Georgia on my mind

[earendel]

I'm surprised that there hasn't been any discussion about what the Georgia Board of Elections has done - requiring a hand count of all ballots in the upcoming election. I've seen reports that this only requires a count of the total number of ballots cast, or that it requires a count of votes for each candidate. Either way, supposedly this will delay reporting a winner past the date that the state is required to certify the winner. I'm sure that this may devolve into the usual rancor, but for now I'd just like SSS's and flock's thoughts.

[flockofseagulls104]

I'm surprised that there hasn't been any discussion about what the Georgia Board of Elections has done - requiring a hand count of all ballots in the upcoming election. I've seen reports that this only requires a count of the total number of ballots cast, or that it requires a count of votes for each candidate. Either way, supposedly this will delay reporting a winner past the date that the state is required to certify the winner. I'm sure that this may devolve into the usual rancor, but for now I'd just like SSS's and flock's thoughts.

You want to know about the Georgia State Election Board? Here are the facts, which are completely in opposition to what you have heard. First hand. I have been in attendance at all the SEB meetings this year. To address the specific rule you reference:

Sharlene Alexander has been a poll manager for years. Up until a couple of years ago it was standard procedure to count the number of BALLOTS, the pieces of paper, not the votes, at the close of the polls. The number was matched against the number on the scanner. If the numbers are wrong, they need to find out why. I have seen it done as a poll watcher in my precinct. It doesn't take much time. And it makes sure that all the ballots are accounted for. When you cash a check in a bank, the machine may count out the bills, and then the teller counts the bills, gives them to you and you probably count them. This rule is just common sense, and will give a little more confidence at the start of the process. If a count is off and it isn't caught at the start of the process, it will take a lot more time to find out where the problem was once the process goes further.

A couple of years ago, a letter from Raffy's SOS office instructed the county election offices NOT to do that. We can speculate as to why.

She proposed a rule to the State Election Board to reinstate that practice. That unleashed a barrage of misinformation, character assassination and lawfare from the left.

I have been going to SEB meetings for over a year. Before Ed Lindsey was replaced, Room 341 of the GA State Capitol was never filled up for SEB meetings. Since Janelle King was appointed to replace him, the left has called out its minions. Since July, hundreds of protesters show up at the meetings. They are from out-of-state NGOs, leftist election officials from GAVREO, the organization of democrat election workers, (the conservative election workers somehow don't get access to FIREFLY, their communication software) and general useful idiots that have no clue about the issues. They are just told to show up. They have now closed off Room 341 to the public. Only those involved in the agenda, state officials and the press are allowed in the room now. They open up overflow rooms where the meeting is on TV. They mostly leave after lunch. Last week's meeting was extended until Monday. On Monday, less than half the room was occupied. They seem to only be there for show.

The NGOs get there early and sign up for all the public comments. They take the first 30 signups to talk before the business starts. Last meeting 28 of the 30 public comments were lawyers, people from NGOs with the word 'democracy' in their title, and citizens given scripts to read, all saying the same false points with different words. They flood the emails of the SEB members with prepared content. And the local, social and national media echo the left's narrative, filed by seemingly unlimited funds and lawyers. They have filed pernicious and hypocritical lawsuits against the conservative members of the Board.

The left opposes anything that will help Election Integrity using whatever means possible. As Ms Ghazal stated in the link below, though she didn't intend to, the left doesn't like that private citizens concerns are being heard by the SEB.

At the meeting last week, this came to a head.

The rule was watered down, but it was passed and will take effect. This rule is only one of the many common sense rules that the left has targeted. Election Integrity activists have won most of them, but we've lost a few very important ones. The ability of the general public to obtain a list of qualified voters before the election was shot down on a very questionable legal technicality. The board all believe it is a good idea, but they did not like the wording, and refused to amend the rule without going through the whole process again, which would take until after the election.

[silverscreenselect]

Ear:

Since you asked, I'm not going to reply at this time. I've avoided commenting in the Political Lounge since my surgery, since I feel it would take too much of my time and effort to adequately do so in my situation. I don't want to get involved in lengthy threads of this nature.

I'm scheduled to go back to my surgeon Friday, although with the hurricane coming through, and scheduled for maximum intensity in Atlanta around Friday morning, I may not be able. I'll see what the doctor says and how I feel afterwards.

[flockofseagulls104]

Ear:

Since you asked, I'm not going to reply at this time. I've avoided commenting in the Political Lounge since my surgery, since I feel it would take too much of my time and effort to adequately do so in my situation. I don't want to get involved in lengthy threads of this nature.

I'm scheduled to go back to my surgeon Friday, although with the hurricane coming through, and scheduled for maximum intensity in Atlanta around Friday morning, I may not be able. I'll see what the doctor says and how I feel afterwards.

Take care of yourself and all the best for your full recovery.

[Weyoun]

Get better, SSS. I’ll hold down the fort here

[Beebs52]

Be well.

[earendel]

I'm surprised that there hasn't been any discussion about what the Georgia Board of Elections has done - requiring a hand count of all ballots in the upcoming election. I've seen reports that this only requires a count of the total number of ballots cast, or that it requires a count of votes for each candidate. Either way, supposedly this will delay reporting a winner past the date that the state is required to certify the winner. I'm sure that this may devolve into the usual rancor, but for now I'd just like SSS's and flock's thoughts.

You want to know about the Georgia State Election Board? Here are the facts, which are completely in opposition to what you have heard. First hand. I have been in attendance at all the SEB meetings this year. To address the specific rule you reference:

Sharlene Alexander has been a poll manager for years. Up until a couple of years ago it was standard procedure to count the number of BALLOTS, the pieces of paper, not the votes, at the close of the polls. The number was matched against the number on the scanner. If the numbers are wrong, they need to find out why. I have seen it done as a poll watcher in my precinct. It doesn't take much time. And it makes sure that all the ballots are accounted for. When you cash a check in a bank, the machine may count out the bills, and then the teller counts the bills, gives them to you and you probably count them. This rule is just common sense, and will give a little more confidence at the start of the process. If a count is off and it isn't caught at the start of the process, it will take a lot more time to find out where the problem was once the process goes further.

A couple of years ago, a letter from Raffy's SOS office instructed the county election offices NOT to do that. We can speculate as to why.

She proposed a rule to the State Election Board to reinstate that practice. That unleashed a barrage of misinformation, character assassination and lawfare from the left.

I have been going to SEB meetings for over a year. Before Ed Lindsey was replaced, Room 341 of the GA State Capitol was never filled up for SEB meetings. Since Janelle King was appointed to replace him, the left has called out its minions. Since July, hundreds of protesters show up at the meetings. They are from out-of-state NGOs, leftist election officials from GAVREO, the organization of democrat election workers, (the conservative election workers somehow don't get access to FIREFLY, their communication software) and general useful idiots that have no clue about the issues. They are just told to show up. They have now closed off Room 341 to the public. Only those involved in the agenda, state officials and the press are allowed in the room now. They open up overflow rooms where the meeting is on TV. They mostly leave after lunch. Last week's meeting was extended until Monday. On Monday, less than half the room was occupied. They seem to only be there for show.

The NGOs get there early and sign up for all the public comments. They take the first 30 signups to talk before the business starts. Last meeting 28 of the 30 public comments were lawyers, people from NGOs with the word 'democracy' in their title, and citizens given scripts to read, all saying the same false points with different words. They flood the emails of the SEB members with prepared content. And the local, social and national media echo the left's narrative, filed by seemingly unlimited funds and lawyers. They have filed pernicious and hypocritical lawsuits against the conservative members of the Board.

The left opposes anything that will help Election Integrity using whatever means possible. As Ms Ghazal stated in the link below, though she didn't intend to, the left doesn't like that private citizens concerns are being heard by the SEB.

At the meeting last week, this came to a head.

The rule was watered down, but it was passed and will take effect. This rule is only one of the many common sense rules that the left has targeted. Election Integrity activists have won most of them, but we've lost a few very important ones. The ability of the general public to obtain a list of qualified voters before the election was shot down on a very questionable legal technicality. The board all believe it is a good idea, but they did not like the wording, and refused to amend the rule without going through the whole process again, which would take until after the election.

Thanks, flock. Just to be clear, the counting is just of the total number of ballots, not the number for each candidate?

[flockofseagulls104]

I'm surprised that there hasn't been any discussion about what the Georgia Board of Elections has done - requiring a hand count of all ballots in the upcoming election. I've seen reports that this only requires a count of the total number of ballots cast, or that it requires a count of votes for each candidate. Either way, supposedly this will delay reporting a winner past the date that the state is required to certify the winner. I'm sure that this may devolve into the usual rancor, but for now I'd just like SSS's and flock's thoughts.

You want to know about the Georgia State Election Board? Here are the facts, which are completely in opposition to what you have heard. First hand. I have been in attendance at all the SEB meetings this year. To address the specific rule you reference:

Sharlene Alexander has been a poll manager for years. Up until a couple of years ago it was standard procedure to count the number of BALLOTS, the pieces of paper, not the votes, at the close of the polls. The number was matched against the number on the scanner. If the numbers are wrong, they need to find out why. I have seen it done as a poll watcher in my precinct. It doesn't take much time. And it makes sure that all the ballots are accounted for. When you cash a check in a bank, the machine may count out the bills, and then the teller counts the bills, gives them to you and you probably count them. This rule is just common sense, and will give a little more confidence at the start of the process. If a count is off and it isn't caught at the start of the process, it will take a lot more time to find out where the problem was once the process goes further.

A couple of years ago, a letter from Raffy's SOS office instructed the county election offices NOT to do that. We can speculate as to why.

She proposed a rule to the State Election Board to reinstate that practice. That unleashed a barrage of misinformation, character assassination and lawfare from the left.

I have been going to SEB meetings for over a year. Before Ed Lindsey was replaced, Room 341 of the GA State Capitol was never filled up for SEB meetings. Since Janelle King was appointed to replace him, the left has called out its minions. Since July, hundreds of protesters show up at the meetings. They are from out-of-state NGOs, leftist election officials from GAVREO, the organization of democrat election workers, (the conservative election workers somehow don't get access to FIREFLY, their communication software) and general useful idiots that have no clue about the issues. They are just told to show up. They have now closed off Room 341 to the public. Only those involved in the agenda, state officials and the press are allowed in the room now. They open up overflow rooms where the meeting is on TV. They mostly leave after lunch. Last week's meeting was extended until Monday. On Monday, less than half the room was occupied. They seem to only be there for show.

The NGOs get there early and sign up for all the public comments. They take the first 30 signups to talk before the business starts. Last meeting 28 of the 30 public comments were lawyers, people from NGOs with the word 'democracy' in their title, and citizens given scripts to read, all saying the same false points with different words. They flood the emails of the SEB members with prepared content. And the local, social and national media echo the left's narrative, filed by seemingly unlimited funds and lawyers. They have filed pernicious and hypocritical lawsuits against the conservative members of the Board.

The left opposes anything that will help Election Integrity using whatever means possible. As Ms Ghazal stated in the link below, though she didn't intend to, the left doesn't like that private citizens concerns are being heard by the SEB.

At the meeting last week, this came to a head.

The rule was watered down, but it was passed and will take effect. This rule is only one of the many common sense rules that the left has targeted. Election Integrity activists have won most of them, but we've lost a few very important ones. The ability of the general public to obtain a list of qualified voters before the election was shot down on a very questionable legal technicality. The board all believe it is a good idea, but they did not like the wording, and refused to amend the rule without going through the whole process again, which would take until after the election.

Thanks, flock. Just to be clear, the counting is just of the total number of ballots, not the number for each candidate?

The counting is of the number of sheets of paper that they remove from the scanner at closing. There will be 3 people assigned to count them, and poll watchers as well as the general public can observe the counting. The sheets will be face down and the recommended way of counting is to do it from the corners into counts of 10 or 50. Sharlene has demonstrated the procedure and offered a short video for training purposes. Anyone who can count to 10 and has hands can do it. Then the count will be compared to the number on the scanner. If the number is off, it can be dealt with at this level. If it isn't caught here, it will be caught much later on in the process, and the investigation (trying to find where in the state the missing or extra ballots are) and resulting lawsuits (if they don't sweep it under the rug) WILL take months. If not years.

ear, I would highly recommend that you completely disregard any future (or past) information from any source that told you they would be tallying votes. They have deliberately lied to you. Also, anyone who told you it would take months, even days, to do this. This is pure propaganda. And you should note that. And I would also recommend you extrapolate from that.

[earendel]

The counting is of the number of sheets of paper that they remove from the scanner at closing. There will be 3 people assigned to count them, and poll watchers as well as the general public can observe the counting. The sheets will be face down and the recommended way of counting is to do it from the corners into counts of 10 or 50. Sharlene has demonstrated the procedure and offered a short video for training purposes. Anyone who can count to 10 and has hands can do it. Then the count will be compared to the number on the scanner. If the number is off, it can be dealt with at this level. If it isn't caught here, it will be caught much later on in the process, and the investigation (trying to find where in the state the missing or extra ballots are) and resulting lawsuits (if they don't sweep it under the rug) WILL take months. If not years.

ear, I would highly recommend that you completely disregard any future (or past) information from any source that told you they would be tallying votes. They have deliberately lied to you. Also, anyone who told you it would take months, even days, to do this. This is pure propaganda. And you should note that. And I would also recommend you extrapolate from that.

Counting by hand will definitely take longer than having it done by machine. How long is the question. Plus there is a question about accuracy - counting by machine has been shown to be more reliable than hand counting. And doesn't the rule require that each of the three individuals must count all of the ballots, and if their numbers don't agree, they have to start over?

[flockofseagulls104]

Counting by hand will definitely take longer than having it done by machine. How long is the question.

Yeah, a little bit. But it was standard practice before the SOS decided it wasn't to be done anymore. I saw it being done in the precinct I was poll watching in 2023. It took all of a half an hour, if that. It matched. We going for speed or accuracy? But, of course, I am an 'election denier', so the conventional wisdom is you can't believe anything I say.

Plus there is a question about accuracy - counting by machine has been shown to be more reliable than hand counting.

Really? And where does that piece of information come from? Some proclamation or another? Tell that to Michelle Long Spears. The machines had her in third place in her race for DeKalb County Commissioner. Problem was, the machines reported there were no votes for her in the precinct she voted in. It was only that obvious problem that caused them to do the only physical hand count of the paper ballots in the State of Georgia. Turned out the machines weren't very accurate after all. After the recount, she won. This was caught in only one race in the state. How many other races may have had a problem that wasn't so obvious?
It ain't the machines, ear. It's the software.

Many peer-reviewed and verified studies show the electronic voting system that was forced upon us is very vulnerable to hacking. (Did we ever have a vote on whether we should use electronic voting systems? I don't remember one.) Recently hackers took control of multiple Las Vegas Casinos, for instance. Our electric grid has been hacked. Trump's campaign has been hacked. So, I guess the Dominion Election Suite is immune?

No. it isn't ear. On Monday, my county's Republican party is suing the SOS because the passwords to access the Dominion voting system is stored UNENCRYPTED and available to hackers. And they knew it.

Do you really believe that with the global implications of elections in the US, there are no entities, domestic or foreign, that have any interest in influencing or predetermining the results? What is hard to believe and defend is the left's complete refusal to even acknowledge the vulnerabilities and opposition to any steps to make the process more transparent. Can we make up an epithet for them? "ELECTION VULNERABILITY DENIERS?" Once a vote goes into the machines, it is totally lost from the standpoint of auditing. There is NO PHYSICAL RECORD that can be looked at. That is why we need to go back to paper. Like France and many other countries have done. But until we can do that, we need to do everything we can to make the process more transparent, verifiable and have unbroken chains of custody. And verify what the machines say against what physical reality we have. This rule is part of that.

And doesn't the rule require that each of the three individuals must count all of the ballots, and if their numbers don't agree, they have to start over?

Yes. And if they can't match the numbers, we know there is a problem in that particular precinct without having to find it later, if there is any motivation to do so.

Don't blindly go with what TPTB tell you. Your arguments are taken directly from the NGOs and the left's narrative. It is those entities that have the ear of the media conglomerate and organized manipulation of social media. They don't pass scrutiny. You are parroting. That's what the populace does in totalitarian states. In our country, up to now, it is WE THE PEOPLE who are in charge. Act like that is the case and do some independent thinking.

[earendel]

Counting by hand will definitely take longer than having it done by machine. How long is the question.

Yeah, a little bit. But it was standard practice before the SOS decided it wasn't to be done anymore. I saw it being done in the precinct I was poll watching in 2023. It took all of a half an hour, if that. It matched. We going for speed or accuracy? But, of course, I am an 'election denier', so the conventional wisdom is you can't believe anything I say.

I'm not doubting what you are saying regarding ballot counting.

Plus there is a question about accuracy - counting by machine has been shown to be more reliable than hand counting.

Really? And where does that piece of information come from? Some proclamation or another? Tell that to Michelle Long Spears. The machines had her in third place in her race for DeKalb County Commissioner. Problem was, the machines reported there were no votes for her in the precinct she voted in. It was only that obvious problem that caused them to do the only physical hand count of the paper ballots in the State of Georgia. Turned out the machines weren't very accurate after all. After the recount, she won. This was caught in only one race in the state. How many other races may have had a problem that wasn't so obvious?
It ain't the machines, ear. It's the software.

If it's just a matter of counting the number of ballots, I don't have an issue with it, although the studies that have been done show that electronic counting is less prone to errors than manual counting.

Many peer-reviewed and verified studies show the electronic voting system that was forced upon us is very vulnerable to hacking. (Did we ever have a vote on whether we should use electronic voting systems? I don't remember one.) Recently hackers took control of multiple Las Vegas Casinos, for instance. Our electric grid has been hacked. Trump's campaign has been hacked. So, I guess the Dominion Election Suite is immune?

No. it isn't ear. On Monday, my county's Republican party is suing the SOS because the passwords to access the Dominion voting system is stored UNENCRYPTED and available to hackers. And they knew it.

Hacking would be done to influence the outcome - the number of votes cast for each candidate - not the number of ballots cast, so this is a separate issue. I agree that electronic systems can be subject to hacking.

Do you really believe that with the global implications of elections in the US, there are no entities, domestic or foreign, that have any interest in influencing or predetermining the results? What is hard to believe and defend is the left's complete refusal to even acknowledge the vulnerabilities and opposition to any steps to make the process more transparent. Can we make up an epithet for them? "ELECTION VULNERABILITY DENIERS?" Once a vote goes into the machines, it is totally lost from the standpoint of auditing. There is NO PHYSICAL RECORD that can be looked at. That is why we need to go back to paper. Like France and many other countries have done. But until we can do that, we need to do everything we can to make the process more transparent, verifiable and have unbroken chains of custody. And verify what the machines say against what physical reality we have. This rule is part of that.

I believe that there are entities that would love to affect the outcome. We've already seen it. As for paper vs. electronic, it's possible to have both.

And doesn't the rule require that each of the three individuals must count all of the ballots, and if their numbers don't agree, they have to start over?

Yes. And if they can't match the numbers, we know there is a problem in that particular precinct without having to find it later, if there is any motivation to do so.

Don't blindly go with what TPTB tell you. Your arguments are taken directly from the NGOs and the left's narrative. It is those entities that have the ear of the media conglomerate and organized manipulation of social media. They don't pass scrutiny. You are parroting. That's what the populace does in totalitarian states. In our country, up to now, it is WE THE PEOPLE who are in charge. Act like that is the case and do some independent thinking.

The reason I asked the question in the first place was to get opinions from those most directly affected by the decisions. I don't appreciate being accused of "parroting" when what I want is information, which you have provided. The name-calling was not necessary.

[flockofseagulls104]

If it's just a matter of counting the number of ballots, I don't have an issue with it, although the studies that have been done show that electronic counting is less prone to errors than manual counting.

Machines do what the installed software tells them to do. Do your studies account for that?

As for paper vs. electronic, it's possible to have both.

Maybe, but WHY? We didn't have machines in the past. Ultimately, the results have to come from the PAPER, a record that comes directly from the voter, not put through the hidden, unreadable software of the machines. And the paper must be protected by an ironclad chain of custody. That should be a whole lot easier and faster than the current over complicated and opaque system. The Americans in the 'dark ages' managed to do it. Surely we, in 2024, can do it. Why is the GA SOS going through every possible means to avoid having anyone else having access to the paper ballots? Even when the law compels him to do so? Ask yourself that.

The reason I asked the question in the first place was to get opinions from those most directly affected by the decisions. I don't appreciate being accused of "parroting" when what I want is information, which you have provided. The name-calling was not necessary.

Sorry, but it's frustrating that you present the standard narrative pretty much verbatim without any indication that you have any qualms with it. Surely you could point out that you have some skepticism about it in your own mind.

[earendel]

If it's just a matter of counting the number of ballots, I don't have an issue with it, although the studies that have been done show that electronic counting is less prone to errors than manual counting.

Machines do what the installed software tells them to do. Do your studies account for that?

If it's just a matter of counting the number, there's not much that the software could "tell" them. Let's keep the issue of counting votes separate from just counting the number of ballots.

As for paper vs. electronic, it's possible to have both.

Maybe, but WHY? We didn't have machines in the past. Ultimately, the results have to come from the PAPER, a record that comes directly from the voter, not put through the hidden, unreadable software of the machines. And the paper must be protected by an ironclad chain of custody. That should be a whole lot easier and faster than the current over complicated and opaque system. The Americans in the 'dark ages' managed to do it. Surely we, in 2024, can do it. Why is the GA SOS going through every possible means to avoid having anyone else having access to the paper ballots? Even when the law compels him to do so? Ask yourself that.

I can't speak for the GASOS. As for why both, the purpose is to have a verifiable method of confirming the results. The machine tabulates the vote, a paper receipt is given, and can be checked if there is an issue.

The reason I asked the question in the first place was to get opinions from those most directly affected by the decisions. I don't appreciate being accused of "parroting" when what I want is information, which you have provided. The name-calling was not necessary.

Sorry, but it's frustrating that you present the standard narrative pretty much verbatim without any indication that you have any qualms with it. Surely you could point out that you have some skepticism about it in your own mind.

What I presented was my question, not a statement. I was asking for your opinion, not intending to enter into a debate.

[flockofseagulls104]

If it's just a matter of counting the number, there's not much that the software could "tell" them. Let's keep the issue of counting votes separate from just counting the number of ballots.

The rule was presented the way it was because Sharlene knew counting had been done before the letter was sent by the SOS office to tell them to stop. And the State Election Board cannot compel the SOS office to purchase the standalone counting machines required. A couple of the other important rules proposed were voted down because of that. VoterGA proposed that all ballot images be preserved on a memory card, which the Board agreed with, but they voted it down because it required the SOS to purchase memory cards, which they decided was out of their legal authority. The SOS office was under contract to only purchase memory cards from Dominion, at about $42 a pop. They cost about $11 on the open market, but the SEB can't decide that, even though it's a better solution. So, yeah, if they can get a completely disconnected, devoted machine to count pieces of paper, that might be a good idea, but for the thousands of precincts in the state?

I can't speak for the GASOS. As for why both, the purpose is to have a verifiable method of confirming the results. The machine tabulates the vote, a paper receipt is given, and can be checked if there is an issue.

VoterGA has been fighting that fight for years. A few months ago, they finally got a ruling from the court system that Fulton County is required to give qualified representatives access to the actual 2020 ballots. They have not done so, and Raffensperger and Fulton County, even though they are violating the law, are using every legal trick they can think of to avoid having to do so, even to the point of just ignoring it. Your statement is wonderful in theory, ear, but TPTB don't see it that way.

What I presented was my question, not a statement. I was asking for your opinion, not intending to enter into a debate.

Sorry if it seems that way, but frustration plays a role. I have given you first hand facts. I am involved in the fight. It would be nice to hear from you that the facts are giving you pause in accepting the narrative of the left.

[earendel]

Sorry if it seems that way, but frustration plays a role. I have given you first hand facts. I am involved in the fight. It would be nice to hear from you that the facts are giving you pause in accepting the narrative of the left.

It's precisely because I don't have a dog in that hunt that I asked for your thoughts. Frankly, I don't have a problem with manual counting of the number of ballots, but only to verify the machine count.

[flockofseagulls104]

Sorry if it seems that way, but frustration plays a role. I have given you first hand facts. I am involved in the fight. It would be nice to hear from you that the facts are giving you pause in accepting the narrative of the left.

It's precisely because I don't have a dog in that hunt that I asked for your thoughts. Frankly, I don't have a problem with manual counting of the number of ballots, but only to verify the machine count.

You certainly do have a dog in the hunt.

[earendel]

Sorry if it seems that way, but frustration plays a role. I have given you first hand facts. I am involved in the fight. It would be nice to hear from you that the facts are giving you pause in accepting the narrative of the left.

It's precisely because I don't have a dog in that hunt that I asked for your thoughts. Frankly, I don't have a problem with manual counting of the number of ballots, but only to verify the machine count.

You certainly do have a dog in the hunt.

I'm not a citizen of Georgia, so what the GASOS does has no effect on my state.

[BackInTex]

It's precisely because I don't have a dog in that hunt that I asked for your thoughts. Frankly, I don't have a problem with manual counting of the number of ballots, but only to verify the machine count.

You certainly do have a dog in the hunt.

I'm not a citizen of Georgia, so what the GASOS does has no effect on my state.

Last I checked, Georgia has 16 electoral votes. They also get two senators and 14 representatives. How they vote and how they count those votes affects you and everyone in Kentucky, and every other state.

[flockofseagulls104]

It's precisely because I don't have a dog in that hunt that I asked for your thoughts. Frankly, I don't have a problem with manual counting of the number of ballots, but only to verify the machine count.

You certainly do have a dog in the hunt.

I'm not a citizen of Georgia, so what the GASOS does has no effect on my state.

Ear, do some more thinking, please. And consider this. dvscorp08! That's all someone needs to decide who wins and who loses. And it is NOT a 'baseless' claim that Georgia's election was fixed in 2020 and 2022, as you are being told by the people who would be affected if the truth were to come out. There is a boatload of evidence that has been and continues to be swept under the rug. We are not trying to change any results. We are trying to prevent it from happening again.

If you are following Georgia, then you should be concerned about the Curling v Raffensperger case, which shows the vulnerabilities of the Dominion system with tons of evidence. This case was heard in January, but still hasn't been decided. Judge Totenberg, the sister of NPR's Nina Totenberg, is sweeping it under the rug by not ruling on it. Raffensperger was recently sued by two citizens with tons of evidence. So who does Raffy call on? None other than Marc Elias! What does that tell you?

If your state uses an electronic election system, especially Dominion's, you have a dog in the hunt. You are just being led to ignore your dog's barking at you. Don't let them do it again.

[Weyoun]

Wasn’t there an audit that showed that over a 25 year window of time, something like 2000 illegals tried to vote in Georgia, and they were all screened out as ineligible? Remember, not getting a result you want is not the same as the system being crooked.

[flockofseagulls104]

Wasn’t there an audit that showed that over a 25 year window of time, something like 2000 illegals tried to vote in Georgia, and they were all screened out as ineligible? Remember, not getting a result you want is not the same as the system being crooked.

Ifonly, I am talking to earendel here, not you.
The only 'evidence' we get from TPTB is their proclamations. Qualified professionals outside the 'halls of power' have actually examined the data that TPTB let us see, and have come to other conclusions and have shown their work. TPTB don't ever address the numbers, they attack the messengers. The result we want is for the numbers to add up and make sense, and whomever wins wins. That IS NOT THE CASE currently.

[earendel]

You certainly do have a dog in the hunt.

I'm not a citizen of Georgia, so what the GASOS does has no effect on my state.

Last I checked, Georgia has 16 electoral votes. They also get two senators and 14 representatives. How they vote and how they count those votes affects you and everyone in Kentucky, and every other state.

Yes, but because I am not a citizen of Georgia, I have no influence on what the GASOIS decides for their state. If it becomes an issue in Kentucky, then it becomes an issue for me.

[earendel]

Ear, do some more thinking, please. And consider this. dvscorp08! That's all someone needs to decide who wins and who loses. And it is NOT a 'baseless' claim that Georgia's election was fixed in 2020 and 2022, as you are being told by the people who would be affected if the truth were to come out. There is a boatload of evidence that has been and continues to be swept under the rug. We are not trying to change any results. We are trying to prevent it from happening again.

If you are following Georgia, then you should be concerned about the Curling v Raffensperger case, which shows the vulnerabilities of the Dominion system with tons of evidence. This case was heard in January, but still hasn't been decided. Judge Totenberg, the sister of NPR's Nina Totenberg, is sweeping it under the rug by not ruling on it. Raffensperger was recently sued by two citizens with tons of evidence. So who does Raffy call on? None other than Marc Elias! What does that tell you?

If your state uses an electronic election system, especially Dominion's, you have a dog in the hunt. You are just being led to ignore your dog's barking at you. Don't let them do it again.

Once again I remind you that I'm only interested in ballot counting, not vote counting.

[flockofseagulls104]

Ear, do some more thinking, please. And consider this. dvscorp08! That's all someone needs to decide who wins and who loses. And it is NOT a 'baseless' claim that Georgia's election was fixed in 2020 and 2022, as you are being told by the people who would be affected if the truth were to come out. There is a boatload of evidence that has been and continues to be swept under the rug. We are not trying to change any results. We are trying to prevent it from happening again.

If you are following Georgia, then you should be concerned about the Curling v Raffensperger case, which shows the vulnerabilities of the Dominion system with tons of evidence. This case was heard in January, but still hasn't been decided. Judge Totenberg, the sister of NPR's Nina Totenberg, is sweeping it under the rug by not ruling on it. Raffensperger was recently sued by two citizens with tons of evidence. So who does Raffy call on? None other than Marc Elias! What does that tell you?

If your state uses an electronic election system, especially Dominion's, you have a dog in the hunt. You are just being led to ignore your dog's barking at you. Don't let them do it again.

Once again I remind you that I'm only interested in ballot counting, not vote counting.

I trust that I have answered your question on that topic, although I believe you should be more interested in vote counting, because it is true: "It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes." At the end of the day, people like me and you need to be able to count the votes and not rely on who is reporting the results to us. Right now, we do not have that situation. And those that count the votes, especially here in Georgia, are doing everything possible to prevent us from doing that. Trust, but verify!

[flockofseagulls104]

Since you seem to be interested in what's going on in Georgia, DeKalb GOP v Raffensperger is currently being heard in Scott McAfee's (yes, that one) court. You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/@judgescottmcafee/streams