• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two of the most damning things from Arizona audit report

Seems like this happened: Trump and his supporters claimed the election was fixed in AZ. The audit said it wasn’t. Trump’s supporters (has Donald commented yet?) say the audit was fixed. Do an audit of the audit, and if it comes up with the same conclusion, it’s fixed. Any outcome that displeases Trump or his supporters is fixed. Actually quite simple to understand.
 
I'm not banking on anything... I just want every state to take measures so audits like this are never necessary again.

So what's your take on those things I posted?
What's done is done. But this shit better be cleaned up and tightened down by the midterms.
 
There were 2 things that really stood out to me in today's audit report that are tough to write off as merely being "coincidental", and seem to indicate that there was some internal hanky-panky going on with the mail-in ballots in last November's election.

First there was this:

View attachment 67355417

Compared to the 2016 election, there was a 53% increase in the number of mail-in ballots in last November's election. Logic dictates you would see a similar increase, or at least some increase, in the number of signature mismatch rejections, but that isn't what happened. Instead the number of signature mismatch rejections went from 1,456 in 2016, to only 587 in 2020.... That's a whopping 61% decrease.


The other thing that caught my attention was this:

View attachment 67355416

In the 4 weeks leading up to election day, only 5% of the signatures from mail-in ballot were seen as illegible when examined, which sounds perfectly reasonable... What sends up the red flag for me is the fact that of the ballot signatures looked at from the 4 days after the election, an unbelievable 95% of them were deemed illegible. It went from 1 out of 20 being illegible before election day, to 19 out of 20 after election day.

I'm sorry, but I just can't square that, and I can't see anyone else being able to square it either.

.
The most damning thing about the audit is Trump lost. It’s sad to see you move away from living in the real world.
 
What this means is that in the days after the election, they needed to be able to count votes that they would normally be unable to count...votes that they wanted to use to stuff the ballot box for Biden.

If those votes that were counted AFTER the election are ever canvassed...something the AZ AG has the power to do...I think they'll find that those ballots that actually have signatures will not be able to be matched up with real voters. Also, the ballots that had no signatures...but were accepted and counted...should be removed from the count.

If all that is done, then heads should roll and the election results should be decertified...something the legislature can do.

The question, at this point, is whether the AZ AG and the legislature have the political balls to do all that.

We'll have to wait and see.

In the meantime, there is a lot more stuff for the AG and the legislature to do to hold people responsible for violating AZ election laws and to create legislation that'll prevent this from happening again.
My god!

You lost. Bigly

Now man up for once in your life, accept it and move on
 
There were 2 things that really stood out to me in today's audit report that are tough to write off as merely being "coincidental", and seem to indicate that there was some internal hanky-panky going on with the mail-in ballots in last November's election.

First there was this:

View attachment 67355417

Compared to the 2016 election, there was a 53% increase in the number of mail-in ballots in last November's election. Logic dictates you would see a similar increase, or at least some increase, in the number of signature mismatch rejections, but that isn't what happened. Instead the number of signature mismatch rejections went from 1,456 in 2016, to only 587 in 2020.... That's a whopping 61% decrease.


The other thing that caught my attention was this:

View attachment 67355416

In the 4 weeks leading up to election day, only 5% of the signatures from mail-in ballot were seen as illegible when examined, which sounds perfectly reasonable... What sends up the red flag for me is the fact that of the ballot signatures looked at from the 4 days after the election, an unbelievable 95% of them were deemed illegible. It went from 1 out of 20 being illegible before election day, to 19 out of 20 after election day.

I'm sorry, but I just can't square that, and I can't see anyone else being able to square it either.

.
Those are interesting findings but I can't conclude or infer anything from them.

On the signature mismatch rate, we have only two data points, which alone really means nothing. I have no idea if that kind of swing is normal or way out of the ordinary. Do they have mismatch rates from the primaries, or from other counties? It would also be helpful to see mismatch rates from numerous elections in various states to get a sense of their typical variability.

I don't understand the illegibility finding. It says it is of a random sampling of signatures; what is the sample size? 95% is not impossible, statistically speaking, just really unlikely. Could they do another random sampling to see if it falls closer to one than to the other?
 
So your take is, that signatures don't matter... If that's true, then why are they required?

.
People like you think it "improves election security."

TV lied to you. "Handwriting analysis" is pseudoscience. Give a signature to five different people and you'll get five different answers. Signature being "illegible?" That describes most of the population.
 
What this means is that in the days after the election, they needed to be able to count votes that they would normally be unable to count...votes that they wanted to use to stuff the ballot box for Biden.

If those votes that were counted AFTER the election are ever canvassed...something the AZ AG has the power to do...I think they'll find that those ballots that actually have signatures will not be able to be matched up with real voters. Also, the ballots that had no signatures...but were accepted and counted...should be removed from the count.

If all that is done, then heads should roll and the election results should be decertified...something the legislature can do.

The question, at this point, is whether the AZ AG and the legislature have the political balls to do all that.

We'll have to wait and see.

In the meantime, there is a lot more stuff for the AG and the legislature to do to hold people responsible for violating AZ election laws and to create legislation that'll prevent this from happening again.
Mycroft, why do you have to thread crap with shitty posts like this? I mean really.

Who is the nefarious "they"? Four of five Maricopa County Board of Elections supervisors are Republican. Why would they want to stuff for Biden? And what logic chain gets you to ballot stuffing? If you are looking for votes you don't suddenly disqualify 90% of them. Do you know what happens to signature mismatches in the Arizona?

From this site:

"SIGNATURE VERIFICATION & TABULATION
When a voter is mailed an early ballot, their ballot package includes the actual ballot and an early ballot affidavit envelope. This affidavit must be signed by the voter in order for their ballot to be counted. All early ballots are reviewed by the county before they can be tabulated. The county verifies in their system that they did actually mail the voter the early ballot and confirm the signature on the early ballot affidavit matches the signature on file with the voter registration record. County election staff receive professional training to verify the signature on the affidavit envelope matches the signature on the voters' registration record.

If the signature is a match, the ballot proceeds to the Citizens Board who then prepare the unopened ballots for tabulation. The Citizens Boards are made up of two board members of different political party affiliations. They confirm that the County Recorder verified the voter's signature and then they remove the ballot from the envelope, taking special care to ensure the privacy of the voters' ballot. The ballots are then transmitted to the tabulation room. If the county is unable to verify the signature, the county will attempt to contact the voter. Voters have until 5:00 p.m. on the 5th business day after a federal primary or general election to confirm/correct their signature."

Please enlighten us as to how anything you claim happened could have under this system.
 
I love that the fraudit showed that 🍊 🐷 lost by even more and trumpturds are all YEAH WHAT ABOUT WHAT ABOUT!!!
View attachment 67355442
I don't think that's a true statement by Trump. At least, I didn't find it. On his website, these are the statements he made that are up today:

I will be discussing the winning results of the Arizona Forensic Audit, which will show 44,000 possibly illegal ballots cast, tomorrow at the Great State of Georgia rally, which will be packed!

-and-

is not even believable the dishonesty of the Fake News Media on the Arizona Audit results, which shows incomprehensible Fraud at an Election Changing level, many times more votes than is needed. The Fake News Media refuses to write the facts, thereby being complicit in the Crime of the Century. They are so dishonest, but Patriots know the truth! Arizona must immediately decertify their 2020 Presidential Election Results.

 
There were 2 things that really stood out to me in today's audit report that are tough to write off as merely being "coincidental", and seem to indicate that there was some internal hanky-panky going on with the mail-in ballots in last November's election.

First there was this:

View attachment 67355417

Compared to the 2016 election, there was a 53% increase in the number of mail-in ballots in last November's election. Logic dictates you would see a similar increase, or at least some increase, in the number of signature mismatch rejections, but that isn't what happened. Instead the number of signature mismatch rejections went from 1,456 in 2016, to only 587 in 2020.... That's a whopping 61% decrease.


The other thing that caught my attention was this:

View attachment 67355416

In the 4 weeks leading up to election day, only 5% of the signatures from mail-in ballot were seen as illegible when examined, which sounds perfectly reasonable... What sends up the red flag for me is the fact that of the ballot signatures looked at from the 4 days after the election, an unbelievable 95% of them were deemed illegible. It went from 1 out of 20 being illegible before election day, to 19 out of 20 after election day.

I'm sorry, but I just can't square that, and I can't see anyone else being able to square it either.

.
 
There were 2 things that really stood out to me in today's audit report that are tough to write off as merely being "coincidental", and seem to indicate that there was some internal hanky-panky going on with the mail-in ballots in last November's election.

First there was this:

View attachment 67355417

Compared to the 2016 election, there was a 53% increase in the number of mail-in ballots in last November's election. Logic dictates you would see a similar increase, or at least some increase, in the number of signature mismatch rejections, but that isn't what happened. Instead the number of signature mismatch rejections went from 1,456 in 2016, to only 587 in 2020.... That's a whopping 61% decrease.


The other thing that caught my attention was this:

View attachment 67355416

In the 4 weeks leading up to election day, only 5% of the signatures from mail-in ballot were seen as illegible when examined, which sounds perfectly reasonable... What sends up the red flag for me is the fact that of the ballot signatures looked at from the 4 days after the election, an unbelievable 95% of them were deemed illegible. It went from 1 out of 20 being illegible before election day, to 19 out of 20 after election day.

I'm sorry, but I just can't square that, and I can't see anyone else being able to square it either.

.
I don't trust one damn thing an ultra partisan group of hacks like the "Cyber Ninjas" have to say..... and there you have it.
 
The most damning thing about the audit is Trump lost. It’s sad to see you move away from living in the real world.

So you find nothing unusual or strange about the 2 things I posted?

If you simply don't care about election integrity, just come out and say it.
 
People like you think it "improves election security."

TV lied to you. "Handwriting analysis" is pseudoscience. Give a signature to five different people and you'll get five different answers. Signature being "illegible?" That describes most of the population.

There was no "Handwriting analysis" that took place... They did NOT attempt to verify that the signatures matched what was on file, this was only to establish that there was some form of a legible signature on the ballot envelopes.

Now what do you have to say?


.
 
Really? That's all you've got?

I take it then that you find nothing at all questionable or unusual about either of those findings?

.
All you got is another audit, another loss.

And all you got is Trump losing...again.

So sad, so tragic, so hilarious
 
I don't trust one damn thing an ultra partisan group of hacks like the "Cyber Ninjas" have to say..... and there you have it.

Of course you don't... That would require an intellectual evaluation of the evidence, a desire to obtain the truth, and the ability to accept the truth regardless of the political ramifications.


.
 
All you got is another audit, another loss.

And all you got is Trump losing...again.

So sad, so tragic, so hilarious

What's sad is that you've become so blinded by your hatred that you willingly turn a blind eye to corruption, fraud and immoral behavior. Is that really who you are, someone who will condone anything as long as it's politically beneficial?

That was rhetorical so there's need to respond... You made that clear by ignoring everything I posted in my op and instead tried to make it about Trump.

.
 
Why are you stuck on the recount and ignoring the audit?

The question isn't the counting the ballots, but the legitimacy of those ballots.
Ok…the audit is over…who—give us the names—casted an illegitimate ballot?
 
There was no "Handwriting analysis" that took place... They did NOT attempt to verify that the signatures matched what was on file, this was only to establish that there was some form of a legible signature on the ballot envelopes.

Now what do you have to say?


.
Hahahahah that's even dumber and even less indicative of some kind of "fraud."
 
There were 2 things that really stood out to me in today's audit report that are tough to write off as merely being "coincidental", and seem to indicate that there was some internal hanky-panky going on with the mail-in ballots in last November's election.

First there was this:

View attachment 67355417

Compared to the 2016 election, there was a 53% increase in the number of mail-in ballots in last November's election. Logic dictates you would see a similar increase, or at least some increase, in the number of signature mismatch rejections, but that isn't what happened. Instead the number of signature mismatch rejections went from 1,456 in 2016, to only 587 in 2020.... That's a whopping 61% decrease.
I found this interesting as well! Given that my firm, Cyborg Gorillas, found an improvement in handwriting accuracy assessment of 74% due to the George Soros Signature Quality Initiative, this means that the quality of assessment improved dramatically and in a nigh unprecedented fashion. I think this is sufficient evidence that we should extend the audit to the entire state of America - not just Maricopa but all rural municipalities as well. I appreciate your raising this important point.
The other thing that caught my attention was this:

View attachment 67355416

In the 4 weeks leading up to election day, only 5% of the signatures from mail-in ballot were seen as illegible when examined, which sounds perfectly reasonable... What sends up the red flag for me is the fact that of the ballot signatures looked at from the 4 days after the election, an unbelievable 95% of them were deemed illegible. It went from 1 out of 20 being illegible before election day, to 19 out of 20 after election day.

I'm sorry, but I just can't square that, and I can't see anyone else being able to square it either.
I am deeply troubled that when confronted with a square, you’re unable to ‘square it’ however I think with education and treatment this can be addressed. As to the visual depictions, I also took a ”random” sampling of 100 ballots my conservative intern picked and ended up with the same thing Cyber Ninjas did. Then, i did a second “random“ sampling of 100 ballots my liberal intern picked and got precisely the opposite. Finally, I had a color blind Canadian select 100 ballots and the R-vs-D ratio mirrored the vote tally that Cyber Ninjas confirmed. Hopefully this means Donald can take a break and get back to Celebrity Apprentice.
 
There were 2 things that really stood out to me in today's audit report that are tough to write off as merely being "coincidental", and seem to indicate that there was some internal hanky-panky going on with the mail-in ballots in last November's election.

First there was this:

View attachment 67355417

Compared to the 2016 election, there was a 53% increase in the number of mail-in ballots in last November's election. Logic dictates you would see a similar increase, or at least some increase, in the number of signature mismatch rejections, but that isn't what happened. Instead the number of signature mismatch rejections went from 1,456 in 2016, to only 587 in 2020.... That's a whopping 61% decrease.


The other thing that caught my attention was this:

View attachment 67355416

In the 4 weeks leading up to election day, only 5% of the signatures from mail-in ballot were seen as illegible when examined, which sounds perfectly reasonable... What sends up the red flag for me is the fact that of the ballot signatures looked at from the 4 days after the election, an unbelievable 95% of them were deemed illegible. It went from 1 out of 20 being illegible before election day, to 19 out of 20 after election day.

I'm sorry, but I just can't square that, and I can't see anyone else being able to square it either.

.
Except the Cyber Ninja counting methodology has been roundly criticized for being outside accepted processes and procedures, bearing an error rate higher than the norm. In other words, they can't even count! The entire thing should simply be tossed in a trash can.
 
Ok…the audit is over…who—give us the names—casted an illegitimate ballot?

That is not what the audit was about. Investigating who may have been responsible for the things they discovered will be up to Arizona's AG.

.
 
What's sad is that you've become so blinded by your hatred that you willingly turn a blind eye to corruption, fraud and immoral behavior. Is that really who you are, someone who will condone anything as long as it's politically beneficial?

That was rhetorical so there's need to respond... You made that clear by ignoring everything I posted in my op and instead tried to make it about Trump.

.
But the audit yet again confirmed there was NO corruption, fraud or immoral behavior.

Duh and sorry. Loss #71
 
Except the Cyber Ninja counting methodology has been roundly criticized for being outside accepted processes and procedures, bearing an error rate higher than the norm. In other words, they can't even count! The entire thing should simply be tossed in a trash can.

It's been criticized by the people who vehemently opposed the audit, like the state democrats and the Maricopa county board of supervisors... Who by the way were invited to be a part of the entire auditing process, including contributing in the decision making process, but absolutely refused. Personally, I believe they refused to take part in the audit just so they could attack the entire process at will.

Did you watch the hearing today? They went to great lengths to explain in detail every aspect of the process, including all the security involved and how everything they did was done with transparency in mind.

.
 
Back
Top Bottom