because they are "votes", in fact you shouldn't count them at all and I should go to prison.

One way to avoid this kind of thing in the future with "just enough" nonsense is to stop allowing folks to report any results in a state until the entire state's results are in. Report it all in one... that way they simply will not know what "just enough" is and will have to do things differently.
Click to expand...

It will be ignored because it is the Gateway Pundit. Look up 'Surefire Intelligence' if you want to know why I completely dismiss anything they have to say. They are not a news site.

As for this claim, it is a nothing burger, just like the 10,342 names. The default position with respect to the Arizona audit is to ignore it. It was a partisan exercise run by a Trump toady and paid for largely by private sources that have pushed the notion that the election was stolen.

"County officials say there are many reasons why this could have been the case. One reason is that the system tracks a ballot every time the county receives it. In some cases when the county sends back a ballot to a voter to try to get a signature and then gets it back, the county receives that ballot twice.

In any case, county officials said the actual ballot, and the votes on it, is only counted once.

The county has a few ways of ensuring that each voter only votes once, according to county elections director Scott Jarrett.

Each voter envelope, for example, has a unique barcode that tracks where a voter's ballot is and what stage it is in. The county's system updates as soon as the ballot inside the envelope is processed and counted, which prevents the voter from being able to cast another ballot."
Click to expand...
It is an utter waste to debunk every single idiotic claim made by Cyber Ninjas and parroted by patchy the pirate. The audit can be dismissed out of hand. Unless you think the chickens ate the homework. How dumb.
 
Damocles said:
Yes, I am sure that something like that could be a "very small number of folks". I base it on my experience being a poll judge and how these things are run, which counties that they happen in, and an understanding of what can happen.

In this case, in one county in a swing state nearly 90K imaginary voters cast a ballot and their votes were enough to overturn the election result for an entire state.
Click to expand...

That is proven, then?
 
Damocles said:
If in every single case it happens it is "just enough to win", then it is evidence that is is coordinated and organized.

Whether or not it is coordinated or organized, in this case we know that nearly 90K imaginary folks voted in an election that we have no evidence that they actually exist. This is a problem.
Click to expand...

So why do you repeat the lie? How does that help anything? For God's sake man, just read what was posted. If they know that the 'registered voter' was a democrat, then they KNOW WHO CAST THE BALLOT. Good God, are you really that obtuse? Get real.
 
BartenderElite said:
That is proven, then?
Click to expand...

It is evidence of it, as I stated. My quote was: "This is evidence of fraud", and then I predicted it would be ignored by folks on the left who pretend to care about election integrity.

I will further predict that they will gaslight folks who care about it and pretend that what their own eyes see could not possibly be evidence of anything.
 
Concart said:
So why do you repeat the lie? How does that help anything? For God's sake man, just read what was posted. If they know that the 'registered voter' was a democrat, then they KNOW WHO CAST THE BALLOT. Good God, are you really that obtuse? Get real.
Click to expand...

No, they do not know who cast the ballot, they only know that there is a ballot that was counted for someone that they cannot find any evidence actually exists. This is evidence of fraudulently cast ballots and clearly should get some attention in any sane society based on elections...

Believe me, if this happened in a mostly republican county with "just enough" ballots that had no actual person casting them to be found you would be figuratively spraying diarrhea...

And you just proved my last prediction correct.
 
Damocles said:
It is evidence of it, as I stated. My quote was: "This is evidence of fraud", and then I predicted it would be ignored by folks on the left who pretend to care about election integrity.

I will further predict that they will gaslight folks who care about it and pretend that what their own eyes see could not possibly be evidence of anything.
Click to expand...

You are the gaslighters. What you are stating is a lie. There is no other way to spin it.
 
Damocles said:
It is evidence of it, as I stated. My quote was: "This is evidence of fraud", and then I predicted it would be ignored by folks on the left who pretend to care about election integrity.

I will further predict that they will gaslight folks who care about it and pretend that what their own eyes see could not possibly be evidence of anything.
Click to expand...

For starters, the AZ audit is hopelessly partisan, and has been denounced by quite a few conservatives.

But here is what you said: "In this case, in one county in a swing state nearly 90K imaginary voters cast a ballot and their votes were enough to overturn the election result for an entire state."

That is a definitive, conclusive statement. You just said that Biden really lost AZ.
 
Damocles said:
No, they do not know who cast the ballot, they only know that there is a ballot that was counted for someone that they cannot find any evidence actually exists. This is evidence of fraudulently cast ballots.
Click to expand...

FFS just stop. Please.

Just because someone doesn't happen to be in a commercial database, that does not mean they don't exist. That is just galactically stupid. Stop defending these idiots just because they have an 'R' next to their name. It makes you look bad.
 
BartenderElite said:
For starters, the AZ audit is hopelessly partisan, and has been denounced by quite a few conservatives.

But here is what you said: "In this case, in one county in a swing state nearly 90K imaginary voters cast a ballot and their votes were enough to overturn the election result for an entire state."

That is a definitive, conclusive statement. You just said that Biden really lost AZ.
Click to expand...

Ah, yeah, I forgot the "apparently" before imaginary that I included on the post previous to that one. Let's assume that I actually meant it to be there, because I did. I believe that most folks will think it merits more attention than what you want on it... if they ever hear of it.

If you do not think that ballots that cannot be connected to an actual voter in just the right number is something that we should look into, then you are simply a partisan hack.

I 100% predicted that this audit would be first called "hackery" and then later would be "Hailed" when it stated that the votes counted had the same result...

I now predict that the left and the media will try to make sure that is the only conclusion that is taken from the audit and will try to ignore any further evidence that should be looked at. And as I predicted in my last post, their evidence will just be repeating things until folks stop arguing. In other words no real evidence. Gaslighting... "You're crazy if you think"...

You state it here, "Some conservatives have said"... that isn't evidence of anything. It is anecdotal nonsense. Just noise.
 
Damocles said:
No, they do not know who cast the ballot, they only know that there is a ballot that was counted for someone that they cannot find any evidence actually exists. This is evidence of fraudulently cast ballots and clearly should get some attention in any sane society based on elections...

Believe me, if this happened in a mostly republican county with "just enough" ballots that had no actual person casting them to be found you would be figuratively spraying diarrhea...

And you just proved my last prediction correct.
Click to expand...

Yes they do. If they don't know who cast the ballot, what are they matching it against in the commercial database? Good grief.
 
Damocles said:
Ah, yeah, I forgot the "apparently" before imaginary that I included on the post previous to that one. Let's assume that I actually meant it to be there, because I did.

If you do not think that ballots that cannot be connected to an actual voter in just the right number is something that we should look into, then you are simply a partisan hack.

I 100% predicted that this audit would be first called "hackery" and then later would be "Hailed" when it stated that the votes counted had the same result...

I now predict that the left and the media will try to make sure that is the only conclusion that is taken from the audit and will try to ignore any further evidence that should be looked it. And as I predicted in my last post, their evidence will just be repeating things until folks stop arguing. In other words no real evidence.

You state it here, "Some conservatives have said"... that isn't evidence of anything. It is anecdotal nonsense. Just noise.
Click to expand...

I'll accept that you meant to include that.

We'll never agree on the audit. It was actually a LOT of conservatives, including election officials in AZ (from the GOP). That audit is an embarrassment. One of those involved was photographed on 1/6.

Being called a hack by someone who takes that audit at face value is a bit hard to accept, but we're not going to agree on this one. That audit was a sham, and incredibly destructive to our republic.
 
Concart said:
FFS just stop. Please.

Just because someone doesn't happen to be in a commercial database, that does not mean they don't exist. That is just galactically stupid. Stop defending these idiots just because they have an 'R' next to their name. It makes you look bad.
Click to expand...

You need too stop yourself. I am not defending "these people" because they have an R, that's you trying to gaslight as I predicted would happen.

"You must be crazy"...

"You must be a partisan hack"...

These are simply projecting, and gaslighting statements.

When there are more than 90K apparently imaginary folks who voted in an election that cannot be found in reality, there is a problem and we should look into it, especially when the vote split was less than that number.
 
Damocles said:
It is evidence of it, as I stated. My quote was: "This is evidence of fraud", and then I predicted it would be ignored by folks on the left who pretend to care about election integrity.

I will further predict that they will gaslight folks who care about it and pretend that what their own eyes see could not possibly be evidence of anything.
Click to expand...

So you accept Gateway as a good source? That is disgusting. Gateway is a far far right gnus source that repeatedly publishes false stories IE That Head council Mueller sexually assaulted someone. This is a terrible source that was built to lie.
 
Nordberg said:
So you accept Gateway as a good source? That is disgusting. Gateway is a far far right gnus source that repeatedly publishes false stories IE That Head council Mueller sexually assaulted someone. This is a terrible source that was built to lie.
Click to expand...

No, I read page 56 of the report, going directly to the source to verify. You can download it too and check.
 
BartenderElite said:
I'll accept that you meant to include that.

We'll never agree on the audit. It was actually a LOT of conservatives, including election officials in AZ (from the GOP). That audit is an embarrassment. One of those involved was photographed on 1/6.

Being called a hack by someone who takes that audit at face value is a bit hard to accept, but we're not going to agree on this one. That audit was a sham, and incredibly destructive to our republic.
Click to expand...

We will see if my prediction become reality. I can already post link after link all excited about how the audit count of ballots didn't change the result. So my prediction that it would first be called hackery then later hailed and why has already come to fruition. All we have to do is wait a bit to see if the rest of the prediction comes true.

You've already got a good start on gaslighting.

"You would be crazy to believe this..." I believe that you will get a version of that for everything that the audit came up with, but will still hear how it is super trustworthy on the ballot counting part from those same folks....
 
Damocles said:
You need too stop yourself. I am not defending "these people" because they have an R, that's you trying to gaslight as I predicted would happen.

"You must be crazy"...

"You must be a partisan hack"...

These are simply projecting, and gaslighting statements.

When there are more than 90K apparently imaginary folks who voted in an election that cannot be found in reality, there is a problem and we should look into it, especially when the vote split was less than that number.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the lie, it will still be a lie. There were ZERO imaginary folks. None. Every one had a name and an address. Every one was filled out by a registered voter. Your conclusion is not supported by the facts. Lie some more. I'll debunk you some more. It's kind of fun.
 
Damocles said:
We will see if my prediction become reality. I can already post link after link all excited about how the audit count of ballots didn't change the result. So my prediction that it would first be called hackery then later hailed and why has already come to fruition. All we have to do is wait a bit to see if the rest of the prediction comes true.
Click to expand...

No one is 'hailing' the result. We are laughing at it. Trump lost the state again. What is that now, five times? Almost as many as Georgia. Lose some more, losers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top