2020 Election Fraud Roundup

Post Reply New Topic

I'm reminded of all the accusations of voter fraud and or voter interference in 2018.

People of colour were being prevented from voting and so on.

Another very, very interesting analysis from /pol/. This is one of the clearer red flags imo, unless it's been fabricated or someone can think of good explanation as to why we are seeing this phenomenon. It's very simple to understand.

Short version: as mail-in ballots are "shuffled" by the postal system you would expect to see the ratio of reported R:D votes to remain fairly constant as they come in, with perhaps a slight lean towards the Republicans as counting goes on due to the extra distance and time spent in the postal system by rural (generally more R leaning) ballots. This "data scientist" anon has scraped some reporting data from the NYT website, plotted time series and seen the expected pattern in most states ... except the ones suspected of fraud and ... Virginia for some reason.

Do take a look, even if you ignore all the others in this thread. If this data is verified it may tip me into full on belief that this election was stolen.

Just because you think two things are similar, doesn't make them the same thing.

ACTING like they're the same might help your approach, but they're still not.

I'd be happy to explain it, but it gets very long.

Basically, america has a long history of disenfranchising minority voters (voter suppression), extending right up to present day. It's hardly a WiLd aNd CrAzY claim. It is not difficult to do. It's is preventing people from voting in the first place. Voter FRAUD is tampering with votes that HAVE been cast, and is a lot harder to do.

I seem to remember in 2004 the idea of votes going missing was laughable. But now it's totally possible and real and absolutely must be happening...

@Mikah

Also, it's not hard to fake a graph, or a chart, or a dataset. You just make a chart the same way you'd make a real chart, but you plug in the data you want it to say, instead of the real data. Anyone can fake a fake data and say it came from wherever they want. Especially if they say they got it covertly, and they're "not supposed to have it" or "don't want it seen", or something. Because then OF COURSE the supposed source is going to say it's fake. Be wary of any analysis that claims to have exclusive unverifiable data from a "source" that can't or won't confirm it.

That's why it's important to be able to see the data yourself, from the source itself. Anything else is glorified hearsay.

The script used to download the data is provided. I just tried it and the data (pulled from static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/...) is still accessible using the script as I write this.

That's pretty compelling. I'd like to see it systematically debunked rather than arbitrarily dismissed.

these lawsuits are stalling tactics designed to defeat the electoral college's ability to meet on schedule thus bouncing the decision to majority state legislatures who will reinstall trumpoleeney. then there will be hell to pay.

Given the cases went until mid December for the 2000 election, it's rather premature to complain about them this soon after the election.

Last edited by Feyokien on 09 Nov 2020, 12:20 am, edited 1 time in total.: insinuation

I recall there being huge objections to the elctorial college process in 2016, claims of how unfair it was after Trump won. Along with a viral comercial of verious celebrities pleading with electors to be unfaithful and change their vote.

Guys. The tone it down suggestion swings both ways. Insinuation is against the rules Brictoria.

It's called burden of proof, not burden of disproof. Expecting the opponent to disprove a claim is a distraction from the claimant having to prove their claim. In mikah's own post, it's acknowledged that it is currently unverified information.

Besides, when someone DOES systematically debunk something, someone inevitably complains about walls of text, or too long didn't read, or just outright denies the credibility of the contrary information.

@Mikah - Do you know for certain the info is being downloaded from NYT, or is it being downloaded from a link that has NYT as part of the address. Can you provide actual links instead of screen captures?

"Maybe we should try to get rid of the electoral college"
"And yet you won this election with the electoral college. Curious!"

This might have been hypocritical on the part of the Democrats if they didn't win the popular vote, but they did.
The GOP is clinging onto the Electoral College as much as they are because they know they couldn't win a popular vote for president with their current platform.
In the last 30 years, the only presidential elections wherein they won the popular vote as well as the electoral college were in 1992 and 2004. That's 16 years since the last time, and 28 years since the one before that. How long will it be until they win another? They ask themselves the same question, and that's why they will fight tooth and nail to keep this archaic, anti-democratic system in place.
They can't even argue that they're just following the will of the Founders. If they did that, the electors would vote however they wanted and the popular votes would just be treated like friendly suggestions from the unwashed rabble.

Particulars aside, in 2016 the electorial college was declaired a flawed system that needed to be abolished and attempts were made to change its outcome. But when the system is challenged in 2020 that suddenly becomes an attack on democracy. Despite a bunch of "this is why it's not the same thing" examples, in my opinion that's still what it boils down to.

Last edited by Tempus Fugit on 09 Nov 2020, 3:16 am, edited 2 times in total.

The source code used is at: https://pastebin.com/NkYXrJEX with the data being pulled from NYT in line 30:


The above were found in https://twitter.com/APhilosophae/status/1325592664520142849, which includes a link to the CSV data that has been extracted and saved for easier access.

Edit: CSV file keeps getting taken down, apparently, so you may need to dig through the thread to find it - One copy is at http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=14566999163598825215

Here's another useful script:

viewtopic.php?t=390645

You can keep trying to provoke a fight all you want, but I'll no longer see anything you post.

Challenging the electoral college is not an attack on democracy because the electoral college is an anti-democratic system. It was put in place by the founders so electors could vote however they wanted when they thought the voters were being stupid. It was put in place with the belief that the political class knows what is best for the rest of us. It is an obstacle to democracy.

The GOP and Trump are not challenging the system on some ideological or moral basis. They're suggesting that the vote was flawed or fraudulent without concrete evidence of fraud only because they lost. Impartial election observers have found no evidence of the kind of mass fraud that would be necessary for Trump to win. This is all part of Trump's emotional inability to admit defeat and the ongoing GOP strategy of undermining public confidence in the legitimacy of elections in general for political gain. They've been making vague insinuations for years about widespread voter fraud despite the evidence showing that is is negligible at worst. It's how they've been justifying voter ID laws. It's another part of Republican efforts at voter suppression. It's politicians using the mechanisms of government to deny the will of the people.

The point of existence of the Electoral College has been contested long before 2016, e.g. in 1977.
It's a relict form the Founders' time, absent in almost all modern democracies.