Replies

I don't like same day registration either, and drop boxes, etc., are even worse. They all make it easier to commit fraud.

However, when the author ignores the existence of same day registration, and argues that November turnout in excess of October registration numbers proves actual fraud, it's just a terrible argument.

I don't like same day registration either, and drop boxes, etc., are even worse. They all make it easier to commit fraud.
However, when the author ignores the existence of same day just registration, and argues that November turnout in excess of October registration numbers proves actual fraud, it's just a terrible argument.

I think you missed the argument from the lawyer, which is a pattern of statistical fraud, not same day registration. Those statistics show that voter registration is near, or even exceeds the population in each county. Then the Election day voters fit the polynomial function "key" which is the same in each county. It's a more sophisticated form of election fraud than the alphabetical voting, like LBJ used in places to win a tough primary election, harder to detect, but once found clear and convincing proof of a rigged election.

You needed to actually follow the links and read the brief to understand that argument because GP didn't develop the story completely. They just like the splashy headline, but don't explain the argument properly.

However, when the author ignores the existence of same day registration, and argues that November turnout in excess of October registration numbers proves actual fraud, it's just a terrible argument.

Upon review, you assume that ballots resulted from same day registration. There should be a registration form on Election Day, right? Otherwise, these are just illegal or fraudulent ballots. When they do the statistical analysis of such voters, frequently unique surnames are found, and common names like "Johnson" or "Smith" are statistically underrepresented.