Election Investigations

[Jess77]

I came here to see if there was any discussion on the current election status and I finally found it buried in the Biden Presidency thread. I figured pulling it out and giving it its own post would make it easier for everyone to discuss.

I for one am not ready to mark this election over until all the votes are counted and recounted and all the court cases have concluded. That took Bush/Gore 36 days to figure out in 2000. Why the rush?

One thing I have seen pop up several times is that the software used in one Michigan county caused 6,000 votes for Trump to be given to Biden. Once the glitch was caught and the ballots were recounted, the votes were correctly attributed. The same glitch also changed the results of a congressional seat which had originally gone to the democrat, switching to the republican candidate.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnew ... ocrat.amp

https://www.newsbreak.com/michigan/roch ... and-county


One report suggests that software was used in 47 counties in the state of Michigan and across 30 states altogether. I am interested in learning more about the results from this investigation.

Also curious as to whether the last minute software upload in Georgia may be in anyway connected to this glitch.

[temporal1]

Why the rush?

There should be no rush.
It’s not as tho anyone’s going anywhere.

[Ernie]

I'm in no rush.

No rush to crown Biden as President-elect.

No rush to spread fraud claims until they are verified.

[Bootstrap]

I'm in no rush.

No rush to crown Biden as President-elect.

No rush to spread fraud claims until they are verified.

I agree. If there is real evidence of fraudulent votes or of votes that should have been counted but weren't, this evidence should be taken to courts that can evaluate it. If states are close enough to warrant a recount, that's fine. Those are ways that people with access to actual evidence can evaluate it.

Television stations in the United States have turned "election night" into an event that does not exist in the Constitution. The electoral college votes on December 14th, that's the real deadline.

On the other hand, there's no need to get worked up about anything without enough solid evidence to prompt an investigation or a hearing. If they can't demonstrate their claims in court, there's no need to get worked up about them. And in general, it's extremely unlikely to find issues significant enough to make a difference that would change the results of this election.

[Judas Maccabeus]

One thing I have seen pop up several times is that the software used in one Michigan county caused 6,000 votes for Trump to be given to Biden. Once the glitch was caught and the ballots were recounted, the votes were correctly attributed. The same glitch also changed the results of a congressional seat which had originally gone to the democrat, switching to the republican candidate.

Of note, this was caught. There are cross checks and controls, in the end everything must add up.

Or you count them again. If you live in a state where the canvas sheet is posted after the election at the polling place, have a peek. You will be surprised what they count, and what must match. I drove around with my grandfather as a youth (Actually I drove him, he could no longer drive safely, I was his "chauffeur") and he copied all of the numbers down for certain races, and drove them back to Democratic party Hq. You can bet your last nickel that the republicans were doing it too, and all of the numbers added up.

He could not drive at age 80, but he sure could add numbers.

J.M.

[Robert]

I agree. If there is real evidence of fraudulent votes or of votes that should have been counted but weren't, this evidence should be taken to courts that can evaluate it. If states are close enough to warrant a recount, that's fine. Those are ways that people with access to actual evidence can evaluate it.

Television stations in the United States have turned "election night" into an event that does not exist in the Constitution. The electoral college votes on December 14th, that's the real deadline.

On the other hand, there's no need to get worked up about anything without enough solid evidence to prompt an investigation or a hearing. If they can't demonstrate their claims in court, there's no need to get worked up about them. And in general, it's extremely unlikely to find issues significant enough to make a difference that would change the results of this election.

There are courts considering the evidence and investigations being started. WE are just reporting and discussing them. I see no harm in that. Or are you suggesting that they are just being posted in media and not being investigated? I am not seeing that. I am seeing reports that these claims ARE being referred to the proper authorities.

[Robert]

No rush to spread fraud claims until they are verified.

A claim is not false until verified. A claim is a claim and should be evaluated by facts. Yes, there are a lot of unsubstantiated claims out there. We have seen many over the past 4 years and repeated endlessly. I would not want to do the same, but bringing claims to light is not an issue. Keeping making the claims once facts reveal that it is not valid is and issue.

[Bootstrap]

There are courts considering the evidence and investigations being started. WE are just reporting and discussing them. I see no harm in that. Or are you suggesting that they are just being posted in media and not being investigated? I am not seeing that. I am seeing reports that these claims ARE being referred to the proper authorities.

Mostly, we seem to be discussing claims made on the Internet and talk shows rather than the court cases.

Here Are All the Lawsuits the Trump Campaign Has Filed Since Election Day—And Why Most Are Unlikely to Go Anywhere

But we can wait for them to play out. In the meantime, I think it's best not to treat these claims as established facts. If people are interested in discussing the actual merits of these cases, that would be more interesting.

Harm? I think there's no harm if we focus on facts and let the process work itself out. I think there is real harm if people divide over these things. Especially when people get angry or even violent in some places. So we should be careful not to pour gas on these flames.

[Bootstrap]

I see no harm in that.

There is obvious harm when the president claims to have won the election and claims that the other side stole the election, declares victory, and incites anger among his supporters. There is obvious harm if the president is publicly promoting false claims of fraud and falsely accusing the other side of stealing the election. If these claims turn out to be false, that's extremely serious. That's not the sort of thing that happens in the United States, that's the sort of thing that happens in authoritarian regimes.

Courts and recounts are the right way to bring up any real issues that might affect the outcome, with evidence. If the election results stand after all of this is completed, there should be a peaceful transition to the new presidency. If there is evidence of clear wrongdoing - on either side - there should be investigations afterward. (Investigations typically take way too long to be finished before December 14th, when the electoral vote is due.)

And of course, any attempt to resist the outcome of a free and fair election using force or power should be considered a coup d'etat. I doubt it would ever get to that point, but that's a concern with the media blitz. We have a stable democracy. Respecting the electoral process is a big part of that.

[Robert]

There is obvious harm when the president claims to have won the election and claims that the other side stole the election, declares victory, and incites anger among his supporters.

If the claims are true, then the harm of not stopping the corruption is much worse. We need to know we have fair elections.