Replies

The balllots that came after the election have a variety of sources, including stacks of "mail-in" ballots with no provenance. Most had no or very little signature matching (the courts either overruled signature matching, or certain jurisdictions allowed anything, with impossibly low rejection rates). Some "mail-in" ballots were not folded so never mailed. Many had no security envelopes in states where that was required.

Ballots were processed without adequate or in come cases any supervision in several states. That included creating new ballots from old ballots that (allegedly) could not be read. That all happened after the election. Hundreds of thousands of ballots were processed after the election overwhelmingly in favor of Biden. That was planned and planned to be cover for the fraud.

There's no need to dream up a biased algorithm, which according to your new theory, was only triggered after the election. The prior drivel from the MIT guy and the physics guy was that the algorithm bias took place during the election. Those were junk so now you nvented a new algorithm, one triggered after the polls close. Of course an algorithm could easily access and use the date. But the counting fraud has a simpler explanation.

The algorithm bias theory serves three simple purposes: make convervatives look stupid, distract from the actual fraud, and enrich voting machine companies in their lawsuits. How are we going to stop midnight ballot alterations? How are we going to securely mark ballots to stop fabrication? How are we going to stop harvesting, bribing, threats, signature forging, non-postmarked ballots, and worst of all, bureaucrats and judges illegally changing the rules?

In your world, we're not. We'll simply accuse the voting machine companies, without evidence, of biased counting and let all that other stuff continue. Because of course it had to be the algorithm.