Dominion vote switching physically impossible
- Thread starter Tanj
- Start date
chad kincham
Well-Known Member
You can say that until you turn blue, it won’t change the easily verifiable truth of using signature matching on mail in ballots.
After the signatures are matched which authenticates who sent in the ballot. the envelope is discarded, which is where the privacy comes in, but only AFTER they first make sure the vote is authentic and not a harvested ballot.
Upvote
0
chad kincham
Well-Known Member
They use scanners to compare the envelope signature to the one on file.
If they don’t match, the ballot can’t be counted.
At least that’s how it works where there’s not election fraud.
Philadelphia is infamous for voter fraud, BTW.
Upvote
0
chad kincham
Well-Known Member
From CBS news, signature matching on mail in ballots.
At 1:19 they explain it works exactly how I stated it does:
At 1:19 they explain it works exactly how I stated it does:
Upvote
0
- Nov 13, 2017
- 12,212
- 12,526
- Country
- Romania
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
What reason do you have to believe that any of this is real, or that voting machines are ‘suspect’ and so on? What are your actual reasons, and based on what evidence?
Upvote
0
- Aug 6, 2017
- 5,118
- 1,649
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Aug 6, 2017
- 5,118
- 1,649
- 46
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Nobody informed Americans they were voting with weighted points like that
Upvote
0
- Nov 13, 2017
- 12,212
- 12,526
- Country
- Romania
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Vague assertions are not proof. These kind of arguments are similar to those put forward for miracle natural cures and why ‘the Drs’ try to hide the truth about them. Just as you can’t prove that drinking cranberry juice doesn’t cure cancer to someone over the internet, you can’t prove that some random set of vague associations has nothing to do with anything.
The interesting question here is why people believe this kind of thing. There’s a village near where I live that was abandoned by most of its inhabitants, only a few people still live there kind of in a world of their own, there’s no paved road going through it and the people living there rarely go anywhere. They are prone to this kind of thinking - one guy who lives there sold a few hectares of land to my brother in law, went on a week long bender with the proceeds and then couldn’t remember selling the land. He’s been going on about it for a couple of years and has come up with a whole bizarre story of how my bro in law and the local authorities cooked up a plan to take his land, forge his signature etc., linking up random ideas to create a narrative that for him at least ‘proves’ his land was stolen. A certain segment of US conservatives live in a similar kind of bubble, where poorly written news sources which lack any sort of journalistic integrity are the ones telling ‘the truth’. The only difference between the article you quoted and my friend in the village is volume- somehow through sheer volume the most absurdly irrelevant nonsense takes on a life of its own and people start to think it’s real. Guilliani seems to get this; the more ridiculous the claims are, and the more ridiculous claims you make, the higher the likelihood they will be believed, a la emperor’s new clothes.
I wonder if it’s about the need for a narrative we all have to support our view of the world. People unwilling to engage in the realities of the modern world seem to have a need, which probably all or most of us have, to feel like they are ‘the good guys’, and in the absence of any sort of reality base for that a fantasy narrative will do. This might explain dissonant oddities like raving over abortion when the facts make it clear that it is the provision of effective family planning support etc that dramatically reduces the numbers of abortions, and not some pretend pro-life character who simply says what people want to hear, or the far more effective and humane immigration policies of the Obama administration vs the Trump wall circus, and so on.
Upvote
0
- Nov 13, 2017
- 12,212
- 12,526
- Country
- Romania
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
There’s nothing in the article that contains any proof of anything at all, nothing. Prove to me there is no soup dragon living under tycho crater on the moon, and I’ll take your question seriously.
The only meaningful questions in relation to Trump’s election fraud nonsense relate to why people feel the need to believe there is anything to it - addressing questions of that sort offers the only possibility of any kind of progress in US politics.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Nov 13, 2017
- 12,212
- 12,526
- Country
- Romania
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
What possible reason could you have for taking this seriously? Serious question: why do you need to believe this is true?
Upvote
0
- Mar 31, 2017
- 7,682
- 8,316
- 59
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
They weren't. The fact the voting machine has that as an available setting doesn't mean it was used. It's like having a a computer that can boot both linux and windows. The fact it can run linux doesn't mean it was.
More importantly, the weighted systems we are talking about only make sense in a proportional voting system, in this case apparently using a proportional shift of all votes rather than a full shift of a proportion of votes, and it only has meaning in a proportional system. Or, to extend my analogy, you can use this to cheat in exactly the same way you can run a linux executable in native windows. Which is to say, in no way at all. This only works as a conspiracy cheating theory for people very ignorant of the different types of voting systems. People like Chad, who thinks that the sole purpose of RCV is fraud, despite being told 4 times in a row that Australia uses it in its elections.
For emphasis, the proportional vote shift only kicks in after the candidate in question has won election, and is used to select the next seat. As I said, it's meaningless in an election with only one seat, such as a presidential election.
Counting single transferable votes - Wikipedia
Another method, known as Senatorial rules (after its use for most seats in Irish Senate elections), or the Gregory method (after its inventor in 1880, J. B. Gregory of Melbourne) eliminates all randomness. Instead of transferring a fraction of votes at full value, transfer all votes at a fractional value.
Such a system requires a winning quota setting, amongst other things. It is utterly meaningless in a presidential race.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Valletta
Well-Known Member
- Oct 10, 2020
- 8,240
- 3,034
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
It should have been obvious to anyone who stayed up to watch the election results that something was very wrong when the counting in major Democrat cities in the swing states suddenly halted. It wasn't just Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren who raised the alarm about Dominion, the state of Texas did a fair job at pointing out some of the problems. This should have been all cleared up by now because Dominion said they would answer questions at a Pennsylvania hearing, but Dominion was a no-show. That they so quickly chose to go through a news service instead of answering questions under oath is telling. Why did Dominon make updates just before the election? What was the nature of these updates? Were these updates only for specific sites or for all of the sites. Was the RCV code in all of their election software or did they only allow that software to be used in their machines in the few places in the country where RCV voting was the law? If it was in all of their election software didn't they consider the security implications? Is there a backdoor to their software?
Upvote
0
Valletta
Well-Known Member
- Oct 10, 2020
- 8,240
- 3,034
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
There has never before been so many reports of wrongdoing in a presidential election. Those who prevented legal Republican observers from doing their job have not only not been charged, but I am unaware of any law force investigation. Where is the FBI? Where are the local police? When observers were blocked the chain of custody was broken. Those who illegally did this showed utter contempt for the voters of this nation, and so do many of the supposed leaders, or "leaders-elect." Are we a nation of law or of mob rule?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
