Posted on 11/07/2022 10:06:36 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
John Fetterman, the Democratic candidate running for the Pennsylvania Senate, has sent out a memo warning that the election-reporting process could be delayed by a while and to "buckle up" for a long week ahead.
In his memo, Fetterman lashed out at many Republicans whom he claimed would try to delegitimize the results, including Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Tucker Carlson, Doug Mastriano, and even his opponent Mehmet Oz.
GOP nominee Doctor Mehmet Oz is currently polling neck and neck against Democrat Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman.
On Sunday's episode of Meet the Press host Chuck Todd told his audience to expect delays in the results from Tuesday's midterms as many of the battleground states will not have their votes tallied until well past the November 8.
Lots of cars with trunks in PA, eh?
The election results will be delayed until the Democrat party is ready to report them.
The Hunch back from hell wants to make sure his fake ballots get counted.
I hear the GOP is playing the mail in game much better this time in PA. Curious to see if they play it well enough to blunt the dem trickery.
why would it be delayed...and how does he know that...his stroke gave him ESP.
đ± Hmmmm! Didn’t branDUHn issue a notice like that last week? You know, even if it takes a few days, accept the results.
I sincerely hope that anyone committing vote fraud is put on trial for treason, and if convicted, dealt the appropriate punishment.
It takes time to print out more fake ballots. Hope they really don’t think they’ll get away with it.
I wonder how many fraudulent ballots theyâre ready to dump. Might even be riskier than 2020, but if they get caught, they can still count on the media to cover it up.
Fixed it for accuracy.
And vans stuffed with coolers for the hard working inner city counters?
In commie speak that means that Oz is gonna win the election but never fear commie rats, once they find out how many votes they “need” to steal it they will find a crap load in Philly
Look, this is just ramping up the process that began in Florida in the aftermath of the 2000 Presidential election. The objective is to use process changes and technology in voting to create DELIBERATE AMBIGUITY about the results to enable increasingly inventive forms of cheating.
The first time I remember going with my Dad when he voted was 1960, New York had these wonderful mechanical voting machines where you changed the state of a mechanical lever to vote, and opened the curtain with a big red lever which locked your votes and reset the levers. These machines were invented to limit paper ballot cheating, but like paper ballots, they would yield a tally by the early morning hours of the following day, and that was that. Yes, you could recount the ballots or re-tally the machines, but the results existed in physical form in the possession of authorities (i.e., the results were âanalogâ). In essence, âElection Dayâ was when everything happened and by Wednesday morning it was over.
What has been happening since 2000 (and maybe before) is the use of media, and technology, to create a condition where nobody knows what the result truly is - nobody knows how many votes were cast, nobody knows which votes count and which ones donât, and the final tally can change for days and even weeks (or until the Democrat wins). Most of the results, and now a lot of the votes themselves, are no longer analog but digital, and exist only as an ordered set of electrons, subject to change in many ways by many people.
This has created a fundamental change in public perception, and you can see it even here on FR. People go on and on about whether or not a winner has been âdeclaredâ, usually by media people who have no access to the real data. As electronic voting, and now even apps meant to run on handhelds, define reality, we may be approaching or already be at the point where most people are accepting of the proposition that ânobody knows who won, we have to rerun the program, we have to call in the experts, it was Russian bots, it was Craig Livingstone, etc., etc.).
This problem is of course compounded by early voting, mail-in voting, drop boxes, absentee voting, overseas voting, etc.
On election night in 1932, everybody knew that FDR had won a big victory - that in a country with no electronic media, no computers, and half paralyzed by depression. On election night in 1952, there were more votes for Eisenhower than Stevenson, and everybody knew THAT.
Eight years ago (a century in digital years), Hugh Hewitt wrote a book called, âIf Itâs Not Close, They Canât Cheatâ. As long as people believe that only digital wizards can actually determine the result, that may no longer be true.
If we could conduct and tally elections in 1932 and 1952, we should be able to do it now - except that would upset our masters, who have worked so hard to create the status quo. They certainly wonât give it up without a fight.
The pre-filled ballots supply chain is moving slowly like everything else.
Now how would a campaign know this?
From what I’ve heard from friends in the know-—this happens almost every year,
> they can still count on the media to cover it up <
They can count on the Deep State to cover it up as well. Folks like Bill Barr will be trotted out. And despite any evidence to the contrary, weâll be told that the fraud was minimal. So letâs all move along now.
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.