Heather Honey, researcher who has distorted 2020 voter data, appointed to Homeland Security election integrity role

Pommer · Sunday at 3:12 AM

ozso said:
I didn't point out any errors or even say there were errors. I said it was a hard left critique. If it was a Britebart article, then I'd say it was a hard right critique. Saying MSNBC is hard left, is like saying water is wet.

Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

ozso · Sunday at 4:28 AM

Pommer said:
Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

This isn't rocket surgery. A hard left source is going to say what its readers want to hear. Therefore take it as such.

As for Heather Honey fudging numbers, the info I got on that is:

Heather Honey did not "fudge" or manipulate election numbers directly, but news reports have documented that she has repeatedly used flawed analysis of election data to promote false claims of voter fraud.

The keywords are "news reports". News reports from what sources? Hard left sources like MSNBC?

Did any court or government agency file anything aginst her? Any citations of falsefying voter information, or manipulating voter information or election tampering? Anything like that at all from any kind of agency that polices illicit activity of that nature?

It's a foregone conclusion the answer to that is no, because DHS wouldn't have hired her if that was the case.

So there's a couple of conclusions that can be reached:

A. DHS hired her because she's qualified and didn't actually commit any wrongdoing.

B. Conspiracy theory.

perplexed · Sunday at 5:31 AM

It is fascinating to watch someone brainwash themselves in real time.

ozso · Sunday at 7:00 AM

perplexed said:
It is fascinating to watch someone brainwash themselves in real time.

Please discuss the topic rather than launch personal attacks. Flaming is aginst the rules here.

RocksInMyHead · Sunday at 8:01 AM

ozso said:
It's a foregone conclusion the answer to that is no, because DHS wouldn't have hired her if that was the case.

"The government can do no wrong" is certainly an opinion that someone can have.

FAITH-IN-HIM · Sunday at 8:54 AM

Always in His Presence said:
Absolutely - one evidence is the 100% tribe speak through the Democratic Party who touted the party line that Joe Biden was the sharpest he has ever been - right up until the time they turned on him and forced a sitting President out of a reelection campaign. Where were the independent thinkers?

We often disagree, but I completely agree with you this time. From January 2021 to January 2025, most Democrats supported President Biden, with only Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema opposing his administration. Both are no longer Democrats.

If moderate Democrats had challenged President Biden’s China policy and reversed President Trump’s 2019 tariffs, inflation might not have been as severe in 2022. However, most congressional Democrats remained silent and supported the president.

If Democrats had addressed President Biden’s health concerns in 2003 and challenged him in a primary with televised debates, his condition could have been made clear to the American public, possibly resulting in a different 2024 DNC nominee than Kamala Harris.

This has been the nature of American politics since 2006, when Democrats took control of Congress and opposed President Bush with little dissent. Cooperation with the opposition party ceased to be valued. In 2010, Republicans responded in kind by opposing President Obama, mirroring the same lack of collaboration for the country's benefit. And this continues until today.

It's not just politicians—the voters act the same way. Today, American voter rarely admit when their own side does something wrong. You criticize Democrats for tribal behavior, but if I ask about Republicans, you simply tell me to start a new thread.

You ask where independent thinking is reflected. It is present in this post. I do not hesitate to critique both Democrats and Republicans, and I am willing to acknowledge when I am mistaken. That is how independent thinking operates. Independent thinking involves evaluating all perspectives objectively, rather than only highlighting others' faults while ignoring one's own mistakes. Critical and independent thinking are effective only when all aspects are considered impartially.

essentialsaltes · Sunday at 9:20 AM

ozso said:
Heather Honey did not "fudge" or manipulate election numbers directly,

Of course not. She's just a private citizen with no knowledge of or role in the administration of those elections. This is just a red herring or strawman.

ozso said:
but news reports have documented that she has repeatedly used flawed analysis of election data to promote false claims of voter fraud.

That's right. She propagated erroneous information about elections. Of course that's not a crime. Again a strawman. I am not accusing her of being a criminal. I'm accusing her of being unqualified for this job. She doesn't know what she's doing, and her 'methods' continue to produce false findings.

ozso · Sunday at 9:32 AM

essentialsaltes said:
Of course not. She's just a private citizen with no knowledge of or role in the administration of those elections. This is just a red herring or strawman.

It was a reply to:

Pommer said:
Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

And it's not very nice to accuse him of red herrings and strawmen.

essentialsaltes said:
That's right. She propagated erroneous information about elections. Of course that's not a crime. Again a strawman. I am not accusing her of being a criminal. I'm accusing her of being unqualified for this job. She doesn't know what she's doing, and her 'methods' continue to produce false findings.

Did any court or government agency file anything aginst her? Any citations of falsefying voter information, or manipulating voter information or election tampering? Anything like that at all from any kind of agency that polices illicit activity of that nature?

ozso · Sunday at 9:38 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
"The government can do no wrong" is certainly an opinion that someone can have.

Or just simply a logical conclusion that the DHS wouldn't hire someone for that job who had official charges brought against them for committing election no-nos.

essentialsaltes · Sunday at 10:00 AM

ozso said:
this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers.

No reasonable person would assume this meant she had changed election results.

ozso · Sunday at 10:06 AM

essentialsaltes said:
No reasonable person would assume this meant she had changed election results.

Tell it to @Pommer

Pommer said:
Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

(emphasis added by me)

And please stop with the misquote via editing tactics. It's rather tacky.

rambot · Sunday at 1:32 PM

ozso said:
. Anecdotally, the more the left objects to someone, the more likely it is they're the right person for the job.

And a person would think that if they define "aptitude for job performance" based on how popular they are with a certain crowd.

You know. Like how people made choices in junior high.

rambot · Sunday at 1:42 PM

ozso said:
Heather Honey did not "fudge" or manipulate election numbers directly, but news reports have documented that she has repeatedly used flawed analysis of election data to promote false claims of voter fraud.

It's a foregone conclusion the answer to that is no, because DHS wouldn't have hired her if that was the case.

Ahhh. I see. You ACTUALLY believe Trump goes for people of integrity and not people who will do what he says regardless of anything

That's....a strange opinion to hold given the lack of evidence to suggest anything of the sort.

ozso · Sunday at 1:45 PM

rambot said:
And a person would think that if they define "aptitude for job performance" based on how popular they are with a certain crowd.

You know. Like how people made choices in junior high.

I thought it was supposed to be they get hired because they're loyal to the king.

ozso · Sunday at 1:47 PM

rambot said:
Ahhh. I see. You ACTUALLY believe Trump goes for people of integrity and not people who will do what he says regardless of anything

That's....a strange opinion to hold given the lack of evidence to suggest anything of the sort.

There we go, that's more like it.

RocksInMyHead · Sunday at 2:54 PM

ozso said:
Tell it to @Pommer

Pommer said:
Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

Right - I don't see how that would imply that she actually changed election results or committed a crime. If I go around claiming that Kamala Harris won the 2024 election and that Pennsylvania had 200,000 more votes than voters (an example of one of Honey's many false claims), that's not changing anything official or committing a crime, but it is fudging the numbers.

This article breaks down several of her false claims and misrepresentations: Heather Honey’s research has made her a right-wing election expert. Her findings are deeply flawed.

rambot · Sunday at 3:19 PM

ozso said:
I thought it was supposed to be they get hired because they're loyal to the king.

You misunderstood

perplexed · Sunday at 4:42 PM

Originally Heather Honey used publicly available information to work out there were 205,000 more votes than voters, Trump used this Statement on Jan 6th. She is now saying there are 121,000 more votes that voters.

This statement is a conspiracy theory because it needs lots of counties to have a difference between the number of votes and voters and nobody blowing the whistle, having a difference between votes and voters is clear evidence something is horribly wrong.

rambot · Sunday at 6:17 PM

perplexed said:
Originally Heather Honey used publicly available information to work out there were 205,000 more votes than voters, Trump used this Statement on Jan 6th. She is now saying there are 121,000 more votes that voters.

This statement is a conspiracy theory because it needs lots of counties to have a difference between the number of votes and voters and nobody blowing the whistle, having a difference between votes and voters is clear evidence something is horribly wrong.

Oh...but I'm sure she showed her work somewhere.

I'm sure someone who supports this choice will definitely be willing to find evidence of her capacity.

In the meantime, my vice presidency of my community garden committe should get me a spot under a jd Vance presidency.

Pommer · Sunday at 6:49 PM

ozso said:
Tell it to @Pommer

Pommer said:
Oh I see, there’s nothing “wrong” with it, per se, just that it was overly critical of the facts of the matter, that being this person has a documented history of fudging the numbers. Okay.

(emphasis added by me)

And please stop with the misquote via editing tactics. It's rather tacky.

Did I get something wrong?
Mercy me, where’s my cat-o-nine-tails!?

Heather Honey, researcher who has distorted 2020 voter data, appointed to Homeland Security election integrity role

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

✦

Senior Member

✦

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

✦

✦

Fact-Based Lifeform

✦

Senior Member

Senior Member

✦

✦

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Similar threads