One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
On the subject of FAIRNESS: SPORTS AND E******NS
Apr 3, 2024 07:49:51   #
ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island
 
So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not?

To understand the issue of fairness, let’s compare e******n results to the score in an NBA basketball game. Assume that the Celtics scored more points than the Knicks in a game played last night. Scoring more points than your opponent normally means that you win the game and that any recount of points scored would confirm that result.

E******n results are similar to basketball scores. The candidate with the most v**es—the highest score—is normally declared the winner. Now the loser might challenge the result by asking for a recount of v**es
but should that recount produce very similar results, the candidate with the most v**es would still win.

But let’s assume that an analysis of the game confirms that the referees allowed the Celtics to double-dribble (a standard rule infraction) while the Knicks were not allowed. And let’s assume that the analysis shows that the referees allowed the Celtics to continue to use players with more than 5 fouls; the Knicks were not allowed to do that. Finally, let’s assume that the analysis showed that each Celtic free throw counted for 2 points while each Knicks free throw counted for the usual single point. Now, would we still have confidence that the game was fair and that the Celtics—who scored the most points–were really the legitimate winner?

You get the picture. Every competitive contest has rules that must be followed by both teams if any competitive process is to produce a legitimate result. And in an e******n, the process cannot produce a fair result if the participants don’t follow the rules or if the courts refuse to allow an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the rules were really followed or not. (The fairness of the rules\ themselves is a separate issue). To be sure, counting and recounting v**es accurately is an important procedural rule; but it is only ONE procedural rule and not necessarily the most important in terms of producing a legitimate outcome.

THE GEORGIA 2020 E******N

To see why this is so, let’s take the controversy over the results in the 2020 e******n in Georgia.

We know the final score of that e******n. After counting and recounting v**es cast, Joe Biden scored 6,580 more v**es than Donald Trump and was declared the winner. But were all of the procedural rules followed so that the e******n was fair?

One way to tell would be to do a database analysis searching for “anomalies”, i.e., for procedural rule irregularities as to how v**es were cast and counted. The methodology is fairly straightforward: cross-compare databases for registered v**ers and v**es cast in Georgia (2020) with other certified Georgia databases such as death certificates for registered v**ers; addresses and locations of registered v**er; v**ers who moved out of state prior to the e******n; and the number of v**er I.D.’s per registered v**ers. If significant “irregularities” appear with any of these comparisons, there could be a problem with the e******n process.

As an example, a common procedural rule for v****g in state e******ns is that dead v**ers and v**ers that have moved out of state can’t legally v**e. (Sounds fair!) Most states are supposed to scrub deceased v**ers and out-of-state v**ers from their v****g roles prior to an e******n or, failing that, to disallow v**es that can be traced back to such v**ers. But did Georgia do that in the 2020 e******n? It is unclear that they did. This means that some v**es may have been counted from registered v**ers who had died or moved out of state prior to the e******n.

State law in Georgia requires that all registered v**ers must have a legitimate residential in-state address. A federal post office location or a commercial warehouse cannot normally be considered a legitimate residential address. Yet hundreds of v**es in the 2020 e******n seem to have originated from federal post office locations, commercial warehouses, and several other non-residential locations, an almost certain violation of the procedural rules.

Finally, v**ers with multiple I.D. photos or numbers are an obvious red f**g for v****g irregularities. After all, more than one identification card or number could t***slate into more than one v**e per registered v**er, an obvious violation of the procedural rules. Yet a computer cross-check of v****g roles and I.D. numbers in Georgia discovered hundreds of individual registered v**ers with MORE than one identification number at multiple addresses (i.e., college students, etc.) and some v**ers with as many as five.

An analysis of these specific anomalies (and many more) has been done recently by a private firm called Omega 4 America. See here.

Omega 4, or Fractal, had previously assisted state governments in uncovering fraud in their medical and health care databases by employing the same methodology, i.e., comparing legally eligible recipients for state programs with actual funds received. Similarly, in this particular case involving the fairness of the 2020 Georgia e******n, Omega’s “fractal” analysis concluded that there may have been more than 12,000 separate procedural rule violations; actually the number was probably far higher. And since the e******n was officially decided by just 6,570 v**es, Omega then concluded that there was really no way to determine who legitimately won that e******n. After all, the “irregular” v**es could have all gone to Joe Biden, or they could have all gone to Donald Trump, or they could have gone to either candidate in some unknowable percentage. So, fair and square, who really won? Who knows.

CONCLUSION

If e******n fairness means following procedural rules, then by facts and logic alone the 2020 e******n process was unfair, despite the much ballyhooed sideshow of counting and recounting of v**es. Given the scope of the identified irregularities, Joe Biden may have won the e******n with more v**es than the official tally, or by fewer v**es than the official tally, or may have even lost the e******n entirely to Donald Trump; absent any additional analysis, there is just no way to tell. It will be interesting to see how the mainstream media—so allegedly concerned with fairness issues–intends to spin this one.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/04/dom-armentano/dead-people-v**ed-in-georgia/

Reply
Apr 3, 2024 07:55:12   #
Forkbassman Loc: Missouri
 
Fairness? How about every American citizen who has registered to v**e, should up at the polls IN PERSON WITH A PICTURE ID, PERIOD.

Reply
Apr 3, 2024 08:01:31   #
ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island
 
Forkbassman wrote:
Fairness? How about every American citizen who has registered to v**e, should up at the polls IN PERSON WITH A PICTURE ID, PERIOD.


That is, and should be, the mindset of every American who wants to see an honest e******n, rather than doing wh**ever it takes for your side to win.

Reply
 
 
Apr 3, 2024 08:07:10   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
ACP45 wrote:
So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not?

To understand the issue of fairness, let’s compare e******n results to the score in an NBA basketball game. Assume that the Celtics scored more points than the Knicks in a game played last night. Scoring more points than your opponent normally means that you win the game and that any recount of points scored would confirm that result.

E******n results are similar to basketball scores. The candidate with the most v**es—the highest score—is normally declared the winner. Now the loser might challenge the result by asking for a recount of v**es
but should that recount produce very similar results, the candidate with the most v**es would still win.

But let’s assume that an analysis of the game confirms that the referees allowed the Celtics to double-dribble (a standard rule infraction) while the Knicks were not allowed. And let’s assume that the analysis shows that the referees allowed the Celtics to continue to use players with more than 5 fouls; the Knicks were not allowed to do that. Finally, let’s assume that the analysis showed that each Celtic free throw counted for 2 points while each Knicks free throw counted for the usual single point. Now, would we still have confidence that the game was fair and that the Celtics—who scored the most points–were really the legitimate winner?

You get the picture. Every competitive contest has rules that must be followed by both teams if any competitive process is to produce a legitimate result. And in an e******n, the process cannot produce a fair result if the participants don’t follow the rules or if the courts refuse to allow an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the rules were really followed or not. (The fairness of the rules\ themselves is a separate issue). To be sure, counting and recounting v**es accurately is an important procedural rule; but it is only ONE procedural rule and not necessarily the most important in terms of producing a legitimate outcome.

THE GEORGIA 2020 E******N

To see why this is so, let’s take the controversy over the results in the 2020 e******n in Georgia.

We know the final score of that e******n. After counting and recounting v**es cast, Joe Biden scored 6,580 more v**es than Donald Trump and was declared the winner. But were all of the procedural rules followed so that the e******n was fair?

One way to tell would be to do a database analysis searching for “anomalies”, i.e., for procedural rule irregularities as to how v**es were cast and counted. The methodology is fairly straightforward: cross-compare databases for registered v**ers and v**es cast in Georgia (2020) with other certified Georgia databases such as death certificates for registered v**ers; addresses and locations of registered v**er; v**ers who moved out of state prior to the e******n; and the number of v**er I.D.’s per registered v**ers. If significant “irregularities” appear with any of these comparisons, there could be a problem with the e******n process.

As an example, a common procedural rule for v****g in state e******ns is that dead v**ers and v**ers that have moved out of state can’t legally v**e. (Sounds fair!) Most states are supposed to scrub deceased v**ers and out-of-state v**ers from their v****g roles prior to an e******n or, failing that, to disallow v**es that can be traced back to such v**ers. But did Georgia do that in the 2020 e******n? It is unclear that they did. This means that some v**es may have been counted from registered v**ers who had died or moved out of state prior to the e******n.

State law in Georgia requires that all registered v**ers must have a legitimate residential in-state address. A federal post office location or a commercial warehouse cannot normally be considered a legitimate residential address. Yet hundreds of v**es in the 2020 e******n seem to have originated from federal post office locations, commercial warehouses, and several other non-residential locations, an almost certain violation of the procedural rules.

Finally, v**ers with multiple I.D. photos or numbers are an obvious red f**g for v****g irregularities. After all, more than one identification card or number could t***slate into more than one v**e per registered v**er, an obvious violation of the procedural rules. Yet a computer cross-check of v****g roles and I.D. numbers in Georgia discovered hundreds of individual registered v**ers with MORE than one identification number at multiple addresses (i.e., college students, etc.) and some v**ers with as many as five.

An analysis of these specific anomalies (and many more) has been done recently by a private firm called Omega 4 America. See here.

Omega 4, or Fractal, had previously assisted state governments in uncovering fraud in their medical and health care databases by employing the same methodology, i.e., comparing legally eligible recipients for state programs with actual funds received. Similarly, in this particular case involving the fairness of the 2020 Georgia e******n, Omega’s “fractal” analysis concluded that there may have been more than 12,000 separate procedural rule violations; actually the number was probably far higher. And since the e******n was officially decided by just 6,570 v**es, Omega then concluded that there was really no way to determine who legitimately won that e******n. After all, the “irregular” v**es could have all gone to Joe Biden, or they could have all gone to Donald Trump, or they could have gone to either candidate in some unknowable percentage. So, fair and square, who really won? Who knows.

CONCLUSION

If e******n fairness means following procedural rules, then by facts and logic alone the 2020 e******n process was unfair, despite the much ballyhooed sideshow of counting and recounting of v**es. Given the scope of the identified irregularities, Joe Biden may have won the e******n with more v**es than the official tally, or by fewer v**es than the official tally, or may have even lost the e******n entirely to Donald Trump; absent any additional analysis, there is just no way to tell. It will be interesting to see how the mainstream media—so allegedly concerned with fairness issues–intends to spin this one.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/04/dom-armentano/dead-people-v**ed-in-georgia/
b So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not? /b... (show quote)


Recently released from the American Military News; a hearing in Fulton County Georgia (Fat ass Fani) about e*****rs trying to overturn e******n results was floored when under oath a Fulton county Board member (Wingate) asked what did we do about signature verification? The answer; we didn't verify signatures. That's 147,000 mail in b****ts. The e******n in Georgia was determined by a small margin of v**es . In addition the supervisor said there was no chain of custody of v**es, and no surveillance of drop boxes as required by law. This entire e******n was r****d.

Reply
Apr 3, 2024 08:45:18   #
pescado rojo
 
Forkbassman wrote:
Fairness? How about every American citizen who has registered to v**e, should up at the polls IN PERSON WITH A PICTURE ID, PERIOD.


With the exception of legitimate ABSENTEE b****ts. NOT "mail in." Along those lines, military v**es from overseas need better security.

Reply
Apr 3, 2024 09:31:09   #
Weswill
 
ACP45 wrote:
So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not?

To understand the issue of fairness, let’s compare e******n results to the score in an NBA basketball game. Assume that the Celtics scored more points than the Knicks in a game played last night. Scoring more points than your opponent normally means that you win the game and that any recount of points scored would confirm that result.

E******n results are similar to basketball scores. The candidate with the most v**es—the highest score—is normally declared the winner. Now the loser might challenge the result by asking for a recount of v**es
but should that recount produce very similar results, the candidate with the most v**es would still win.

But let’s assume that an analysis of the game confirms that the referees allowed the Celtics to double-dribble (a standard rule infraction) while the Knicks were not allowed. And let’s assume that the analysis shows that the referees allowed the Celtics to continue to use players with more than 5 fouls; the Knicks were not allowed to do that. Finally, let’s assume that the analysis showed that each Celtic free throw counted for 2 points while each Knicks free throw counted for the usual single point. Now, would we still have confidence that the game was fair and that the Celtics—who scored the most points–were really the legitimate winner?

You get the picture. Every competitive contest has rules that must be followed by both teams if any competitive process is to produce a legitimate result. And in an e******n, the process cannot produce a fair result if the participants don’t follow the rules or if the courts refuse to allow an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the rules were really followed or not. (The fairness of the rules\ themselves is a separate issue). To be sure, counting and recounting v**es accurately is an important procedural rule; but it is only ONE procedural rule and not necessarily the most important in terms of producing a legitimate outcome.

THE GEORGIA 2020 E******N

To see why this is so, let’s take the controversy over the results in the 2020 e******n in Georgia.

We know the final score of that e******n. After counting and recounting v**es cast, Joe Biden scored 6,580 more v**es than Donald Trump and was declared the winner. But were all of the procedural rules followed so that the e******n was fair?

One way to tell would be to do a database analysis searching for “anomalies”, i.e., for procedural rule irregularities as to how v**es were cast and counted. The methodology is fairly straightforward: cross-compare databases for registered v**ers and v**es cast in Georgia (2020) with other certified Georgia databases such as death certificates for registered v**ers; addresses and locations of registered v**er; v**ers who moved out of state prior to the e******n; and the number of v**er I.D.’s per registered v**ers. If significant “irregularities” appear with any of these comparisons, there could be a problem with the e******n process.

As an example, a common procedural rule for v****g in state e******ns is that dead v**ers and v**ers that have moved out of state can’t legally v**e. (Sounds fair!) Most states are supposed to scrub deceased v**ers and out-of-state v**ers from their v****g roles prior to an e******n or, failing that, to disallow v**es that can be traced back to such v**ers. But did Georgia do that in the 2020 e******n? It is unclear that they did. This means that some v**es may have been counted from registered v**ers who had died or moved out of state prior to the e******n.

State law in Georgia requires that all registered v**ers must have a legitimate residential in-state address. A federal post office location or a commercial warehouse cannot normally be considered a legitimate residential address. Yet hundreds of v**es in the 2020 e******n seem to have originated from federal post office locations, commercial warehouses, and several other non-residential locations, an almost certain violation of the procedural rules.

Finally, v**ers with multiple I.D. photos or numbers are an obvious red f**g for v****g irregularities. After all, more than one identification card or number could t***slate into more than one v**e per registered v**er, an obvious violation of the procedural rules. Yet a computer cross-check of v****g roles and I.D. numbers in Georgia discovered hundreds of individual registered v**ers with MORE than one identification number at multiple addresses (i.e., college students, etc.) and some v**ers with as many as five.

An analysis of these specific anomalies (and many more) has been done recently by a private firm called Omega 4 America. See here.

Omega 4, or Fractal, had previously assisted state governments in uncovering fraud in their medical and health care databases by employing the same methodology, i.e., comparing legally eligible recipients for state programs with actual funds received. Similarly, in this particular case involving the fairness of the 2020 Georgia e******n, Omega’s “fractal” analysis concluded that there may have been more than 12,000 separate procedural rule violations; actually the number was probably far higher. And since the e******n was officially decided by just 6,570 v**es, Omega then concluded that there was really no way to determine who legitimately won that e******n. After all, the “irregular” v**es could have all gone to Joe Biden, or they could have all gone to Donald Trump, or they could have gone to either candidate in some unknowable percentage. So, fair and square, who really won? Who knows.

CONCLUSION

If e******n fairness means following procedural rules, then by facts and logic alone the 2020 e******n process was unfair, despite the much ballyhooed sideshow of counting and recounting of v**es. Given the scope of the identified irregularities, Joe Biden may have won the e******n with more v**es than the official tally, or by fewer v**es than the official tally, or may have even lost the e******n entirely to Donald Trump; absent any additional analysis, there is just no way to tell. It will be interesting to see how the mainstream media—so allegedly concerned with fairness issues–intends to spin this one.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/04/dom-armentano/dead-people-v**ed-in-georgia/
b So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not? /b... (show quote)


Your point is well taken. If fraud does happen in an e******n , it is impossible to prove unless.it is discovered when it happens. Recounts do nothing to find fraud other than making sure the original count was correct. Mail-in v**es can not be verified once the.envelopes and b****ts are separated. So even though there might seem to be some irregularities or even fraud it is nearly impossible to prove after the fact. I would think that states when made aware of these irregularities they would want to check those concerns out and make changes. But that is not what happened they have even doubled down on keeping those practices in place. For instance, several states change e******n laws illegally, by bypassing the state legislatures, due to c***d. These states e******n results should have been rejected in my opinion. But when people want to move the e******n laws back to what they were before c***d, they shout v**er suppression. So there are many officials that are not very interested in having f**r e******ns in my opinion.
Another observation is why does it take so long to count the v**es? Could that be a form of fraud or at least an irregularity? There is no excuse for it taking so long to count the v**es.

Reply
Apr 3, 2024 09:39:46   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Weswill wrote:
Your point is well taken. If fraud does happen in an e******n , it is impossible to prove unless.it is discovered when it happens. Recounts do nothing to find fraud other than making sure the original count was correct. Mail-in v**es can not be verified once the.envelopes and b****ts are separated. So even though there might seem to be some irregularities or even fraud it is nearly impossible to prove after the fact. I would think that states when made aware of these irregularities they would want to check those concerns out and make changes. But that is not what happened they have even doubled down on keeping those practices in place. For instance, several states change e******n laws illegally, by bypassing the state legislatures, due to c***d. These states e******n results should have been rejected in my opinion. But when people want to move the e******n laws back to what they were before c***d, they shout v**er suppression. So there are many officials that are not very interested in having f**r e******ns in my opinion.
Another observation is why does it take so long to count the v**es? Could that be a form of fraud or at least an irregularity? There is no excuse for it taking so long to count the v**es.
Your point is well taken. If fraud does happen in ... (show quote)



Reply
 
 
Apr 4, 2024 08:24:38   #
bggamers Loc: georgia
 
JFlorio wrote:
Recently released from the American Military News; a hearing in Fulton County Georgia (Fat ass Fani) about e*****rs trying to overturn e******n results was floored when under oath a Fulton county Board member (Wingate) asked what did we do about signature verification? The answer; we didn't verify signatures. That's 147,000 mail in b****ts. The e******n in Georgia was determined by a small margin of v**es . In addition the supervisor said there was no chain of custody of v**es, and no surveillance of drop boxes as required by law. This entire e******n was r****d.
Recently released from the American Military News;... (show quote)


Don't forget the large suit cases coming out after everyone was sent home. I live in Georgia and am upset about what happened. To me seems Den target large cities that are capital of a state to take over pitty we can't stop that.

Reply
Apr 5, 2024 07:04:46   #
DAV
 
ACP45 wrote:
So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not?

To understand the issue of fairness, let’s compare e******n results to the score in an NBA basketball game. Assume that the Celtics scored more points than the Knicks in a game played last night. Scoring more points than your opponent normally means that you win the game and that any recount of points scored would confirm that result.

E******n results are similar to basketball scores. The candidate with the most v**es—the highest score—is normally declared the winner. Now the loser might challenge the result by asking for a recount of v**es
but should that recount produce very similar results, the candidate with the most v**es would still win.

But let’s assume that an analysis of the game confirms that the referees allowed the Celtics to double-dribble (a standard rule infraction) while the Knicks were not allowed. And let’s assume that the analysis shows that the referees allowed the Celtics to continue to use players with more than 5 fouls; the Knicks were not allowed to do that. Finally, let’s assume that the analysis showed that each Celtic free throw counted for 2 points while each Knicks free throw counted for the usual single point. Now, would we still have confidence that the game was fair and that the Celtics—who scored the most points–were really the legitimate winner?

You get the picture. Every competitive contest has rules that must be followed by both teams if any competitive process is to produce a legitimate result. And in an e******n, the process cannot produce a fair result if the participants don’t follow the rules or if the courts refuse to allow an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the rules were really followed or not. (The fairness of the rules\ themselves is a separate issue). To be sure, counting and recounting v**es accurately is an important procedural rule; but it is only ONE procedural rule and not necessarily the most important in terms of producing a legitimate outcome.

THE GEORGIA 2020 E******N

To see why this is so, let’s take the controversy over the results in the 2020 e******n in Georgia.

We know the final score of that e******n. After counting and recounting v**es cast, Joe Biden scored 6,580 more v**es than Donald Trump and was declared the winner. But were all of the procedural rules followed so that the e******n was fair?

One way to tell would be to do a database analysis searching for “anomalies”, i.e., for procedural rule irregularities as to how v**es were cast and counted. The methodology is fairly straightforward: cross-compare databases for registered v**ers and v**es cast in Georgia (2020) with other certified Georgia databases such as death certificates for registered v**ers; addresses and locations of registered v**er; v**ers who moved out of state prior to the e******n; and the number of v**er I.D.’s per registered v**ers. If significant “irregularities” appear with any of these comparisons, there could be a problem with the e******n process.

As an example, a common procedural rule for v****g in state e******ns is that dead v**ers and v**ers that have moved out of state can’t legally v**e. (Sounds fair!) Most states are supposed to scrub deceased v**ers and out-of-state v**ers from their v****g roles prior to an e******n or, failing that, to disallow v**es that can be traced back to such v**ers. But did Georgia do that in the 2020 e******n? It is unclear that they did. This means that some v**es may have been counted from registered v**ers who had died or moved out of state prior to the e******n.

State law in Georgia requires that all registered v**ers must have a legitimate residential in-state address. A federal post office location or a commercial warehouse cannot normally be considered a legitimate residential address. Yet hundreds of v**es in the 2020 e******n seem to have originated from federal post office locations, commercial warehouses, and several other non-residential locations, an almost certain violation of the procedural rules.

Finally, v**ers with multiple I.D. photos or numbers are an obvious red f**g for v****g irregularities. After all, more than one identification card or number could t***slate into more than one v**e per registered v**er, an obvious violation of the procedural rules. Yet a computer cross-check of v****g roles and I.D. numbers in Georgia discovered hundreds of individual registered v**ers with MORE than one identification number at multiple addresses (i.e., college students, etc.) and some v**ers with as many as five.

An analysis of these specific anomalies (and many more) has been done recently by a private firm called Omega 4 America. See here.

Omega 4, or Fractal, had previously assisted state governments in uncovering fraud in their medical and health care databases by employing the same methodology, i.e., comparing legally eligible recipients for state programs with actual funds received. Similarly, in this particular case involving the fairness of the 2020 Georgia e******n, Omega’s “fractal” analysis concluded that there may have been more than 12,000 separate procedural rule violations; actually the number was probably far higher. And since the e******n was officially decided by just 6,570 v**es, Omega then concluded that there was really no way to determine who legitimately won that e******n. After all, the “irregular” v**es could have all gone to Joe Biden, or they could have all gone to Donald Trump, or they could have gone to either candidate in some unknowable percentage. So, fair and square, who really won? Who knows.

CONCLUSION

If e******n fairness means following procedural rules, then by facts and logic alone the 2020 e******n process was unfair, despite the much ballyhooed sideshow of counting and recounting of v**es. Given the scope of the identified irregularities, Joe Biden may have won the e******n with more v**es than the official tally, or by fewer v**es than the official tally, or may have even lost the e******n entirely to Donald Trump; absent any additional analysis, there is just no way to tell. It will be interesting to see how the mainstream media—so allegedly concerned with fairness issues–intends to spin this one.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/04/dom-armentano/dead-people-v**ed-in-georgia/
b So was the 2020 e******n really fair or not? /b... (show quote)


Lie-berals DON'T DO FAIR. They are all about CONTROL and having everything THEIR way....don't you know ?!?!

Reply
Apr 5, 2024 08:19:32   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
bggamers wrote:
Don't forget the large suit cases coming out after everyone was sent home. I live in Georgia and am upset about what happened. To me seems Den target large cities that are capital of a state to take over pitty we can't stop that.


We know why those cities are targeted. Minorities and democrat prosecutors. They’ve convinced minorities they’re nothing but victims. They are of course. Victims of the democrat plantation.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.