The Distributed Election Fraud Model

[TheCount]

Less attention if 1 election is fixed vs 10. It's a numbers game.

Dubious.

The presidential race gets far more attention than house races or state races, and any race involving The Orange God even more attention than that. This is a person who cried fraud in an election that he won. Has anyone claimed that, with apparently millions of fraudulent votes, that any downballot races were stolen?

 

[Philhelm]

Can someone explain to me how and why this massive, distributed conspiracy was designed to fail to take control of the senate, to lose house seats, and to lose control of state legislatures and state governorships?

Simple: Trump (and therefore the down-ballot) outperformed expectations resulting in old-fashioned, last minute ballot stuffing at 4:00 a.m. with Biden-only ballots to supplement the baked in fraud. In addition, they probably didn't want to take out too many Republicans for the sake of appearance and to not give Trump more aggrieved allies. Finally, they only needed to commit fraud within key districts of key states (i.e. swing states).

 

[Philhelm]

Has anyone claimed that, with apparently millions of fraudulent votes, that any downballot races were stolen?

I think that John James and Kim Klacik are challenging.

 

[jmdrake]

Can someone explain to me how and why this massive, distributed conspiracy was designed to fail to take control of the senate, to lose house seats, and to lose control of state legislatures and state governorships?

1) The Republican co-conspirators like the Lincoln Project wouldn't have gone along with that.

2) Rank and file republicans need to have hope in order to not go into full revolt.

3) Not all Senate seats were up for re-election.

 

[TheCount]

Trump (and therefore the down-ballot) outperformed expectations resulting in old-fashioned, last minute ballot stuffing at 4:00 a.m. with Biden-only ballots to supplement the baked in fraud.

Last minute, 4AM ballot stuffing is explicitly the sort of election fraud that this distributed election fraud model says doesn't exist.

Also, if those ballots were Biden-only, why did the late-counted ballots change numbers in downballot races too? You can look at the election #s from Nov 3 and later and see that those ballots were clearly not Biden-only.

In addition, they probably didn't want to take out too many Republicans for the sake of appearance and to not give Trump more aggrieved allies.

2018 was 'too many' Republicans taken out and they had to back off of that?

Why don't I remember mass allegations of election fraud from 2018, then?

Finally, they only needed to commit fraud within key districts of key states (i.e. swing states).

Why is it that voter turnout in those key districts of those key states was unaffected, then? Turnout in swing states was up by the same % in red areas as blue for 2020. Does this new, magical kind of election fraud also include adding fraudulent GOP ballots to match the Dem ballots?

 

[tebowlives]

Last minute, 4AM ballot stuffing is explicitly the sort of election fraud that this distributed election fraud model says doesn't exist.

No one has offered an explanation on why mail in votes had such large differences when we know they are mixed together vs in person where large swings exist.

 

[TheCount]

No one has offered an explanation on why mail in votes had such large differences when we know they are mixed together vs in person where large swings exist.

Trump told people not to vote mail in.

Dems told people to vote mail in.


That's why, even in very red areas, the mail-in ballots were mostly blue.

 

[tebowlives]

Trump told people not to vote mail in.

Dems told people to vote mail in.


That's why, even in very red areas, the mail-in ballots were mostly blue.

Curious, where is the proof of this?

Plus the mail ins still would be mixed together and wild swings would not happen nearly as much as what we've seen.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Last minute, 4AM ballot stuffing is explicitly the sort of election fraud that this distributed election fraud model says doesn't exist.

Actually, this conspiracy hypothesis does not rule out "4AM ballot stuffing". It does not rule out any type of election fraud. Quite the opposite. All types of fraud could be used.

While a huge dump of tens or hundreds of thousands of fraudulent ballots may be easier to catch

Easier to catch, but does not rule out that it may be done in a desperate moment.

Once the election rules are sufficiently loose and the seeds of fraud are sewn, it is time for operatives large and small to gather that harvest. In this case, flooding the population with ballots and almost eliminating validations is enough to enable vote fraud. Allowing these ballots to be collected en masse by anyone who has an urge to do so further enables fraud (ballot harvesting).

A larger operation may collect ballots and hold them in reserve, in case they are needed at 4am. On a tangent, printing ballots from scratch is not addressed, or ruled out.

And who knows how counting machine "glitches" might manifest themselves, and in what numbers.

I will address other specific questions about the hypothesis tomorrow. Questions, corner cases, and challenges are always welcome in testing a hypothesis against the real world.

 

[TheCount]

Actually, this conspiracy hypothesis does not rule out "4AM ballot stuffing". It does not rule out any type of election fraud. Quite the opposite. All types of fraud could be used.

4AM ballot stuffing isn't distributed. It can't be distributed. There is no way for an ordinary person, poll worker, or election official to print and fill out valid ballots on the night after the election has concluded. That necessitates a massive, top-down conspiracy.

Easier to catch, but does not rule out that it may be done in a desperate moment.

Which is what is being described, right? So... where is this easy to catch dump or tens or hundreds of thousands of ballots?

A larger operation may collect ballots and hold them in reserve, in case they are needed at 4am. On a tangent, printing ballots from scratch is not addressed, or ruled out.

Collect whose ballots? Print whose ballots? What names are on these ballots?

 

[PRB]

It's real. But there was nothing for the lawyer to "lie under oath" about.

The transcription is from Donald J. Trump for President v. Montgomery County Board of Elections, which was an attempt to halt ballot counting on the basis of improper ballot handling. It had nothing to do with any allegations of fraud (which is precisely what the court's questions were intended to establish).

if it wasn't fraud, then it's immaterial to the outcome of this election ,and thus a waste of courts time.

 

[PRB]

Last minute, 4AM ballot stuffing is explicitly the sort of election fraud that this distributed election fraud model says doesn't exist.

Also, if those ballots were Biden-only, why did the late-counted ballots change numbers in downballot races too? You can look at the election #s from Nov 3 and later and see that those ballots were clearly not Biden-only.




2018 was 'too many' Republicans taken out and they had to back off of that?

Why don't I remember mass allegations of election fraud from 2018, then?




Why is it that voter turnout in those key districts of those key states was unaffected, then? Turnout in swing states was up by the same % in red areas as blue for 2020. Does this new, magical kind of election fraud also include adding fraudulent GOP ballots to match the Dem ballots?

I'm still waiting for somebody to explain to me why they waiting last minute to cheat and get caught if they had 3 weeks to mix them in?

ESPECIALLY in states like PA where they don't even start counting until election day.

 

[Occam's Banana]

if it wasn't fraud, then it's immaterial to the outcome of this election ,and thus a waste of courts time.

It isn't. If ballots are improperly handled (among other possible problems - such as fraud), then their integrity cannot be verified and they might therefore be invalidated. This is why they have such laws to begin with. Enforcing the law if it can be established that the law has not been observed is not "a waste of the court's time" - it's the reason for the court's existence in the first place.

 

[Contumacious]

nice conspiracy theory, would be a shame if somebody asked for evidence

YO , PRB , whistleblowers and affiants have provided testimonial evidence .

Furthermore the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to ignore the Legislature's intent,

So we are dealing with several issues.

 

[Contumacious]

It isn't. If ballots are improperly handled (among other possible problems - such as fraud), then their integrity cannot be verified and they might therefore be invalidated. This is why they have such laws to begin with. Enforcing the law if it can be established that the law has not been observed is not a waste of the court's time - it's the reason for the court's existence in the first place.

EXACTLY

 

[PRB]

YO , PRB , whistleblowers and affiants have provided testimonial evidence .

evidence that there's substantial votes that aren't legal?

 

[PRB]

It isn't. If ballots are improperly handled (among other possible problems - such as fraud), then their integrity cannot be verified and they might therefore be invalidated. This is why they have such laws to begin with. Enforcing the law if it can be established that the law has not been observed is not "a waste of the court's time" - it's the reason for the court's existence in the first place.

yeah, "might" but until you prove that they "were" improper to begin with, you got nothing.

 

[Occam's Banana]

yeah, "might" but until you prove that they "were" improper to begin with, you got nothing.

I have never said otherwise. (And I am not party to any of the suits, so I don't need to "have" or to "prove" anything.)

The existence of the courts is predicated upon the resolution of such matters; thus, such matters are not, as you asserted, a "waste of the court's time." Such matters are why the courts exist in the first place.

 

[PRB]

I have never said otherwise. (And I am not party to any of the suits, so I don't need to "have" or to "prove" anything.)

The existence of the courts is predicated upon the resolution of such matters; thus, such matters are not, as you asserted, a "waste of the court's time." Such matters are why the courts exist in the first place.

no, it's not, courts are for things that matter.

 

[tod evans]

no, it's not, courts are for things that matter.

Now a whole 'nuther group of people will learn of what I speak when I say "Justice will not be found in their courts."

I find it humorous that either group will face that reality.

Time to suck it up Buttercup.

(These sentiments hold true whether you're a Rep. or a Dem.)