Because those “experts” turned out to be“self-described.” I’ve read several articles by reputable sources debunking their claims, but probably the best overview is by Rebecca Watson (Skepchick) on YouTube. There’s no more evidence of rigging in 2024 than there was in 2020.
which episode/video?
Here you go! youtu.be/5521NypM_rg?...
I agree. I keep reading things by “experts” only to come to the conclusion that there really isn’t anything there. Will check out skepchick, thanks!
Keep your mind open. The data analysis is happening right now. youtu.be/cKDw2rlLAs0?...
Kamala had a huge team of lawyers headed by Democracy Docket fighter Marc Elias to fight voter suppression before the election and to prepare for any post-election legal disputes. Elias has been the Republicans’ nemesis for years, and if he didn’t see a reason to contest the election, I trust him.
Marc Elias is 100% on top of things.
Thank Marc Elias for his mere existence DAILY! I also subscribe to him.
Ditto. The guy is almost single-handedly holding up our country. I 💙 @marcelias.bsky.social.
Ditto!
📌
Check out this team of super smart, cyber security professionals, data, analysts, and statisticians digging into the election data. There’s definitely something there. Support them! youtu.be/cKDw2rlLAs0?...
I took the time to review the video and the materials. I think the folks involved are well-meaning, but I found they are building their case on scant actual evidence. In no particular order, I'll give you some of the reasons why I am unconvinced. 1/
The only evidence they bring to the table is voting patterns. Similar arguments were made by Trump supporters in 2020, Sanders supporters in the 2016 primaries, and in other earlier elections. It’s a big leap to say unusual patterns are proof of interference, and the patterns aren't that odd. 2/
Between vote margins and state laws, recounts were only legally available in Michigan and Nevada. Suspicions and vague forensic analysis wouldn’t have changed that. None are available now, so there's nowhere to go with this effort. 3/
The elections were audited in all states, comparing paper ballots to final tallies. (Most randomly select precincts to check) None of the audits found issues. In most of the swing states, it was Democratic officials overseeing the process. 4/
The voting officials were very aware that the software for some of the machines had been improperly shared, and in the case of Georgia publicly addressed the situation by increasing physical security around the master device to prevent possible manipulation. 5/
With the exception of the flaw that Georgia was taking extra security to prevent, any hack of voting equipment would necessitate hands-on access to every machine involved. That would require bypassing different security processes in hundreds of precincts, most in Democratically managed locations. 6/
A conspiracy of this magnitude would require a large number of people, and the more people necessary for a conspiracy to work, the less likely it is to be kept secret. For instance, we know about the improper sharing of voter system software because the people involved couldn’t keep it secret. 7/
I'll stop here. What frustrates me most is that this is being used to criticize Kamala, saying she's too feckless to fight. I resent those who denigrate her reputation this way. She didn't pursue it because it didn't happen, and she certainly doesn't deserve criticism for accepting the facts. 8/8
This attitude will most definitely ensure we will never have free and fair elections again. Check out the ETA website and read more reports. The data is not normal voting data. Get involved!
Elon Musk spent 6 weeks in PA prior to the election. Per Trump, “he really knows those voting computers.”
1) DJT doesn’t know how to turn on his own computer, so it doesn’t take much to impress him; 2) Musk doesn’t know that much about them, either; 3) Pennsylvania uses a dozen different types of voting machines and none are connected to the Internet. How would Musk or his team hack them?
Source?
Not true. They are asking every county for the data. If the county refuses, they will sue for it. Thus the funding needed for lawyers.
This is just the beginning. They analyzed 2 counties and based on their findings (in this video), will seek the data from every county. If you go to their website, you’ll find the latest analysis of 3 PA counties — all 3 showing the same phenomenon.