Posted on 11/25/2016 10:13:41 PM PST by Hostage
See #39 for your answer. The post you responded to took it out of context and tried to paint the thread as garbage when in fact they lack a detailed understanding.
I worked as an asst. Registrar at the polls on voting day - I found that:
1) It is nearly impossible to tamper if there are even just one or two Republicans at the poll.
2) It is incredibly easy to tamper if everyone at the polling place are Democrats.
They guessed wrong at the amount of fraud necessary -- hence Hillary's visit to the elections official in Broward County FL shortly before the election; hence the usual shenanigans of crooked leftist judges ordering polls to stay open late in predominantly Dem districts only; hence Egg McMuffin's candidacy, hence Terry McAuliffe's restoring the voting status of tens of thousands of felons in Virginia.
Trump doing unusually well for a Republican among blacks, Hispanics, and women......Plus Unions.
J. Alex Halderman provided to Jill Stein an affidavit dated November 25 upon which she premised her petition for recount. (http://elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/news/wisconsin_recount_petition_of_jill_stein_00268242_12391.pdf)
Here is what Halderman said two days prior, on November 23: Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not. I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong, rather than that the election was hacked. (https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.w9ibthp2w)
Unsurprisingly Halderman’s affidavit presents no evidence of hacking or irregularity. What Halderman’s affidavit does present is a series of conjecture, exaggerations, distortions, and lies. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3498577/posts?page=26#26)
best way to not need recounts is to have a system that VERY FEW people handle cast ballots or voting machinery BUT are observed by MANY while doing their tasks from start to finish - less likely to have fraud.
Others on FR have commented in observing election workers, I’m gonna look into doing that for future elections.
Hillary is now joining the recounts.
Per CNN:
Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton’s campaign said Saturday it will take part in efforts to push for recounts in several key states, joining with Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who has raised millions of dollars to have votes counted again in Wisconsin.
Go away noob
Yes, that’s why the locked rooms where ballots are stored need to have surveillance and why absentee and military ballots trickling in need careful monitoring.
Here’s an easy example to understand that should drive the point home for everyone reading:
For this example Blue Swing State, the election day vote accounting was:
96 regular ballots cast
1 provisional held, to be verified at the election office
2 absentee issued, still pending
1 military issued, still pending
100 total votes in the accounting as of the 8pm poll closing time on November 8.
Counting of regular ballots begins at 8pm and finishes at 10pm.
To make it even simpler, there are only 2 candidates and all of the 4 total of provisional, absentee, and military ballots are still outstanding (yet uncounted) by poll closing time.
It is not known how many of the 3 total absentee and military ballots will be received by Nov 8.
On Nov 8 at 10pm, the regular ballot totals are:
51 regular ballots counted for Trump
45 regular ballots counted for Clinton
Trump so far has a winning margin of 51-45=6 more votes than Clinton. This margin of 6 is greater than the 4 votes yet to be counted.
Based on the Trump margin (6 votes) exceeding the number of votes left to be counted (4), the state election is declared for Trump even as votes are yet to be counted.
The State prepares to certify its election to its Electors, to Congress and all other mandatory recipients.
On Wednesday, November 9, the provisional ballot is reviewed and is disputed. The absentee and military votes are not yet received. But they do not matter to the outcome.
SURPRISING DEVELOPMENT
News breaks that one election official made an error in totaling Trump’s 51 regular ballot votes. The official admits that the actual regular ballot total was 48 votes for Trump while Clinton’s votes remain unchanged. Trump still leads Clinton by 48 to 46. His margin of victory with regular ballots has been reduced to 3 from 6. His winning margin has been cut in half. Importantly, his winning margin in regular ballot votes no longer exceeds the 4 ballots yet to be counted. The total regular ballots cast is also reduced from 97 to 94.
Questions for the reader: How is the above development easily refuted? Anticipating an investigation of this development, what would an election thief need to do beforehand to prevent anyone from being able to prove this development is false?
An election thief now has an opportunity to switch out ballots that were cast if they can get inside the safekeeping area. A thief would need to be very careful in designing a scheme to overcome Trump’s 3 vote lead. There are 4 votes to be counted. Here are some considerations for the thief:
1. Put parolees in an off-site mailroom where the 2 absentee votes and 1 military vote are expected to be received. (This type of situation has actually happened).
2. In the week following the election, drop off at the mailroom 2 false absentee votes and 1 false military vote, all marked for Clinton. If the other legitimate votes trickle in, shred them.
The election is now tied 48 to 48.
3. The disputed provisional vote is ruled by an election supervisor controlled or sympathetic to the election thief to be valid and is cast for Clinton.
Clinton is declared the winner 49 to 48.
4. If for some reason the disputed provisional ballot is ruled invalid so that it is subtracted from the total nonregular ballots, then have 2 votes switched out in the safekeeping of the stored regular ballots. Do this in advance, before the opponent’s watchdogs catch on, as a reserve stash to ensure victory. If a machine recount or hand recount is conducted, then the 2 switched ballots can be attributed to machine or human error. (This type of situation has actually happened).
Other actual events that have happened are the democrat thieves knowingly send out absentees to persons that they know do not exist but were registered fictitiously. They then control those ballots. This is their stash of votes in reserve to overcome leads by their opponents. This leads to the following alternative scenario.
ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
In addition to the 2 legitimate absentee ballots that are in the original numbers above, the election thief has caused to issue 10 additional absentee ballots to fictitious persons, bringing the potential absentee total to 2+10=12.
Therefore, Trump never has a winning margin that exceeds the number of uncounted votes and as a result, the State cannot call the election for Trump even though he leads in regular vote totals 51 to 45. The State’s results then hinge on the uncounted votes and the Election thief controls 10 fictitious absentee votes ensuring Clinton will come out on top.
In this situation, if Trump’s real-time lead is large enough to overcome the thief’s 10 fictitious absentee votes, then the election thief falls back on stuffing provisional same-day registration votes and fights to keep the polls open so that additional false provisional ballots can be dropped off. Yes, this type of situation has indeed happened.
Now here are a few important takeaways:
1, The form of vote fraud described above is becoming obsolete in the face of electronic voting fraud. Soros IT Group controls the software (the IP) of most electronic voting machines and systems in the United States including GEMS (Global Election Management System). It appears that in this election they were either not ready to throw the election or they were thwarted. That’s good news but it doesn’t mean the threat is eliminated.
2. Should candidates go to court over ‘voting irregularities’, the fraud or errors may indeed be discovered and verified BUT IT MAY NOT MATTER. Why? Because all the votes are commingled together and it may not be possible to separate by what was regular, what was absentee, what was military, and which way the fraudulent votes went. So say for example that the thief was caught fabricating those 10 fictitious absentee ballots but the ballots are now commingled with all the other ballots. Which went for Clinton and which went to Trump? Which 10 votes should be taken out of the commingled pile? (This type of situation has actually happened)
If you remember anything, remember this:
ONCE BALLOTS ARE COMMINGLED, IT IS CONSIDERED IMPOSSIBLE TO SORT OUT FRAUDULENT VOTES FROM LEGITIMATE VOTES BECAUSE THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME.
EVEN IF BALLOTS ARE COLOR CODED AS TO CATEGORY, IT IS CONSIDERED IMPOSSIBLE TO SORT FRAUDULENT FROM LEGITIMATE VOTES WITHIN THE SAME CATEGORY.
COMMINGLING IS A ONE-WAY PROCESS. IT CANNOT BE REVERSED.
Thank you. That’s very good info to have. Please have a look at #49.
Australia is moving towards Block Chain Technology for voting. It addresses what you are describing.
https://followmyvote.com/online-voting-technology/blockchain-technology
http://www.zdnet.com/article/australia-post-details-plan-to-use-blockchain-for-voting
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3468215/posts
All true check the links
That may be their sinister plan.
The longest sentence seems to be 4-5 years. That seems ridiculously minimal.
Amen to the death sentence
Vote fraud is the worst crime against the Republic, the renting of the fabric
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.