Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Ohmin, Dec 24, 2020.
"Just forget about the evidence."
Are you patriot enough to ignore the need for facts?
Still nothing substantial on this front, except actually making elections LESS safe as election materials are being mishandled/exposed by so-called audits:
"Earlier this month, copies of the widely used Dominion Voting Systems election software were shared with attendees at an election event organised by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a Trump supporter and booster of election conspiracy theories.
It’s unclear how the software reached participants, but cyber experts told the Associated Press that now that the Dominion software, which is used in roughly 30 states, is out in public hands, it may make it easier for hackers and others bad actors to find vulnerabilities."
There have been events of people hacking those machines for over a decade if I recall.
That said, if people knowing the source code for those machines represence a "vulenerability" than maybe we should stick to paper ballots instead of relying on computers.
Certainly not a good looking quote.
Context is important here though, and you did not provide any.
It's like me quoting Biden talking about how his people assembled the biggest voter fraud group ever, or whatever that was.
Context is important. In this case, it's entirely possible that Biden was misspeaking rather than having a slip of the tongue, he often misspeaks, though often less clearly.
It's also entirely possible that this article following article was not about rigging the election using a shadowy conspiracy of "bipartisan" corporate and political actors and is being 100% sincere about everything it says:
It's also possible that on election night, in key states that Trump's campaign was currently winning, that they all stopped late at night (which doesn't happen), for the same period of time, and when they restarted had Biden get up massively all from one counting of ballots (which were not mail-in ballots mind, as those were counted earlier in the morning). That this was "nothing special" as the Time magazine article states.
Even though in Georgia the method used to shut down counting was to lie to the people counting and observing about a water main break. Even though in other states they showed deliveries of boxes full of ballots to counting stations that were supposedly "taking a break" in the dead of night.
It's possible that all the witnesses having signed sworn affidavits (vulnerable to perjury) are lying, or contain only circumstancial evidence (or both).
It's even possible that the distribution of race/ethnicity is actually proportionally the same in terms of who voted for who within nearby counties of a given state.
That despite the voter registration roles being primarily overbearing in most states that those that had 90%+ voter turnout were just really diligent at keeping their voter rolls clean that year despite no mention of cleaning said records and the general hubub that comes with those opposed to doing such things in the name of protecting voters (legitimately or otherwise).
Maybe those 82K missing or unreturnable mail-in ballots in... Pennsylvania was it? weren't really that important in a race that concluded with less than that as a margin.
Maybe the man who literally halted his campaign, had virtually no turnout for rallies (some even had more people there to protest him than support him), who was always considered the second-hand guy of Obama with terrible foriegn policy choices... maybe he really is the most popular president in American history by sheer volume of supporting voters. Maybe his smashing of Obama's records is indicative of just how much people really want Biden in office. Maybe that guy which people in football stadiums are chanting explitives against had just so much confidence from the people....
Maybe, despite record GAINS with minorities (despite being labeled racist constantly), and with voters in general, and huge rally attendances even now... Trump was just so well hated that that mass of 80 Million finally couldn't stand by any longer even though the last contest between two heavily disliked candidates (Trump and Clinton) had a below-average voter turnout. We had record voter turnout of around 66.8% according to the Washington Post after all. And a massive increase in registrations going from ~153M to ~168M, a 15M increase give or take a few hundred thousand, according to Statista.com Other sources say about 213M registered voters in December (though it's not clear if this figure is from before or after Nov 3rd) ... Even more impressive then either way.
But hang on, 67% of 213 (142) is less than the ~155 million tabbulated votes for both candidates. By over 10 million. Even worse if you use the Statista figures. But we are sure that the US Census recorded a 66.8% participation of registered voters. So uh... where'd those extra 10+ million votes come from?
When taken all in context... it seems improbable that Biden is legitimately the Presiden of the US, even if you set aside Lindell's claims with regards to having data proving hacking.
While I disagree with the speculated motive, I do actually agree with the rest of your statement.
Well, the Arizona audit is over. They found more votes for Biden and less for Trump, LOL.
Meanwhile, Trump claims they found "undeniable evidence of fraud." I mean, if they did... they haven't told anyone.
Now, they claim to have found "issues" but honestly, with the way this whole thing has been handled, can we really trust these guys on anything they say?
Of course, it barely matters, as their most significant finding (that they called a "critical finding") is that ~10k people MAY have voted in other counties... entirely on the basis that someone sharing their first and last name were found in other counties.
Guess what, folks? PEOPLE HAVE THE SAME NAME SOMETIMES.
This is a typical Republican tactic to make it look like that found fraud without having to prove it. Indeed, similar things have occurred in other states investigating voter fraud: instead of producing evidence of fraud, they produce a list of names of people who are on voter registrations or voter rolls in more than one place... and nothing else to prove in any way that these are the same people. And as genealogy buffs will tell you, the truth is it takes a lot of effort to figure out if it's the same person based on a name alone - which is why they don't even bother figuring it out - they just throw the biggest number out there: the number of matching names, and hope people aren't paying attention to the details.
Of course, none of this stops Republicans from continuing to use this lack of evidence as a pretext for more laws that reduce ballot access. What they don't support, is the ONE thing that would actually make it easy to tell if someone voted more than once... a national ID system tied to citizenship. Why is that? Wouldn't this be the best way to make sure that the elections are secure, while also removing all the problems associated with voter registration at the local level?
Ultimately, it seems that every lead has dead ended, and all we have left is the same as we have as the start: unproven conjecture that don't stand up to scrutiny and produce no actual evidence.
Note that this "argument" has been made... many times, with different numbers:
No one really knows where the numbers are coming from, it seems like they just make them up or something. Honestly, you really need to find some better sources of information.
Anyway, I am not going to bother debunking something that's been thoroughly debunked by someone else:
TL;DR the 133, er I mean, 213 million registered voters number has no source and cannot be verified, other sources puts the number much higher
When taken all into context, the fact that the same claim keeps popping up with new numbers, none of which can be verified, makes it improbable that these claims have any merit.
I have a suggestion: the next time you are about to make a claim, spend some time being skeptical about the claim first in the same way that you are skeptical of vaccines, the election, etc. and see what happens.
Sidenote: Statista is notoriously unreliable, by the way, so I try to avoid using it
I have no idea what reality you're watching, but it clearly isn't the one we live in.
Here's at least part of the hearing from today:
Among other things, over 17,000 ballots were found to have been counted multiple times. Most of them twice, hundreds of them thrice, and a dozen quadruple times.
Forensic audits of the machines found that Maricopa County deleted over 1 Million files files from EMS deleted between 11/01/20 and 3/16/21 (before the audit comenced). All of these files are supposed to be preserved. Several 10s of thousands of files were deleted from scanners, including ballots. All deleted a short time before the county was forced to hand the equipment to the auditors. Logs were not mantained.
The passwords for the system were found to were not been changed since 2019.
The final report has not been fully published to the public, as far as I'm aware, at this time. Other findings are yet forthcoming.
Katie Hobbs, who's been against this audit and fighting tooth and nail against it, announced that the finding was "Biden Won" yet this disregards the obvious problems with the election. Even if the "current count" states that Biden has more votes... there are enough ballots duplicated, and other problems, that the election itself should not be certified.
This also does not include a seperate canvasing effort which reached out to over 10k voters, with over 4500 responces, which found some statistics which, extrapolated, are problematic: https://www.scribd.com/document/523907885/Maricopa-County-Canvassing-Result#fullscreen&from_embed
It's not a "debunking." They are claiming that since "Eligable voters" is "commonly used" (no citation on this given) that therefore that is what the 66.7% voter turnout is from. However, this is NOT reflected in the articles that claimed such a turnout. Those articles, including from Washington Post, claimed that this percentage was, from the US Census, descriping a percentage of registered voters. Not merely Eligable ones.
While skepticism concerning the different numbers of votes is valid, even Reuters shows only at most 200M registered voters by their count. Which means there still weren't enough voters participating to reach that 2-thirds number toughted by WP and others.
Certainly, whomever was writing the article for WP and the others could have simply gotten it wrong, with them all saying "percentage of registered voters" when they all meant "percentage of eligable voters." This seems unlikely however. Or if so, it means that that entire story should be scrapped, and new data investigated to find how many
Regardless, it is also one single data point. Even if it IS wrong, it does not dismiss the other data points which show problems. Not just in Maricopa County, but in several, if not all, states in the US.
Your statements, like the following:
Show that you have a massive degree of bias. What, specifically, is wrong with "how things were handled" other than that Maricopa County and Katie Hobbs have done so much try resist handing over lawfully subpeona'd material?
You say there's a lack of trust, and surely there is, but what, specifically, have the Auditors done to hide what they do? They've live-streamed their efforts and invited people to observe. None of those observers have managed to find fault with them. No one watching the streams of work found anything out of place carried out by the auditors... and people on both sides of the issue have been looking intently for precisely that.
You claim to have "debunked" other things but all you've actually offered is your opinion, and flimsy excuses like:
Which amount to nothing. It's an opinion rooted in nothing but a wry observation, an observation which does nothing to meaningfully refute the evidence because there is no data or information to back it up.
You want to say they are different people that just happen to have the same name? The same age? The same history? Prove it. Show the people of Arizona why they don't have to worry about it. Show them why the double and triple county of hundreds and thousands of ballots isn't a problem. Why they shouldn't be worried about Maricopa County deleting files (including ballots) from multiple systems shortly before having to hand those systems to independent auditors. Why it's not a big deal that the election systems in Maricopa County were disqualified from EAC verification due to subsequent system updates and failing to recertify those machines.
Further, that number of people "with the same name" is far from the most important finding. The malfeasance and open obstruction by Maricopa County is actually far more important. Nixon wasn't impeached because some people broke into a hotel, he was impeached for trying to (allegedly) cover it up.
That county (and thus the State) election should have never been certified. Yet they tried to cover up this wrongdoing by deleting files, failing to observe chain of custody, to withhold the reuters (under the inherently flawed excuse that it was somehow also connected to the police database... which if true violates the system integrity laws already on the books), to not give the admin password (claiming they didn't even have it, which would be another violation), among other things.
THAT is the biggest finding so far put out to the public. The entire county's election needs to be decertified because the County itself failed to follow the law.
Yet you, and much of the media you no doubt consume, and Katie Hobbs, all want to say: "There's nothing there!"
Ever state, every county, from Hawaii to Rhode Island, should be audited, fully and properly. And if there really is nothing there... that would prove it. It would finally settle the tens of millions (est. over 100 million) that are concerned about the 2020 election and whether it really was on the up and up.
Whether or not the media and parts of the government have been lying to the people on this as they have so many other things.
First of all, the main thrust of Republicans altering voting laws these days is requiring IDs as part of proof of citizenship. It's why Democrats in Texas fled the state in a bid to prevent the passage of a bill that would increase ID requirements (though not the only aspect of the measure). It's what Biden referred to as "21st Century Jim Crow."
While there are some that have been against it (Ron Paul for example, not sure off-hand what Rand's position is), the main party pushing for Real-ID compliance has been largely Republicans, or at least Neo-Cons. While not currently related to voting itself (not on a national level), it's the closest thing to a "national identification card" that exists in the US. As far as I can gather, the most recent effort to repeal Real-ID came primarily from Democrats. While I'm not particularly a fan of Real-ID (I don't care about conforming to party lines), there's little doubt that there is significant Republican support for it since 2001.
Secondly... what's wrong with State IDs? Why would it need to be national? It's not like it would "remove all the problems... at the local level." It'd just relocate them to Washington DC... and for some strange reason I don't think that would result in a healthier and less corrupt process. To say nothing of the entire "states rights" issue in determining individual election laws. SF in CA for example allows non-citizens to vote in some local elections (schools mostly). So you'd either have to have two distinct systems or cede authority to the Federal level... which the constitution does not allow for without an amendment.
Finally... YOU are one of the people pointing to the fact that voter rolls are inflated. So trimming those rolls down should make sense to you. You can assume that they'll do it unfairly if you want, but until you can prove that is what is actually happening you don't have a strong position to stand on. For as much as you can assume that Republicans operate off of suppressing voting, others can point to Democrats padding the voting. Or really, the establishment in many cases.
That said, I do believe that Trump has actually been quietly pushing for a national-citizenship ID requirement. It's one of the reasons why he wanted the "are you a citizen" question on the Census. Based on what I've heard, which is not quite verified, it seemed like he had wanted to impliment Real-ID as part of voting requirements. Since he's one of those pushing for audits, I wouldn't be surprised if he pushes this more strongly in the future; though that said he seems to have somewhat more respect for states rights than I initially thought he would, so he may focus on State ID requirements rather than National; in the end.
Whether it's typical of Republicans, I can point to the last 5 years of Russian conspiracy hysteria as an example of Democrats running with a "it was stolen" narrative without any actual evidence to back it up. To their credit, I suppose, they gave up on auditing votes relatively quickly, but this didn't stop them from accusing the President of Treason, Sedition, Insurrection, being insane and/or mentally unfit for office, or impeaching him twice all without proper evidence to support their claims. Before, during, and after his time in office.
And all this time, they said: "trust the experts, they tell us there is something." And yet there was nothing.
It's the same BS they use with COVID: "Masks work, trust the experts." And yet all solid evidence points to masks being ineffective. Likewise: "The Vaccine is a must have, trust the experts." Yet the vaccine does not prevent people from being infected, it doesn't prevent them from transmitting, it doesn't appear to do anything significant except possible reduce symptoms, yet meanwhile Regeneron, HCQ, and Ivermectin, all which have solid basis for accomplishing the same thing without needing to be taken prior to illness, are suppressed and warned as being dangerous life-threatening drugs (despite HCQ and Ivermectin being considered some of the safest drugs in existance, frequently taken as prophylactics regularly by millions with almost no harmful side effects).
It's not just the Democrats pushing these narratives on COVID of course, some Republicans do as well. But then that's rather my point.
The system is corrupt. You know it, I know it, pretty much everyone on this sub-forum knows it at some level. We can disagree as to the main cause or the degree, but it's corrupt and has been for a long time.
So why are you still trusting a media, or a party, which tells you it isn't? That everything is just fine, and that are only worry is those "crazy" people that keep telling you the system is corrupt?
These findings from Cyber Ninjas, other findings in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and other places... show that we, as Americans, have probably not had a proper voting system at least in 2020, and most likely for longer than that. In 2016, the Media and others had it as a shoe-in for Clinton. Yet something went wrong then. They figured Trump must have stolen their steal somehow. So they pinned a conspiracy theory on him and said the rest of the world was crazy to not believe it, after spending so long trying to get everyone to think it's the conspiracy theorists which are crazy, ever since JFK.
They try to tell you that those standing up for the Constitution and the right to not get medicated against their will are throwbacks, probably racist, and evil. And some people eat into that. Because to them, the idea that these institutions aren't working properly, that they are outlets not of good solid information, but of propaganda, is much more terrifying. Given the choice, I'd probably not want to believe that election systems have been corrupted far more than even you realize with the gerrymandering and other "obvious" things. But the facts don't add up to that.
They don't add up to Biden being the "most popular" President in US history by raw numbers. They don't add up to say that people would rather choose subservience to a government where everyone knows SOMETHING is wrong but don't quite know what than to face life with some degree of courage. Not cower in the basement, behind masks, or say: "thank goodness my county/state closed down my business to protect me and my customers!"
It's easy for some to push that idea, because it seems like the narrative and the public are... but this is merely an illusion of propaganda. One which is being stripped away with all it's many layers. When all the layers are gone. Will your eyes be open or closed? That's your choice.
It's not "evidence" to say that some people may have voted twice without proving they actually did.
You think you can claim voter fraud by pulling numbers out of thin air, but "some people have the same name" is something I have to "prove."
Yea, we are done here. I will not be replying to you on this topic any further.
Ultimately, the bottom line is clear, another voter fraud fraud has resulted in no real evidence, as predicted.
I did want to, for the sake of others, address some of the specific "anomalies" found by the audit.
First, here is the link to the full report: https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.tow...-11ec-9f0f-c394f7c3dc5f/614e7177ca92c.pdf.pdf
A report, which never uses the word any of the following words:
fraud, illegal, crime, conclusive, etc.
Seriously, read the report yourself, it's pretty bland.
Anyway, anomalies are not unusual - they occur in every election of sufficient size/complexity. Voter Fraud advocates always point to "anomalies" as though it's proof of fraud, but without additional evidence of intent, it's just human error.
Specifically, prior research (that I have already cited in the past) has shown that 1 in 8 voter registrations have "significant" amount of inaccurate information, and an estimated 12 million addresses are incorrect.
So it's not surprising that you will find, in any election, some amount of mismatched or incorrect data of this type.
So one of the things they found was regarding people who moved before ballots went out - Cyber Ninjas tries to paint this as something untoward, but again, it's a perfectly normal thing that happens. People "move" (I pray that I don't have to prove that people move) as a part of life. But in many cases, they are still eligible to vote: these include college students, military personnel, people who "vacation" in other areas of the country for significant amounts of time (of which Maricopa county has a TON of because it's freaking HOT here all year long), etc. So the fact alone that some people reported a new address but still voted in the audit location means... nothing.
As for duplicate names, calling it a "flimsy excuse" is quite silly. It's well known that many people share the same names, particularly among relatives. Look up virtually any "normal" name in any genealogical record or other public records data and you will find, many, many instances of that name over the years.
One way to explain this can be with the Birthday Paradox, where you only need 23 people in a room to have a greater than 50% chance that they share the SAME BIRTHDAY. This is usually counter intuitive to many people given how many days are in a year, but humans are very bad at estimating many things: including, in this case, "matching" data where you are actually comparing every individual with every other individual. Btw, it only takes 70 people for there to be a 99.9% chance that 2 of them share the same birthday.
Now, you might say, "This is just birthday, no name?" Sure, that's true... but look, it only took 70 people to get a DAY and MONTH birthdate match. Surely you can see that it wouldn't take that much more to get a NAME match as well...
This article has some math on it that doesn't address the specific variables here (instead they are looking at name and birth date), but it helps explain the concept I am talking about: https://www.capgemini.com/us-en/2011/09/same-name-same-birth-date-how-likely-is-it/
"This also however tells us something about match probabilities within our MDM solutions, and critically it has an impact on how we view matching for Big Data, the larger the data set the more likely it will be that false positives occur. This means that when we create probabilities for name matching it should be driven not off a fixed assessment of likelihood but on a combination of factors including the number of instances that the name appears in the source records. This means that if there are only 89 records then you have ~90% certainty that any match is the result of it being the same individual, at 468 records your certainty is down to 5%."
Another point of interest is that names aren't assigned to people randomly and have biases.
What this means is that 2 people with the same first name... has a higher chance of being born in the same year than if names were randomly assigned.
In of itself, the same name voting multiple times is insufficient as prove of wrong-doing, much less orchestrated fraud, because you haven't PROVEN it's actually the same person.
Oh, also, Ohmin used the phrase "same history" with regards to the "same name" issue... but there's actually no analysis of this done by Cyber Ninja that is shown in their report - it's simply based on name and birth year.
So I don't know where Ohmin got the same history idea from, but I suspect this is embellishment on his part to make it sound more suspicious than it really is.
Also, "This list should be fully reviewed." Sure, let's do that. So why didn't they do it? Why leave this question hanging for people's imagination? This is not answered by the report.
So you want to say this means fraud? PROVE IT.
Show that these are actually the same people voting in multiple places in the same election.
Remember, the burden of proof is on the accuser. You need EVIDENCE. All this is a lead. A lead that should be looked into - and has been in OTHER voter fraud investigations and it never really amounts to anything.
You can't just say "this looks suspicious to me" and lean back smugly. You need to follow the trail and find the truth.
I don't know why Ohmin constantly wants people to prove a negative, but it's getting tiresome. Of course, as I have mentioned, this is exactly the playbook that's always part of this sort of stuff. They will rarely ever provide actual proof of anything - instead, they look for "anomalies" in every nook and cranny - and they WILL find them - because anomalies exist in any sufficiently complex system.
Anyway, the point is this all of this "evidence" is what is flimsy. And it's the same kind of stuff these investigations always find, and they never amount to anything.
So forgive me if I don't expect anything this time around when we've been doing this for years and years.
Finally, let's use the report's own words here:
So the most important finding, according to the report, does not indicate any wrong-doing or fraud.
That said, I do agree with many of their recommendations tho, such as having a schedule and process for cleaning up voter rolls - as I mentioned, it's well known that many of the voter registration methods in the US are outdated and inaccurate. It really needs to be modernized, and, IMO, nationalized (more on that in another post).
If you have been paying attention to voter fraud investigations over the years, it should be obvious that the class of anomalies that these audits always find tend to revolve around 2 core issues:
People potentially voting more than once
Inaccurate/Outdated voter registration records
Currently, each County maintains voter registration records (as shown in the Cyber Ninja report):
The problem here is as people move between counties or states, these voter records become outdated. Most people don't bother or know that they should update this kind of information. So they remain on the registration.
This is what often leads to "anomalies" and also potentially allows the same person to vote in more than one place since the systems are not integrated.
It also means 2 people with the same name in voter registration in different counties could look like the same person.
A State ID fixes this for movement/people within a state - but doesn't resolve the above issues when people move between states.
At the same time, a National ID would also mean that each individual would have a SINGLE number that identifies them - and this number is never duplicated. Therefore, you should be able to always tell if they try to vote a second time anywhere in the country!
Of course, in the real world it's not as clean as that, but it'd at least mean we aren't dealing with hundreds of disparate data sources.
Let's go over some of the audit's recommendations, many of which are also recommended by others, including the report I mentioned before from 2012 that showed that 1 in 8 registrations have incorrect info:
Ok, so the recommendations from Cyber Ninja:
YES YES YES. All of these systems should be integrated so that updates in one system at the very least flags the other system to review their records. If these systems were tied to a single national ID, even better.
What did Pew recommend? Similar things:
They also added making it easier for people to update their information. Which makes sense. I have moved many times since coming to the US, and it's maddeningly difficult to update your information. Some places even charge a fee... which can only be paid with credit card IN PERSON. So you need to find your checkbook and mail in a form... it's nonsense. This is 2021.
So I have mentioned that many of these "anomalies" have been investigated before and used as proof, so let's given an example, shall we?
Here's how the Brennan Center addressed similar allegations in a 2005 investigation in New Jersey which alleged somewhere around 5000 "illegal" votes.
Specifically, they also found that a little over 40% of the "illegal votes" they found were actually errors the investigators made:
(Clearly, the 2 registration dates aren't the same person OR an error, and the fact that the vote was attributed to both of these records and then counted as "double voting" makes very little sense. There was also a bunch of people with a "default" date of registering in 1880, which also points to problems with the data source.)
Another section outlines a similar issue:
So that eliminates almost all of the "double votes" that were found.
Oh, they also have a list of names and how frequently they occur...
Keeping in mind the birthday problem where it only takes 70 people to have a 99.9% chance that they share the same birthdate...
You can see how EVERY ONE OF THESE names will have at least 2 people, if not more, who share First Name, Last Name, Month and Date of birth - which is a lot of matching data if you are going around looking for this type of "anomalies."
(By the way, name sharing also goes up in areas that is less diverse - especially in areas where the culture also tends to have lots of the same last names and have large families such as Hispanics which make up almost 1/3rd of people in Arizona.)
Voter Fraud advocates, however, would have you believe such a coincidence is unlikely in an attempt to convince you it's indicative of fraud when this kind of thing is actually a common occurrence in terms of "how many will I find in a group of X?"
Oh, and before someone asks.
Yes, the Arizona Audit used Birth Year, and not Birth Date.
But of course, the probability concepts discussed are still applicable.
And, in fact, the data used being Birth Year actually makes it MORE likely to get duplicates, since in a given year there are 365 different dates to match, but in an election, the number of voter birth years are going to be much less (almost certainly less than 100). So given this, it's expected that they would find more duplicates than the New Jersey investigation, and, we can see that is, indeed the case.
The fact is, claims that point to these kind of matches as problems really just suffer from a lack of understanding of probability, which is not uncommon in the general population.
First of all, why should I trust what the Brennan Center has to say?
Second, and more importantly, assuming that the Brennan Center was accurate in addressing those allegations in 2005, in what way is any of that long spiel actually relevant to Arizona 2021?
That it's "similar types of accusations"? Yet much of what was stated was accusations of error done by a completely different group.
That doesn't match your stated standard of "evidence." It's not PROOF of fraud, it's evidence of it. However, I'm not talking about voter fraud here. I'm talking about election fraud. Meaning I'm not necessarily accusing a voter of having voted twice, but rather that the data shows that some ballots were counted multiple times. Several thousands of them in fact.
A fact you simply ignored in your later attempts to "debunk" the audit results. I dunno, it sounds to me from your actions, that you'd rather "just forget the evidence."
You say that as if it's somehow evidence that fraud did not occur. Discrepancies in voter registration data makes it very easy to perpetrate election fraud, and even voter fraud. For example:
You misunderstand the problem. The ballots were sent to an address the prospective voter had already moved away from. They were not there to recieve the ballots, whether they were still eligable to vote in that district or not. If they are not at the address to recieve the ballots, how did they send them back to vote?
I'm sure some might still have had access to the previous property, and/or the new tenet (if any) might have informed them to come and get it, but that won't be the case for all of them, and based on personal experience (though I've not lived in Maricopa), and other information, not even most of them.
For this specifically, I was not referring to Cyber Ninja's report, I apologize for any confusion. I was referencing also Dr. Frank's research, which you tossed as "bad math" without providing any "good math" and mere speculation.
Which you continue to do throughout all of the post this quote is taken from.
Statistically, yes, there are plenty of people with the same name (including both first and last, possibly even without a middle or maiden name etc.). And statistically there are plenty of people that are going to be born in the same year, let alone the same date. It is, however, less common for them to have both, and less so to have both in specific regions.
There are, of course, Millions that voted in Maricopa, being the most populated county in Arizona. So I'm sure some of them are indeed coincidences. But you disregard it as "evidence" despite holding other matters to a lower standard... because it doesn't conclusively prove fraud.
It is an absurdity.
"Look, I might be holding a bloody knife but you can't prove I stabbed someone just because of that! So ignore it. Don't pay any attention to it! Certainly don't test it to see if the blood matches or anything."
I don't know, maybe this is all an idiotic semantics game to you. Where you decide that "evidence" needs to be "conclusive proof" in one case and not in another. It's sad really. We have eyewitness reports of wrongdoing. We have Tens of thousands of ballots counted with important discrepancies (no doubt some of these overlap). We have computer files and hardware being withheld despite appropriate subpeonas from the legislative backed up by a court order from the judicial. We have you and the media that feeds it to you denying that there's any "evidence of wrongdoing" despite blatent evidence, including witnesses, video in some states, etc. And a fall-back position of "well, not enough to make a difference!" despite being well over the margin of error in most states. Biden "won" Arizona by less than 10k votes, and more than double that are suspect at best... in one county alone. Maybe that's the only county with problems. Maybe the other counties cheated in favor of Trump somehow... but dismissing it outright like you do is... sad.
YouTube and others openly admit that they go in to modify the "likes/dislikes" of certain videos for Biden, almost always to remove the obvious discontent people are showing via such systems. The same is recently happening with the Fauci documentary.
We have sports casters clearly intentionally misinterpreting chants expressing displeasure towards Biden as "Let's Go Brandon!" which is "1984" levels of propaganda. All to prop up a President with such flagging approvial numbers even in "official" polling...
And you want to say that 80M people came out to vote for him?
Maybe you want to say that Trump was so hated... but if he was so hated... why did his own tally break records?
I get that many people are still stuck in this idea of "republican versus democrat" without realizing it's really "Preatorian Guard versus the People." "Establishment versus Anti-Establishment." "Central Bank and Corporate Fascism versus a Democratic Republic." That's not limited to proponents of either party either. Though it does seem more prominent on the Left at present (was more on the Right during Bush Jr. and such though).
I guess it's too much for you. You don't want to beleive you've been lied to, consistently, for decades, by those that were supposedly elected and put in power, and/or those media organizations supposed to inform the people and not propagandize them. Not about COVID, not the Election system. And if you can't help but believe in these "authority figures" you have no choice but to go along with what they say is good. It's not healthy though.
"Forget about the evidence!" Is what you scream, and you come up with flimsy justifications to do so. Which is still a heck of a lot better than those that just throw up their emotions and don't even try to justify them. And I guess that's why I keep trying to get through to you, at least every now and then.
Something to consider:
Separate names with a comma.