Georgia's Fulton County reprimanded for double-scanned ballots in 2020 recount

[CdnFox]

https://kdhnews.com/news/politics/georgias-fulton-county-reprimanded-for-double-scanned-ballots-in-2020-recount/article_920c3b95-61a3-5357-8f28-d55f8f450ae5.html

The Houston County voter who brought the complaint, Joe Rossi, said the investigation shows that the 2020 election was flawed, both during the recount and the hand audit of all 5 million votes cast. The State Election Board last year found that thousands of votes were double-counted or misallocated during an audit in Fulton.

“It has now been factually proven that both the hand audit, which is really, really important, and the certified machine count, have both been found to be in violation of Georgia election law,” Rossi told the board. “I’ll close with one word: vindicated.”

[CdnFox]

This is why the US has a problem with whichever side loses saying that the election was rigged, or flawed, or otherwise compromised.

And they are correct. No fraud can be proven in this case and they are claiming that the differences are not sufficient enough to change the outcome of the election. However this was one in a number of other obligations and too many of them are coming back with the claim that they cannot prove fraud, but they can't prove that there wasn't either by intent or by incompetence.

The us if it is going to save its democracy really needs to federalize federal voting, have one solid set of rules for everybody, and design it in such a way that they realize it's not enough to be able to say we can't prove fraud, they have to be able to prove that there wasn't. And that's not something they can do right now. So it's very hard to look at trump supporter in the eye and say you have no basis whatsoever for your claims that the election was not won by Biden.

[Michael Hardner]

"During the recount, Trump gained 939 net votes against Biden in Fulton County, where Biden received 73% support, according to the results."

So... 🤔

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

"During the recount, Trump gained 939 net votes against Biden in Fulton County, where Biden received 73% support, according to the results."

So... 🤔

So what's your point? In an election recount 3000 votes were miscounted and that happened both by hand and by machine.

So how do people know that it shoudln't have been net 3939 net votes for trump? 

How do they know that the other allegations which can neither be proved or disproved wouldn't have put him over the top? He lost by 12000 votes. Here's 3000 votes that DIDN'T EXIST which they can't confirm were or were not added to the pile.

How can anyone have faith in the process when it's that flawed? I mean - tha'ts 25 percent of the difference of the vote count. we're not talking about an inconsequential number.

Surely even your left wing brain can wrap itself around that concept.   If you can't even say whether or not 3000 fake votes which were entered into the system were counted or not  - there is no way you can claim that the election was fraud free.

It's not enough to say you can't PROVE fraud - you need to be able to prove there was no fraud

Edited May 8, 2024 by CdnFox

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

So what's your point? In an election recount 3000 votes were miscounted and that happened both by hand and by machine.

So how do people know that it shoudln't have been net 3939 net votes for trump? 

How do they know that the other allegations which can neither be proved or disproved wouldn't have put him over the top? He lost by 12000 votes. Here's 3000 votes that DIDN'T EXIST which they can't confirm were or were not added to the pile.

How can anyone have faith in the process when it's that flawed? I mean - tha'ts 25 percent of the difference of the vote count. we're not talking about an inconsequential number.

Surely even your left wing brain can wrap itself around that concept.   If you can't even say whether or not 3000 fake votes which were entered into the system were counted or not  - there is no way you can claim that the election was fraud free.

It's not enough to say you can't PROVE fraud - you need to be able to prove there was no fraud

Well counting millions of ballots will result in some mistakes, especially because you're dealing with volunteers for a lot of it. 

I'm confused... The end result was 900 or so votes for Trump, but the district was overwhelmingly for Biden. 

There wasn't really an impact in this case. Why is it being talked about? I'm honestly just trying to figure out what's being said here. 

Because it was an error, that means that the entire system could be in error? I don't think that follows. They investigated specific complaints I thought 

 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well counting millions of ballots will result in some mistakes, especially because you're dealing with volunteers for a lot of it. 

 

We do it in canada pretty regular.  And we have lots and lots of recounts.

There will always be some discrepincy but this is over the top and it creates a problem. Even if it turned out that there  was no actual impact in the overall election results, the fact that they can't say that with certainty is death to a democracy. Democracy only works if people have strong confidence in their elections and the outcomes and you cannot have that when you have a discrepency of 3000 votes among other discrepancies in a race that was only won by 12000.

Quote

I'm confused... The end result was 900 or so votes for Trump, but the district was overwhelmingly for Biden. 

You're fairly easily confused     I'll try to make it as simple as possible. 

The recount showed a NET gain of 900 ish votes for trump. That means biden gained or lost votes AND trump gained or lost votes. Trump ended up with a little more NET votes. That is not the same as 'total' votes. It just means he closed the gap by that much.

However - trump's people initially claimed that there were THOUSAND of votes that should have gone to him.

The recount process was severely flawed - and 3000 ish votes were input twice.  We dont' even know for sure if some orall or none of them were counted twice.

So - in theory it's possible that TRUMP should have had a NET vote increase of closer to 4000.  They can't say. We don't know.

Now its unlikely it was that much but even if it was that's not enough by itself to have overturned the results. Trump lost by 12000. 

But - there were other irregularities noted, and When you start adding them up it calls into question the validity of the vote.

 

Quote

There wasn't really an impact in this case. Why is it being talked about? I'm honestly just trying to figure out what's being said here. 

Ahhhh your usual  cheap "Debate" trick -  "I can't argue against it so lets pretend it's so meaningless we should'nt talk about it!!!!"

Mike - that cheezy low brow tactic might win you points on the playground at recess but  i'd rather you didn't insult my intelligence with that kind of bullshit.  Obviously the election matters. Obviously people's faith in the election results matters. You'd have to be beyond stupid not to realize those are important subjects worth discussing.

If you don't have an argument and can't refute my points just say so - don't try to tell us with dumb-assed crap like that.

Quote

Because it was an error, that means that the entire system could be in error? I don't think that follows. They investigated specific complaints I thought 

Of course it follows.  IF it was JUST an error then it might not be a problem - but they can't even be sure how much of an error it was.  They don't even know if the 3000 votes were recounted, or some were, or none were, etc.

And yes -  if you make a mistake that could be equaly to 1/4  or 1/3 of the split - that is MASSIVE and it calls into question what OTHER errors you might have made that went undetected or what other  things you can't "prove" interfered... but might have.  How can you have confidence in that? Then there's the mail in issues which they ALSO can't "prove" one way or another, etc etc etc. 

The problem is they can't seem to prove there wasn't enough fraud to over turn the results. The best they can say is that there wasn't proof that it did happen. That 'limbo' where you can't prove that the results were absoltuely vaild... that's death to a democracy.

 

[Michael Hardner]

Ok... well I tried to engage with you honestly... should have known better.

Look, there was an investigation.  No significant change.  Be satisfied or go have a nap.

There are so many eyes on these things, as evidenced by this nothing story being shared by the Conspiracy set ... We've seen it before.

Mike Pillow was wrong.

[robosmith]

53 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It's not enough to say you can't PROVE fraud - you need to be able to prove there was no fraud

You poor naive child; because it is impossible to prove a negative:

Why is it impossible to prove a negative?

 

The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise. The person making a negative claim cannot logically prove nonexistence. And here's why: to know that a X does not exist would require a perfect knowledge of all things (omniscience).

 

The Burden of Proof

is on the person challenging the OFFICIAL RESULTS.

No proof of fraud means all you have is the CERTIFIED VOTE COUNT. Duh

 

 

 

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You poor naive child; because it is impossible to prove a negative:

It's actually quite easy in this situation.   Canada does it all the time.  The US is just a little slow.

All you have  to do is tighten the rules and make them consistent such that there is proper accountability and no plausable method for something to do unnoticed.

For example - if you leave your front door open, there's no way to prove someone didnt' enter your house while you were gone.

But - if you've got a good lock on the door, a security camera and motion sensors in side then if someone claims someone went through your door without you noticing while you were out - you would reasonably say "that's not really possible".  Or at least it's insanely unlikely to the point of being non credible.

Right now the US federal election process is an unlocked door.  And every single election going back years the side that loses thinks it was 'rigged' somehow or another. Nancy still says trump is not the legit president and he stole the election.

And it's getting worse - so what needs to happen is rules and proceedures which make it so difficult to cheat that you can prove it didn't happen beyond a 'reasonable' doubt.

 

So i guess you read all my replies, you're just too scared to answer most of the time   LOL!