As I recall ransomnote posted the entire text in a box :)
https://twitter.com/PandaTribune/status/1335826414462001153
The Panda Tribune
@PandaTribune
The Georgia Dems & RINOs filed a motion to exclude the testimony of @MattBraynard & they hired an “expert”, Stephen Ansolabehere, to try to discredit his work…
After reading their “expert’s” rebuttal to Braynard’s report, it’s clear that their “expert” is a very silly goose!...
ROUND 1
Ansolabehere claims that @MattBraynard’s report never mentions what fields (other than ‘date of birth’) he used in his matching methodology…
Ansolabehere is either lying or illiterate, because Braynard explicitly states (several times) the specific fields he used
ROUND 2
Ansolabehere then uses a “straw man” by selecting an incomparable methodology (“Crosscheck”) in order to “discredit” @MattBraynard’s methodology...
Cross mark”Crosscheck” DOESN’T match addresses
White heavy check Braynard’s methodology DOES (w/ the NCOA database from the US Postal Service)
ROUND 2 Continued
In fact... the report Ansolabehere cites as a supporting source for his claim... actually RECOMMENDS using nationally available lists, and even specifically mentions the U.S. Postal Service database (NCOA), which
@MattBraynard used, as an example!
BONUS ROUND
We did some digging & it turns out that 5 years ago, the Election Law Journal published a paper AUTHORED BY Ansolabehere, in which he ADVOCATES using NCOA (list that
@MattBraynard uses) & he even cites a study that used NCOA to CORRECT voter registration lists!
Extra Bonus...
In ANOTHER published paper authored by Stephen Ansolabehere he writes:
“Even just two pieces—either Name & Date of Birth or Name & Address—identifies nearly all individuals in a database uniquely. 99.6% are unique w/ DoB & Name, 99% are unique w/ Name & Address”
ThankQ !!