the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

[Js1 85570]

2 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

LOL - ballgame.

It'll pass 3-1.  

[Bookman 4642]

3 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

And those proven irregularities are?

Trump lost.

[DigDug 1672]

1 minute ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

If I heard right, the speaking was an open enrollment and about 800 people signed up.  You’re not going to listen to 800 fucking people before making a decision.  They need to get a little more clear on what the process is.

[Js1 85570]

 

[Sbbruin 21884]

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

I used to drive my mom crazy when I'd start namin' frauds.

"tantric superman," she'd say.  "You stop namin' frauds!"

[Tuco 5077]

46 minutes ago, Mole said:

How do you know someone is an engineer without asking them? Don’t worry, they’ll tell you.

Really?  Is that a stereotype?  It must be because chicks really dig engineers.  

 

I've always heard it "How do you know an engineer is an extrovert?  He looks at your shoes when he is talking." 

[HenryJames 66170]

12 minutes ago, Js1 said:

LOL - ballgame.

It'll pass 3-1.  

@GreenspointTexas

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

If I understood that one presenter in the Michigan live feed, he's saying that this certification board doesn't have the ability to decline the certification. They may have the ability to adjourn without certifying but there is no action that can take place if they adjourn. They can't call for a recount. They can't audit any county. They can't do anything but postpone and that is there is no reason to delay since there isn't any more information coming their way.

[Mole 4333]

3 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Really?  Is that a stereotype?  It must be because chicks really dig engineers.  

 

I've always heard it "How do you know an engineer is an extrovert?  He looks at your shoes when he is talking." 

Growing up the child of an engineer, the phrase, "as an engineer" was uttered at least once a week in my house.

[SameSame 1705]

15 minutes ago, DigDug said:

If I heard right, the speaking was an open enrollment and about 800 people signed up.  You’re not going to listen to 800 fucking people before making a decision.  They need to get a little more clear on what the process is.

You heard that wrong.  I hope

[SameSame 1705]

6 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

If I understood that one presenter in the Michigan live feed, he's saying that this certification board doesn't have the ability to decline the certification. They may have the ability to adjourn without certifying but there is no action that can take place if they adjourn. They can't call for a recount. They can't audit any county. They can't do anything but postpone and that is there is no reason to delay since there isn't any more information coming their way.

They have no investigative or judicial authority.  They are supposed to follow the guidelines and certify based on the returns given to them by each county.

But you know, 2020.

[SaucyJack 3504]

What  is now clear:  Repubs and Trumpsters  are at each others throats behind close doors and slowly spilling into public.

 

[Tuco 5077]

36 minutes ago, Js1 said:

LOL - ballgame.

It'll pass 3-1.  

I'm going to guess 3-0-with one abstain.

The Trumpster hold out was looking to delay certification by adjourning.  That's not going to happen, so he will be forced into an up/down vote on the issue.  With the potential legal implications of voting no, I think he avoids it all together.  He should still be removed from the board for any future election.  

[South Austin 52600]

4 minutes ago, SaucyJack said:

What  is now clear:  Repubs and Trumpsters  are at each others throats behind close doors and slowly spilling into public.

New Republican Party symbol.

[DigDug 1672]

Mooo

 

[Gatorubet 30311]

Growing up the child of an engineer, the phrase, "as an engineer" was uttered at least once a week in my house.

I strike them from all my juries.

They cannot process “more likely than not/51% wins” in their noggins, and so refuse to follow jury charges mandating they do just that.

[ConferenceRoom 6147]

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

New Republican Party symbol.

Don't tread on moomph.

[South Austin 52600]

1 minute ago, DigDug said:

Mooo

 

[Gatorubet 30311]

Mooo
 

They refuse to certify the fraud votes!!! See!!!!

[Bookman 4642]

3 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I strike them from all my juries.

They cannot process “more likely than not/51% wins” in their noggins, and so refuse to follow jury charges mandating they do just that.

Because it’s not 51%! It’s greater than 50%. Saying 51% leaves out an infinite number of possibilities that are more likely than not.

[Tuco 5077]

9 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I strike them from all my juries.

They cannot process “more likely than not/51% wins” in their noggins, and so refuse to follow jury charges mandating they do just that.

I could see that.  And if that means I don't have to serve on a jury, thats cool too. 

[TwiceHorn 31535]

I think it's more that engineers are used to analyzing complex problems.  And when the evidence doesn't clearly point one way without inconsistencies, they tend to want to answer "e) not enough information given."

[SaucyJack 3504]

15 minutes ago, South Austin said:

New Republican Party symbol.

That's today.

 

Here's tomorrow's:

Spoiler

 

[Mole 4333]

So is this the potty break?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

ah right, now we get the witnesses that want delays in the vote. Now it will get better.

[lemonlime 5503]

To Brisket's point about competent adverse counsel being far better to deal with:

 

[Mole 4333]

What does 71% out of balance count actually mean?

[Brisketexan 105329]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

To Brisket's point about competent adverse counsel being far better to deal with:

 

Bingo.  I've had to file that sort of motion.  And I've used even more plain language than that (not quite "WTF are you doing?", but less vague than "motion for clarification").  Because what they're doing is absolutely bizarro.  

[Mole 4333]

So it’s percentage of precincts not fully balanced.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

3 minutes ago, Mole said:

So it’s percentage of precincts not fully balanced.

Sounds like that. While 70% sounds high I would be curious how much they are out of balance. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

3 minutes ago, Mole said:

So it’s percentage of precincts not fully balanced.

Sounds like that. While 70% sounds high I would be curious how much they are out of balance. 

[Pato del Muerto 52596]

9 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

To Brisket's point about competent adverse counsel being far better to deal with:

 

Haha?

[Pato del Muerto 52596]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Sounds like that. While 70% sounds high I would be curious how much they are out of balance. 

Probably a handful each. And it’s probably like that every election and gets correctly overlooked because it has no bearing on the outcomes and is a waste of resources. 

Edited November 23, 2020 by Pato del Muerto

[Mole 4333]

I’d like to know what things normally are. Is this 70% bad, good, normal?

[Guest Lobo]

12 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

To Brisket's point about competent adverse counsel being far better to deal with:

 

So basically Trump's legal team pulled a high school group project move:  "just fucking turn in the outline man, we don't have time to finish it.  We'll get partial credit and finish the rest before the class presentation."  I mean, I'm not judging.  This approach earned me two degrees from a pretty damn good college.  But it should never get you illegal control over the most powerful nation on Earth.  I mean, maybe a semester in control, but not four years.  

Edited November 23, 2020 by Lobo

[Dahobbs 17682]

9 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I strike them from all my juries.

They cannot process “more likely than not/51% wins” in their noggins, and so refuse to follow jury charges mandating they do just that.

So true. You need to put it in language they understand (e.g., tolerance limits). And even then it is hit or miss. 

[Mole 4333]

I suspect all the stuff we’re seeing with accusations of fraud and the like are just the normal issues that happen in fair elections everywhere. Once you dig down into anything, it starts to look pretty messy. For all of Trump’s faults, he’s been a forced lesson in civics.

[Keef 779]

4 minutes ago, Mole said:

I’d like to know what things normally are. Is this 70% bad, good, normal?

I've read (although I obviously can't verify) that it effects around 400 ballots and that it is an improvement from the 2016 numbers, which obviously weren't challenged by republicans.

[Mole 4333]

Respectfully, you’re a moron.

edit: not you above or anyone on this thread in particular 

Edited November 23, 2020 by Mole

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

Unless that one MI republican canvasser is screwing around and plans to vote this 2-2, this sounds like a done deal. He sounds like he feels that he cannot deny the certification, and he has no reason to adjourn without a vote.

Does the board get paid by the hour to meet? Hold a vote and call it a day.

[Pig Bellmont 8738]

2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

So basically Trump's legal team pulled a high school group project move:  "just fucking turn in the outline man, we don't have time to finish it.  We'll get partial credit and finish the rest before the class presentation."  

Here’s how I decipher it: Their lodged amended complaint only sought to stop the certification of election results which could be mooted very soon by the state following through with certification. They want to abandon that part of their case and focus on being allowed to file a second amended complaint where they seek to have different electors appointed. But then they don’t want to concede the lack of standing argument- they just don’t want the court to rule one way or another so they can delay. 
 

The motion for clarification wants to prevent some piecemeal argument. Advance (and lose) on all claims of error, now. 

[Francisco 2.0 32428]

 

 

[Tuco 5077]

3 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Sounds like that. While 70% sounds high I would be curious how much they are out of balance. 

I know I was responsible for the precinct I worked being at least one provisional ballot out of ballot.  Keep in mind, this was my "first day on the job" as it was for most workers.  A woman came, wasn't in the book.  Her English wasn't great, but she was asked if she had been sent here by the election commission to vote a provisional ballot.  She said yes.  I entered her name in the book.  Then, when she was talking the inspector (who actually knew what she was doing) to go through the provisional ballot process, it appeared that she hadn't talked to the board, so she was going to call them and find out where to go.  I didn't think to cross out the name, as I was busy processing other voters.  So, it is likely appeared that she voted provisionally, but the ballot disappeared.  By the time we were doing the midday count, there was disconnect between the signatures and the number of provisional ballots, but I had no recollection what her name was and wasn't going to risk removing someone's name from the book who had legally voted.  

I'm betting shit like this happens all the time.  In fact, in the training, when they talked about midday counts, they explicitly said don't worry if the counts are off by a few, but to sound the alarm if it's off by a bunch.  

[Brisketexan 105329]

4 minutes ago, Mole said:

I’d like to know what things normally are. Is this 70% bad, good, normal?

Yeah, that matters.  If precinct has a record of 10,546 people voting, but only shows 10,545 votes....then it is "out of balance" (at least, I THINK that's what they're talking about here).  So, would I be surprised about 70% of the precincts not balancing perfectly, 100%?  Not really.  Truly, we need a benchmark here.  Because if the error rate for each precinct is .001%, then the issue is just not material.  If it's 1%, and it usually only happens in 10% of the precincts, that might be a problem.

[wildcat09 29384]

This is from the Michigan Secretary of State a few days ago:

Quote

During the canvass of the August 2020 Primary Election, which the Board of State Canvassers certified, the Board discussed the Wayne County Canvass of election precincts in Detroit and noted that a significant number of precincts were out of balance.

If a precinct is in balance, meaning the number of ballots counted equals the number of names on the pollbook (or if the reason for the imbalance can be identified), the precinct can be recounted. A precinct can also be recounted even if it is not in balance, as long as the number of ballots in the ballot container matches the number ballots tabulated according to the tabulator tape.

A review of data from the November 2020 Wayne County Canvass showed a substantial improvement in the percentage of precincts that were in balance and recountable as compared both to the August 2020 Primary and the November 2016 General Election.

The Bureau of Elections compared out-of-balance precincts from August and November 2020 and determined both that a significantly higher percentage of precincts were recountable and, when precincts were out of balance, the imbalances were smaller in magnitude. Percentage of

Precincts Balanced or Explained:

August 2020: 53.6 % (539/1,006)

November 2020: 71.9% (458/637)

As noted above, balanced precincts or precincts where an imbalance can be explained3 can be recounted. Additionally, precincts with unexplained imbalance between the vote total and the poll book can be recounted if the number of ballots in the container matches the number recorded. The additional number of out-of-balance but recountable precincts is typically not known until recounts occur and all containers are opened. Accordingly, in August 2020 at least 53.6% of precincts were recountable, whereas in November 2020 at least 71.9% are recountable. The Bureau also reviewed out of balance precincts to determine how out of balance the precincts were.

The Bureau found that the percentage of significantly out-of-balance precincts – those with an imbalance of 5 or more – was also lower in November 2020 than August 2020.

Percentage of Precincts with a Difference of 5 or More:

August 2020: 8.1% (81/1,006)

November 2020: 5.7% (36/637)

Together, these figures indicate that Detroit did a substantially better job of balancing precincts in November when compared to August, and also that the recordkeeping errors related to out of balance precincts were of smaller scale in the November election when compared with August.

This improvement is particularly notable given that: (1) Overall turnout in Detroit approximately doubled in November when compared with August. (2) The number of absent voter ballots approximately doubled when compared with August. (3) Multiple precincts were combined into absent voter counting boards in November (meaning poll books and vote totals were larger).

Collectively, these factors meant more ballots were cast, collected, and counted; more names had to be kept track of in poll books; and precincts were more difficult to balance. Despite these factors, Detroit improved on both of these metrics compared to November 2020.

The Bureau also compared November 2020 to November 2016 and found a substantial increase in the percentage of balanced or explained precincts compared to 2016, when there was a much closer margin in the Presidential race.

Percentage of precincts balanced or explained:

November 2016: 41.8% (270/662) • Presidential election margin: 10,704

November 2020: 71.9% (458/637) • Presidential election margin: 154,187

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by wildcat09

[DigDug 1672]

2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Unless that one MI republican canvasser is screwing around and plans to vote this 2-2, this sounds like a done deal. He sounds like he feels that he cannot deny the certification, and he has no reason to adjourn without a vote.

Does the board get paid by the hour to meet? Hold a vote and call it a day.

I honestly think they’re going on and on to try and cull some of the backlash when they certify.

[honolulu horn 6165]

1 minute ago, DigDug said:

I honestly think they’re going on and on to try and cull some of the backlash when they certify.

Yes. 

[Pato del Muerto 52596]

Right, but trump lawyers are taking these isolated mistakes and single ballot issues, removing the scale and commonness, and screaming about “discrepancies.”  And nobody yet is filling in the redacted information. 

[Brisketexan 105329]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

The Bureau found that the percentage of significantly out-of-balance precincts – those with an imbalance of 5 or more – was also lower in November 2020 than August 2020.

5 votes.  We're talking about it only being material if a precinct balance is off by 5 votes...and there are FEWER of these than in August.  This is a nothing.

[honolulu horn 6165]

Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

Right, but trump lawyers are taking these isolated mistakes and single ballot issues, removing the scale and commonness, and screaming about “discrepancies.”  And nobody yet is filling in the redacted information. 

Very similar to students who argue and bitch and whine about getting partial credit on a few questions when their overall grade isn't going to change anyway.