Yeah, we’re the people that always love to talk about evidence. So, let’s make sure we’re applying that principle evenly and demanding and looking at evidence for claims we like the sound and feeling of.
You need evidence to justify a recount when they’re normally only expected to shift the results by less than a percentage point. They’re not cheap, you don’t just do them whenever people feel like it.
I think that’s enough evidence to warrant such recount.
There’s a irregularity that, did not happen in prior elections and only in swing states, not even neighboring ones. It could be nothing or could be valid.
You are saying that there’s no evidence, but with electronic voting machines the only time you get evidence is if you verify it.
The most mind-blowing thing to me is that the less people are familiar with software engineering the more trusting they are of electronic voting machines and when there are irregularities just dismissing it.
Tell me, what evidence you would need to say “ok, I think we should recount these machine counted votes”.
What specific irregularities? I haven’t heard anything credible yet. This article is about how some of the irregularities being claimed are actually falsehoods people made up, the numbers they use are incorrect.
Evidence could really be anything, a witness, a whistleblower, a report of some sort. A shift in voting patterns doesn’t really qualify is all, since that happens all the time, and is very normal.
Yeah, we’re the people that always love to talk about evidence. So, let’s make sure we’re applying that principle evenly and demanding and looking at evidence for claims we like the sound and feeling of.
Well there are irregularitiea and a manual recount would either provide evidence or it would prove that no such thing happened.
You need evidence to justify a recount when they’re normally only expected to shift the results by less than a percentage point. They’re not cheap, you don’t just do them whenever people feel like it.
I think that’s enough evidence to warrant such recount.
There’s a irregularity that, did not happen in prior elections and only in swing states, not even neighboring ones. It could be nothing or could be valid.
You are saying that there’s no evidence, but with electronic voting machines the only time you get evidence is if you verify it.
The most mind-blowing thing to me is that the less people are familiar with software engineering the more trusting they are of electronic voting machines and when there are irregularities just dismissing it.
Tell me, what evidence you would need to say “ok, I think we should recount these machine counted votes”.
What specific irregularities? I haven’t heard anything credible yet. This article is about how some of the irregularities being claimed are actually falsehoods people made up, the numbers they use are incorrect.
Evidence could really be anything, a witness, a whistleblower, a report of some sort. A shift in voting patterns doesn’t really qualify is all, since that happens all the time, and is very normal.
Well it says in the article. Large number of bullet votes that didn’t happen in the past and only happened in the swing states.
With electronic voting machines how there could be witness if fraud happens inside, you need to recount to verify this. That’s the only way.
The article specifies that the bullet votes claim used incorrect numbers. The man lied, or was misinformed or something.
Witness was just one example of one type of evidence I would accept. Many forms of fraud can happen that can be witnessed. I also listed others.