(11-27-2020 03:09 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  If you want to read excerpts from the MI lawsuit...
https://twitter.com/PandaTribune/status/...9143704579

the affidavits from data experts (whose credentials are included) is pretty damning.

One of the affidavits is from the same guy who confused MI and MN, so I wouldn't put your full faith in these affidavits.

His amended affidavit seems to be completely incorrect or misleading.

So according to the affidavit, the city in question with 781% turnout is North Muskegon.

N. Muskegon is divided into two precincts. According to the precinct-by-precinct results on the official page, there were 3,390 registered voters in N. Muskegon for this election: 1,602 in the 1st Precinct + 1,788 in the 2nd.
https://www.co.muskegon.mi.us/DocumentCe...-11-3-2020
(starts on page 459)

The results show 73.53% turnout for its 1st Precinct (1,178 voters), and 82.21% for the 2nd (1,470) — 2,648 votes, or 77.87% turnout for the city as a whole.

781.91% of 3,390 registered voters would be 26,506.749. No idea where that number comes from. But if there were a misplaced decimal somewhere, 78.191% of 3,390 is 2,650 — only two votes more than the reported 2,648. 78.1% of 3,390 is exactly the reported number if we round down the fraction in 2,648.

So this guy is still completely incorrect or wildly misleading.

or you could be wrong.

(11-27-2020 03:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:09 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  If you want to read excerpts from the MI lawsuit...
https://twitter.com/PandaTribune/status/...9143704579

the affidavits from data experts (whose credentials are included) is pretty damning.

One of the affidavits is from the same guy who confused MI and MN, so I wouldn't put your full faith in these affidavits.

His amended affidavit seems to be completely incorrect or misleading.

So according to the affidavit, the city in question with 781% turnout is North Muskegon.

N. Muskegon is divided into two precincts. According to the precinct-by-precinct results on the official page, there were 3,390 registered voters in N. Muskegon for this election: 1,602 in the 1st Precinct + 1,788 in the 2nd.
https://www.co.muskegon.mi.us/DocumentCe...-11-3-2020
(starts on page 459)

The results show 73.53% turnout for its 1st Precinct (1,178 voters), and 82.21% for the 2nd (1,470) — 2,648 votes, or 77.87% turnout for the city as a whole.

781.91% of 3,390 registered voters would be 26,506.749. No idea where that number comes from. But if there were a misplaced decimal somewhere, 78.191% of 3,390 is 2,650 — only two votes more than the reported 2,648. 78.1% of 3,390 is exactly the reported number if we round down the fraction in 2,648.

So this guy is still completely incorrect or wildly misleading.

or you could be wrong.

I provided a link to the official source for election turnout. Don’t believe me, and don’t believe mr. MI/MN either. Do the math for yourself and let us know what you get.

It’s simple math.

(11-27-2020 12:31 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Pretty simple. If more votes were cast than the number of registered voters fraud was committed. Hel. If it is over 80% fraud was committed because voter rolls are rarely updated.

But, there are also reasons why it is not fraud.

1.New registered voters voting for the first time.

2.New registered voters who moved to these factory towns when factories opened up to make ventalators and PPE for the pandemic crisis.

3.Registered voters who were accidently purged because they were deemed dead, but the dead person with the same name is still on the books.

4.A voter who was actually purged on accident.

That could explain why it is not fraud. They are given a provisional ballot, and they checked the books later to find that these people are legal registered voters. You can't deny people their right to vote, but that is what Trump and his goons are trying to do.

(11-27-2020 07:24 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:31 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Pretty simple. If more votes were cast than the number of registered voters fraud was committed. Hel. If it is over 80% fraud was committed because voter rolls are rarely updated.

But, there are also reasons why it is not fraud.

1.New registered voters voting for the first time.

2.New registered voters who moved to these factory towns when factories opened up to make ventalators and PPE for the pandemic crisis.

3.Registered voters who were accidently purged because they were deemed dead, but the dead person with the same name is still on the books.

4.A voter who was actually purged on accident.

That could explain why it is not fraud. They are given a provisional ballot, and they checked the books later to find that these people are legal registered voters. You can't deny people their right to vote, but that is what Trump and his goons are trying to do.

I haven't seen any of these data analysis affidavits actually show anywhere that has more votes that registered voters.

This one is WAY off, the last one was based on the wrong states data.

Right after the election someone posted one for Wisconsin that was way off, they had transposed the numbers in the spreadsheet they were doing the comparison from.

WI offers same day registration, so you do have to add pre registered voters to same day to get the number of registered voters eligible for the election there.

(11-27-2020 07:28 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 07:24 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:31 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Pretty simple. If more votes were cast than the number of registered voters fraud was committed. Hel. If it is over 80% fraud was committed because voter rolls are rarely updated.

But, there are also reasons why it is not fraud.

1.New registered voters voting for the first time.

2.New registered voters who moved to these factory towns when factories opened up to make ventalators and PPE for the pandemic crisis.

3.Registered voters who were accidently purged because they were deemed dead, but the dead person with the same name is still on the books.

4.A voter who was actually purged on accident.

That could explain why it is not fraud. They are given a provisional ballot, and they checked the books later to find that these people are legal registered voters. You can't deny people their right to vote, but that is what Trump and his goons are trying to do.

I haven't seen any of these data analysis affidavits actually show anywhere that has more votes that registered voters.

This one is WAY off, the last one was based on the wrong states data.

Right after the election someone posted one for Wisconsin that was way off, they had transposed the numbers in the spreadsheet they were doing the comparison from.

WI offers same day registration, so you do have to add pre registered voters to same day to get the number of registered voters eligible for the election there.

Republicans benifited from the mail in ballots and same day registrations.

(11-27-2020 03:30 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:09 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  If you want to read excerpts from the MI lawsuit...
https://twitter.com/PandaTribune/status/...9143704579

the affidavits from data experts (whose credentials are included) is pretty damning.

One of the affidavits is from the same guy who confused MI and MN, so I wouldn't put your full faith in these affidavits.

His amended affidavit seems to be completely incorrect or misleading.

So according to the affidavit, the city in question with 781% turnout is North Muskegon.

N. Muskegon is divided into two precincts. According to the precinct-by-precinct results on the official page, there were 3,390 registered voters in N. Muskegon for this election: 1,602 in the 1st Precinct + 1,788 in the 2nd.
https://www.co.muskegon.mi.us/DocumentCe...-11-3-2020
(starts on page 459)

The results show 73.53% turnout for its 1st Precinct (1,178 voters), and 82.21% for the 2nd (1,470) — 2,648 votes, or 77.87% turnout for the city as a whole.

781.91% of 3,390 registered voters would be 26,506.749. No idea where that number comes from. But if there were a misplaced decimal somewhere, 78.191% of 3,390 is 2,650 — only two votes more than the reported 2,648. 78.1% of 3,390 is exactly the reported number if we round down the fraction in 2,648.

So this guy is still completely incorrect or wildly misleading.

or you could be wrong.

I provided a link to the official source for election turnout. Don’t believe me, and don’t believe mr. MI/MN either. Do the math for yourself and let us know what you get.

It’s simple math.

or, it could be what you're reading isnt representing what you think it does.

(11-27-2020 08:07 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:30 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:09 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  If you want to read excerpts from the MI lawsuit...
https://twitter.com/PandaTribune/status/...9143704579

the affidavits from data experts (whose credentials are included) is pretty damning.

One of the affidavits is from the same guy who confused MI and MN, so I wouldn't put your full faith in these affidavits.

His amended affidavit seems to be completely incorrect or misleading.

So according to the affidavit, the city in question with 781% turnout is North Muskegon.

N. Muskegon is divided into two precincts. According to the precinct-by-precinct results on the official page, there were 3,390 registered voters in N. Muskegon for this election: 1,602 in the 1st Precinct + 1,788 in the 2nd.
https://www.co.muskegon.mi.us/DocumentCe...-11-3-2020
(starts on page 459)

The results show 73.53% turnout for its 1st Precinct (1,178 voters), and 82.21% for the 2nd (1,470) — 2,648 votes, or 77.87% turnout for the city as a whole.

781.91% of 3,390 registered voters would be 26,506.749. No idea where that number comes from. But if there were a misplaced decimal somewhere, 78.191% of 3,390 is 2,650 — only two votes more than the reported 2,648. 78.1% of 3,390 is exactly the reported number if we round down the fraction in 2,648.

So this guy is still completely incorrect or wildly misleading.

or you could be wrong.

I provided a link to the official source for election turnout. Don’t believe me, and don’t believe mr. MI/MN either. Do the math for yourself and let us know what you get.

It’s simple math.

or, it could be what you're reading isnt representing what you think it does.

I said completely incorrect or wildly misleading. If the gentleman puts the header on the column “% turnout” and the figure in the column is something other than the percent voter turnout for that district that would qualify as wildly misleading.

There were less votes than registered voters in north Muskegon, doesn’t matter how you slice that number it doesn’t prove voter fraud.

(11-27-2020 08:07 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:30 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:19 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 03:09 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:40 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  If you want to read excerpts from the MI lawsuit...
https://twitter.com/PandaTribune/status/...9143704579

the affidavits from data experts (whose credentials are included) is pretty damning.

One of the affidavits is from the same guy who confused MI and MN, so I wouldn't put your full faith in these affidavits.

His amended affidavit seems to be completely incorrect or misleading.

So according to the affidavit, the city in question with 781% turnout is North Muskegon.

N. Muskegon is divided into two precincts. According to the precinct-by-precinct results on the official page, there were 3,390 registered voters in N. Muskegon for this election: 1,602 in the 1st Precinct + 1,788 in the 2nd.
https://www.co.muskegon.mi.us/DocumentCe...-11-3-2020
(starts on page 459)

The results show 73.53% turnout for its 1st Precinct (1,178 voters), and 82.21% for the 2nd (1,470) — 2,648 votes, or 77.87% turnout for the city as a whole.

781.91% of 3,390 registered voters would be 26,506.749. No idea where that number comes from. But if there were a misplaced decimal somewhere, 78.191% of 3,390 is 2,650 — only two votes more than the reported 2,648. 78.1% of 3,390 is exactly the reported number if we round down the fraction in 2,648.

So this guy is still completely incorrect or wildly misleading.

or you could be wrong.

I provided a link to the official source for election turnout. Don’t believe me, and don’t believe mr. MI/MN either. Do the math for yourself and let us know what you get.

It’s simple math.

or, it could be what you're reading isnt representing what you think it does.

Or another way to look at this is how many new registered voters that have not got updated or that the number of more people who did not vote in the prior Presidential elections that turned out in droves this time or they could be both.

It would be a lot more fun if there were actual evidence of fraud. About time to accept reality.

(11-28-2020 03:35 AM)gobluebigjon Wrote:  It would be a lot more fun if there were actual evidence of fraud. About time to accept reality.

There is a ton of evidence of fraud. Democrats arent even denying it now. If you are one of those that has seen no evidence, pull your head out of your ass and watch a real news source.

There is plenty of evidence suggesting fraud. But it's kind of like smoke from a fire. You have to find the fire to win in court, and that's pretty much impossible after the fact.