Home » The Windham 2020 voting audit continues

Comments

The Windham 2020 voting audit continues — 19 Comments

  1. Copy Edit*

    “As times has gone by…”

    (I’m generally loathe to do that, but I know you like to clean that stuff up. Feel free to delete this comment.)

  2. What kicked this off (and in Antrim County MI) was a DEMOCRAT narrowly lost and demanded a recount. That is where the initial 300 vote reduction was found and off to the races we go. The carefully crafted narrative is slowly becoming undone. Not by the Republican Party but by citizen activists. (Barak would be so proud). No way that Biden won New Hampshire with the massive swing to Republican representation in the state legislature.

    Hmmmmm, I wonder why Hillary stopped the recount in Michigan in 2016.

    We are not stopping to get the truth known. The Antrim suit was dismissed as moot but it is getting appealed. In the meantime the people are becoming educated on what really happened. So the base of people convinced that fraud happened is growing. Change is being effected. Strong election reform is happening. Last night I was on an activist call and the determination of the people to work is very gratifying. We all realize we are not alone. We are getting the tools to be able to effect change.

    Here in Michigan, the mask mandate and Critical Race Theory are the issues we are informing people about. It is going to be a fun work filled two years. Meanwhile the miasma of the Baiden maladministration will become more evident.

  3. Apparently Cory Lewandowski lives in Windham, NH, and is encouraging his fellow Republicans to show some backbone.

    I think we can expect the usual suspects to try to dismiss this on that basis alone.

  4. Boatbuilder – one difference is that the Democrats want this audit too. They lost control of the state legislature and they can’t believe it. So they will be motivated to find out what happened. Cory is not part of the Republican Party per se so yes I believe he is getting citizen activists mobilized.

    Also we are getting smarter on how we approach legal matters. No willy nilly lawsuit filing. Carefully crafted suits are moving forward. Lessons have been learned from the fiasco in Q4 2020. We actually read the bills now. We actually get evidence vetted. So life is going to get harder for the narrative keepers. Legacy media is going to have to cover this story and can’t spin it away.

    The first “decertification” most likely Arizona will get the avalanche started. Plus the Jan 6th commission isn’t going to be able to get cover it up. When the government Jan 6th trials start falling apart and more video is released that narrative will shift also. Couple that with the tsunami of bad economic news coming out after the stimulus runs out and the Carter years will look better and better.

    The Fascists high tide was two months ago. It is downhill from there. The end of the beginning has started. We just have to work hard to make the change. If you aren’t working, you are part of the problem.

  5. I’m surprised that an overvote in one ballot position invalidates the whole ballot. Why not just invalidate that position only?

    From a technical standpoint, I guess I can see how this all could have happened accidentally. The techies could have tested the ballot reader with dozens of folded ballots and never detected the problem. Still, I find it appalling.

    Having read through the original Antrim county audit some, they state that the allowed balloting error is 8 epm or 8 errors per million ballots. It seems as though many of these systems aren’t within a mile of that standard.

  6. Paul,

    Assuming the spreadsheet Nick Moseder is using are the correct numbers, then the “fold read as vote” story does not make any sense. All a misread of a fold as a vote for a Democrat would do is the raise the vote totals of that Democrat, and disqualify a number of votes for Republicans due to a calculated overvote. Assuming the entire ballot is disqualified, then it would lower the vote totals for all the Republicans, raise the vote totals for that one Democrat- the one whose bubble is on the fold- and leave the vote totals for all the Democrats where they were, or lower, too because of the same overvote issues.

    What that spreadsheet is showing is that Biden and Harris’ vote totals going up on that one machine- that cannot be due to a bad fold read by the machine- that is definitely some kind of other mistake, and most likely fraud.

  7. If those spreadsheets are correct, then this has nothing to do with a folded ballot. You are being fed a backup narrative now that the narrative that there was nothing inaccurate at all has been disproven. What you will now see is the appointed auditor leadership try to claim it was only in this one town and one machine. Will that hold? I don’t know.

  8. Yancey, the second video is of the identical corruption showing up in towns other than Windham. Fraud, and yes, it has nothing to do with folded ballots as you correctly point out.

  9. I should have finished my thought. If it were folded ballots, there should have been about the same number of overvotes on every machine. They should not have been concentrated on one or two machines.

  10. Operating on the somewhat questionable assumption that the folds did screw up the votes… begs the question; was the placement of the candidates who landed on the folds accidental or… intentional? Given that presumably the same format is used in each election, why haven’t the folds skewed the results in prior elections?

  11. I assume this is not Dominion voting machines, but it reminds me of a joke on Sunday at church. The outgoing, retiring, senior pastor announced that there would be a church conference that afternoon where the church members could vote for or against the nominee for his replacement. The senior pastor assured the audience that the vote would be by secret ballot and would NOT involve Dominion voting machines. There was a lot of laughter, the majority of the church being conservative.

  12. “…intentional?…”
    Ineed, we’re LONG PAST the point of believing that anything in the realm of Democratic Party voter fraud could possibly be “unintentional”.

    (But one must admit that this particular technique—or should one say, “EXCUSE”?—is particularly creative….)

  13. Tal Bachman’s “Unsucking the Republican Party” hardcore populist reform statement at American Greatness advocates ABOLISHING voting machine’s completely, replacing them with paper ballots like most of the Anglosphere.

    He adds links to document the recurrent fraud problem that they’ve produced since introduced in the 1970s, and that’s kept the smarter of us away from them.
    https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/26/unsucking-the-republican-party/

    It’s a bracing platform re-think that’s not long but is appropriately bracing. This can be done. This should be done, among five pounts made, ending with telling our Great American productive vision statement throughout the rest of it.

    It overdue. It’s now.

  14. Just thinking out loud here, but who actually designed the ballot? Is it possible that they might have known about the issue with Dominion machines reading a fold as a vote and laid out the ballot to take advantage of that?

    To answer that question requires examining the vote tally histories for past years; 2020 was significantly higher in absentee and mail-in ballots, so what might have been a statistical “nearly nothing” in previous years became significant in 2020. If someone noticed that, and kept the information tucked away for “potential future use” it would be useful to examine that possibility.

    I’m sure this sounds like it’s deep into tinfoil hat territory, but based on what we’ve seen from the Democrats, should we assume that anything is past them?

  15. He adds links to document the recurrent fraud problem that they’ve produced since introduced in the 1970s

    We had voting machines well prior to that and they continued to be used in New York until 2008 or thereabouts. They were mechanical appliances. They were not on a network and did not use software.

    We do need paper ballots which can be counted by hand and we need a simpler array of offices subject to election each year, which means reducing the number of elected offices, replacing biennial terms with quadrennial terms, moving certain contests to May (e.g. ballot propositions, retention-in-office referenda, and competitive elections to the judiciary and offices adjacent), and sorting contests over a quadrennial cycle in a sensible way (e.g. federal offices in year one, general-purpose local offices in year two, governor and state legislature in year three, and special-purpose state and local offices in year four).

    Also, only about 10% of the adult population (at most) has an abiding problem which inhibits voting. People in that 10% should be permitted to place a standing order, renewable quadrennially, for a postal ballot. Everyone else votes in person; you can and should move the voting time to Friday evening, Saturday morning, and Saturday afternoon.

  16. How could voting machine scanner technology possibly be that bad, and still sell to … governments … okay I think we have our answer.

  17. Art:

    I suppose your recommendation that the voting time should be Friday evening, Saturday morning and Saturday afternoon would require a Constitutional amendment, but that could be done — just not quickly.

    But another question that needs to be raised is “what makes people think they can get away with voter fraud?” Or said another way, “why don’t they get more attractive candidates who could win an election on their merits?”

    It is possible, I will admit, that their own partisanship is so strong they don’t recognize that Hillary or Biden are not attractive candidates. But if they think that before the election, which is the implication of putting in place a plan to flip legal votes or make a phony count, why did they decide to go with that candidate?

    If it indeed turns out that a number of states had a bogus vote count this year, that is a frank admission that the Democrats knew they did not have a winning candidate, because a bogus count has to be put in place BEFORE the election.

    The presence of flipped vote counts in favor of the Democrats should tell them they need better candidates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>