At the flip of a switch, results can be change on an industrial scale. Why would anyone with such control at his fingertips ever relinquish power?

However it happens, and whatever the extent, election fraud defeats democracy. Cyber fraud however destroys it.

Contests can often be finely pitched, with future policy hanging on a few votes. Every legal vote matters, but only legal votes.

A misplaced ballot here, a vote from the grave there, double voters from anywhere – the real will of the people can soon be defeated. It will probably always go on to some extent, but it won’t always win out. Voting by mail of course makes the potential of such ‘conventional’ fraud infinitely worse. Ballots can go astray by the sackful, the ‘dead’ no longer have to attend in person and the duplicate voter does not have to catch a bus.

Once the fraud becomes systemic however, something so easy to achieve with electronic devices, what you face is not just defeat, but total destruction.

Not possible – the leftist MSM want you to think that, those eager to take control of the USA and drive it backwards ‘America last’ need you to believe that too.

As the showgirl once said, when asked why a worthy politician would deny ever having met her “Well he would, wouldn’t he?”.

You could of course just accept what you are told by those who have nothing of real value to offer. There will after all be plenty of ‘free stuff’ – at least until the money runs out as it surely will.

Perhaps a wiser choice would instead be to listen to someone who has served and fought for this country and then decide what to believe:

Ask yourself why counting systems have the facility to weight ballots and who thought that would be a good idea? Pehaps the very person who wants to press ‘enter’ on a whole new America.

"Ask yourself why counting systems have the facility to weight ballots and who thought that would be a good idea?"

STILL waiting to hear from Dominion and others as to why such a "feature" exists. Whoever thought it was a good idea to build that into their software? Who sets the weighting? What are the decision processes used to set the weights? Who is in charge of that? Why is it done?

Lastly, what weighting values were used in the election last week and how did they affect the outcome?

Did it go like this?

Elections Commissioner: "We feel that lots of Republicans should have voted for Biden, so we'll set Joe's ballot weight to 1.8. We also feel that lots of Republicans didn't know what they were doing when they checked 'Trump' on their ballot, so we'll set Trump's ballot weight to 0.6."

I watched this video, then last night, invited my brother to watch it again with me, and both he and I had EXACTLY the same reaction that you did. We talked about this until about 2 AM.

Dr.SHIVA LIVE: MIT PhD Analysis of Michigan Votes Reveals Unfortunate Truth of U.S. Voting Systems

We are both IT people, so we had a degree of commonality in our view of this.

When we were watching the video, he stopped the video at the point where they were discussing the “feature” of including the option of “weighted races” and we both slammed on the brakes and said “What did he just say?”

My brother was angry, and said “WHO asked for that “feature” and WHAT was their justification for asking for it?”

I put on my “Election Official” hat, and then put my “Leftist” hat on as well, in the former, to try to rationally consider what their real need might have been for asking for this feature and getting it implemented, versus the Latter (Leftist hat) what would be their public facing justification (fig leaf) for putting this functionality in place to cover what their nefarious purposes really were.

Wearing the “Election Official” hat, I was wracking my brain (because I don’t know much about the things they might want to do) but I thought they might want the feature for local election issues, for example...if one precinct or locality has larger mean household populations than another precinct of locality and they have some kind of ballot question issue they are voting on, they might want to change the setting for that locale to give the higher mean a value of 1.5 or 2.0 and the lower one a value of 1.0.

Or (and this was my first impression...oddly) like the 3/5 Compromise, it would be done as a way to give some portion of the population (such as the move to restore felon voting rights) less of a weight in their vote, making their vote a 0.5 value to a non-felon who would have a value of one.

Or making an illegal immigrant a value of 0.5.

I have no rational reason why it would be asked for. But my question, I would like to see asked, is WHO asked for this “feature” to be implemented.

There has been much talk about people on the Left (Not only in the USA, but around the world) who have interests or relationships with Dominion Voting Systems. I think it would be fascinating to see who pushed for this “feature”.

But it sure as hell doesn’t support a “One Person, One Vote” system, and anything other than that is third world or tyrannical.

They’re going to produce virtual voters, fake voters.

Remember a few years ago, Facebook got caught inflating their subscriber statistics, had to purge something like 750 million fake accounts? Their stock price took a big hit because their valuation had been based on the size of their subscriber population.

The left is going to do the same thing with voter rolls. Create millions of fake voters. Trump stopped them from importing physical fake voters from other countries, so they turned to a cyberspace solution.

Biden and Harris are going to restart the flow of fake foreign voters, so they can dial the cyberspace strategy back.

A poster at TheDonald.win observes, "They paused because they realized they were doing the flips and the idiots flipped the digits after the equation and it was showing on live TV.

CNN's people didn't even know what to say... um.... uh.... looks... like.... Biden... is... ahead?

The pause was because they got too far behind on the weighted algorithms and needed the flip function rather than the weight function. They flipped on live TV - early in the race and then realized that shit was going haywire and had to pump the brakes and call in plan C, D and E which were already 'pre-planned' rip cords that they didn't think they would have to use.

Very, very orchestrated, but also very, very sloppy."

It always seemed to me that Hillary cheated by — let’s say — 5% in 2016. Such a huge cheat margin was why she “couldn’t lose”. But Trump beat her so badly that her 5% was not enough. She was shocked.

Joe wasn’t going to make that mistake. Joe cheated by — let’s say — 10% in 2020. Whoo-Hoo! It’s in the bag! He doesn’t even have to campaign! But then they found out that Trump was winning anyway. I think they panicked, got sloppy, and injected waaaaaaaaay too many fraudulent votes into the system.

Any decent audit should find a lot of crime.

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.