Good article - I've long been suspicious of Musk arriving at the 11th hour in Trump's entourage, along with some of Trump's hints that they had something special going on, followed by Harris actual results differing so much from the pre-election polling.
Sadly, the case will eventually be dismissed by the crooked Supreme Court so I doubt there'll ever be transparency on the matter.
It didn't start with Musk--both elections of Dubya and certainly Sanders' primary runs, were extreme outliers according to exit polls, which are reliable. That's why the major media stopped using exit polls.
Unless im mistaken, the only primaries Hillary won were the ones that used the machines because the results could not be verified. Bernie won the primaries that could be verified
That is essentially correct. Both Parties cheat in this way, which tells us that democracy is the last thing they want. Jim Kavanagh over at the Polemicist has written about voting machines, noting that 95% of all votes are either cast or counted on machines, on computers. He points out that this means we can't ever know with certainty who won any Presidential election going back decades. Check out his work at the Polemecist.com
Isn't it the reason why they, I mean black hat hackers such Musk, consider themselves as supreme beings for their ability to crack down the election machines and make their candidates win ?
And we, dumb people, still continuing to trust them?
the book Code Red by Jonathan Simon published in 2018 made clear the statistical impossibilities of the 2016 election made possible by black box computer balloting. In every state Democrat primary where Bernie or Hillary was the clear favorite, the exit polls were close to the final election results (1-2% deviation normal for exit polls). In _every_ close primary Hillary Won and the exit polls were off by 5-6%. In the general election the same anomalies occurred, only it was always Trump that won in the close state elections by the same 5-6% deviation from exit polls. Whereas in the states where Trump or Hillary was favored heavily, the exit polls were only off by 1-2% as is normal. The author makes the point that this was off the charts statistically impossible.
I haven't voted on an electronic voting machine in a long time--I simply don't trust them. But then whenever I vote by hand and turn in my marked ballot, they tell me that the "machine will do the counting" on the circles I filled in. How do I know that isn't a rigged machine as well? I wish we could go back to good ol' fashioned paper ballots where we could write the name of the persons we were voting for on them and then we could watch real live people (not computers or AI 'bots) doing the counting. It's a dream I have that some day we could actually have a "democracy" of sorts.
Let’s say this lawsuit goes forward and eventually reached the Supreme Court. What are the changes SCOTUS will uphold any kind of ruling that supports investigating voting machines?
Good article - I've long been suspicious of Musk arriving at the 11th hour in Trump's entourage, along with some of Trump's hints that they had something special going on, followed by Harris actual results differing so much from the pre-election polling.
Sadly, the case will eventually be dismissed by the crooked Supreme Court so I doubt there'll ever be transparency on the matter.
It didn't start with Musk--both elections of Dubya and certainly Sanders' primary runs, were extreme outliers according to exit polls, which are reliable. That's why the major media stopped using exit polls.
Unless im mistaken, the only primaries Hillary won were the ones that used the machines because the results could not be verified. Bernie won the primaries that could be verified
That is essentially correct. Both Parties cheat in this way, which tells us that democracy is the last thing they want. Jim Kavanagh over at the Polemicist has written about voting machines, noting that 95% of all votes are either cast or counted on machines, on computers. He points out that this means we can't ever know with certainty who won any Presidential election going back decades. Check out his work at the Polemecist.com
Isn't it the reason why they, I mean black hat hackers such Musk, consider themselves as supreme beings for their ability to crack down the election machines and make their candidates win ?
And we, dumb people, still continuing to trust them?
I hope you are right that we will be allowed to verify the machine results, but I fear that somehow, the legal system will result in not allowing it.
I had been hearing that they're were issues with them long before Trump.
Yes, ever since votes starting being cast and tallied on machines and computers.
Ballots should only be hand counted in the presence of a witness or referee! If it takes longer, so what? Democracy
is certainly worth the wait, no?!
The last thing the Ruling Class wants is democracy. They have no use for it in the wider world, so why would they want it here?
Sadly I have to agree.
the book Code Red by Jonathan Simon published in 2018 made clear the statistical impossibilities of the 2016 election made possible by black box computer balloting. In every state Democrat primary where Bernie or Hillary was the clear favorite, the exit polls were close to the final election results (1-2% deviation normal for exit polls). In _every_ close primary Hillary Won and the exit polls were off by 5-6%. In the general election the same anomalies occurred, only it was always Trump that won in the close state elections by the same 5-6% deviation from exit polls. Whereas in the states where Trump or Hillary was favored heavily, the exit polls were only off by 1-2% as is normal. The author makes the point that this was off the charts statistically impossible.
I haven't voted on an electronic voting machine in a long time--I simply don't trust them. But then whenever I vote by hand and turn in my marked ballot, they tell me that the "machine will do the counting" on the circles I filled in. How do I know that isn't a rigged machine as well? I wish we could go back to good ol' fashioned paper ballots where we could write the name of the persons we were voting for on them and then we could watch real live people (not computers or AI 'bots) doing the counting. It's a dream I have that some day we could actually have a "democracy" of sorts.
Let’s say this lawsuit goes forward and eventually reached the Supreme Court. What are the changes SCOTUS will uphold any kind of ruling that supports investigating voting machines?
Yes it absolutely was one of the questions during the rigged 2016 primaries, and numerical anomalies were part of that situation too.
You actually think voting counts? Hahahaha
Actually, We think COLLUSION on Election CORRUPTION MUST "Count."
🙏🏽🔥🙏🏽❗️Thank You, Lee❗️🙏🏽🔥🙏🏽
Been wondering WHY aren't WeThePeople hearing MORE from
INVESTIGATIVE Journalists on this scam
Learn how to spell “demented”. And Dementia isn’t an Insult.
We will see nothing, “the whole worlds a stage..”