Georgia pours cold water on Trump bid to overturn Biden win

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

Newspaper headlines do not make legal processes.  It was an "risk-limiting audit".  They selected a random sample (in this case a random sample of 100% of the ballots) to verify.  A recount can change the official results, an audit can only be used to say the results were not correct. 

 

There, I have a headline as well (battle of the headlines)

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/statewide-audit-results-reaffirm-biden-winner-georgia/story?id=74308105

 

A random sample of 100% of the ballots? Really? This is a distinction without a difference.

[bkkcanuck8]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

A random sample of 100% of the ballots? Really? This is a distinction without a difference.

I did say it was 'slightly' abused to placate Trump... of course it did not work.  But again an audit would not in itself be able to overturn the results.  The funny thing is that if Trump requests a recount (he has today and tomorrow I think to consider it), it will be less thorough than the audit.  In the end, I have no problem being thorough.  It was never going to change anything...  Trump lost, now he lost again, and he will lose again  if he asks for a recount... that would make him a three time loser.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

I did say it was 'slightly' abused to placate Trump... of course it did not work.  But again an audit would not in itself be able to overturn the results.  The funny thing is that if Trump requests a recount (he has today and tomorrow I think to consider it), it will be less thorough than the audit.  In the end, I have no problem being thorough.  It was never going to change anything...  Trump lost, now he lost again, and he will lose again  if he asks for a recount... that would make him a three time loser.

Many types of audits, including risk-limiting audits, call for examining an increasing number of ballots—even performing a full hand count—if initial samples don’t provide adequate confidence in the correctness of the election outcome. Therefore, if a recount involves recounting every ballot by hand, it can be considered a risk-limiting audit that has immediately moved ahead to this ultimate level of examination.

Audits vs. Recounts: What’s the Difference? – Verified Voting

[marcus111]

Finished...Over...Done....Idiot ...Go Away Trump...Fired..!!!!

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by marcus111

[evadgib]

31 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Perhaps you could tell me which of it was true. Im sure its a very short answer.

No idea pal, I'd like Trump to continue next year but as a Ponti I'll have the hump for all of 10 mins on 20 Jan if he doesn't.

[bkkcanuck8]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Many types of audits, including risk-limiting audits, call for examining an increasing number of ballots—even performing a full hand count—if initial samples don’t provide adequate confidence in the correctness of the election outcome. Therefore, if a recount involves recounting every ballot by hand, it can be considered a risk-limiting audit that has immediately moved ahead to this ultimate level of examination.

Audits vs. Recounts: What’s the Difference? – Verified Voting

So now you are arguing he did not abuse the law - that is funny.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

So now you are arguing he did not abuse the law - that is funny.

I don't understand why you would infer that from what I wrote. 

[Sujo]

3 minutes ago, evadgib said:

No idea pal, I'd like Trump to continue next year but as a Ponti I'll have the hump for all of 10 mins on 20 Jan if he doesn't.

 

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

The WH Press Sec pointed out the comparisons between 2016 & 2020 post election shenanigans at the end of yesterdays press briefing. The clip is well worth watching for any that haven't already seen it but I doubt if Biden supporters will enjoy it too much. 

So you say biden supporters will not enjoy it but cant say if any of it is true. How odd.

[evadgib]

5 minutes ago, Sujo said:

So you say biden supporters will not enjoy it but cant say if any of it is true. How odd.

They won't & I never claimed I knew the answer either way. We'll all find out on or before 20th Jan.

[ChouDoufu]

43 minutes ago, placeholder said:

A random sample of 100% of the ballots? Really? This is a distinction without a difference.

 

actually, the other dude is correct.  it's confusing as each state has its own set of election laws, sometimes terms are used differently, and of course reporters aren't always concise.

 

the new georgia law requires the secretary of state to audit (apparently with a 100% hand tally) one race per election.  for obvious reasons, he chose to audit the presidential race. 

 

according to the article below, the audit is more thorough than a recount.  each ballot is viewed by a human, while a recount would simply re-run the machine tabulation.

 

following the audit and certification, the trump campaign has two days to request a recount, which of course would simply reconfirm the confirmed confirmation.

 

 

Are Georgia's votes being audited or recounted?

https://wgxa.tv/news/local/are-georgias-votes-being-audited-or-recounted

[puck2]

6 hours ago, luckyluke said:

Maybe it would be wise, for the future, to issue a new law/regulation that every voting is automatically recounted twice.

Of course it will cost time, effort and money.

 

 

This time I cannot agree with you. Voting automatically recounted twice?

 

If you cannot trust the voting administration of your country, then forget your country.

 

The voting process should be regulaled in a law. And I guess that's the case in the US. As in many other democratic states the law demands recounting, if the voting outcome is tight. Did you ever read about such a  fiasco in other normal democracies and in the USA before Trump?

 

Al Gore, a fine democrat,  has demonstrated how to handle this problem. And therefore the question: why isn't Trump able to do the same? The answer: because Trump has an absoluitely abhorrent character/peronality. He was and is completely unable to recognize  to be a loser.

 

IMO, the most horrible and terrible result of this election is not Trump, but that there has been such a high number, more than 70 million, who voted for him. Electing such a monster, guess what I think about nearly half of the US-American population?!!

 

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, evadgib said:

The WH Press Sec pointed out the comparisons between 2016 & 2020 post election shenanigans at the end of yesterdays press briefing. The clip is well worth watching for any that haven't already seen it but I doubt if Biden supporters will enjoy it too much. 

Did she point out that Hillary Clinton conceded on the night of the 2016 election, even though the election was much closer than the 2020 election?  Or did she go into the standard 'alternative facts' rant?

[BusyB]

18 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

As George Orwell well knew.."doublespeak" was not merely a  a phenomenon of the Marxist powers..as he should have known  as he worked for the British "Ministry of Truth" for a while...

Actually by coining the term..he sorta created it-or,at least,gave it new literary credence and it has been with us ever since.

 

Iraq 2003 springs to mind...but Afghanistan and the later Iraqi period has been "doublespeak" hell..on behalf of Western corporations.

 

John Brunner wrote a very fine novel about this.."Stand On Zanzibar"

..and General Smedley Butler (USMC) knew very well what this is about as his book..'War is a Racket'...would indicate.

 

Many books come with the label 'highly prophetic', but Stand on Zanzibar is the only one that truly earns it.

 

Looking at when it was written, and comparing today's world to the one it describes, it's just stunning. Even if some of the motivations behind various actors and players may vary slightly on the surface, the world 'Zanzibar' describes is as good as a template for today. Even the 'zappy' style it's written in was done long before TV 'zapping' was even a possibility.

 

An utterly, utterly brilliant read.

[canuckamuck]

5 hours ago, puck2 said:

 

.... So fighting Hitler and the Reich was never "entirely" justified?  What a joke from the master of "history".

Can you see the logical fallacy you just posted.  I did not say war is never justified. I said that when two sides feel they have total moral authority they are heading for war.

However, I think the Germans in their fascist authoritarian, National Socialism, movement, did feel they were entirely justified in their steps to nationalize German industry, to take away German freedoms, and then to take over Europe. I think the freedom loving British felt they were morally justified in fighting back.

History is on the side of the lovers of freedom.

 

[olfu]

Well I read a lot of written noise but as real life experience shows  there is no difference between Democrats and

Republicans. One promised "Fundamental transformation"---I am still waiting, and another one promised stop illegal aliens--I guess its easy to promise.

[simple1]

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Trump's actions, or lack of them, during a pandemic border on criminal.

I say trump's lack of action for political purposes is criminal, I assume there is not a provision in the Constitution to address trump's intent to try and destroy the Biden presidency during the transition period which IMO is also criminal. trump's presidency has uncovered flaws in the Constitution in the case of a rogue president.

 

trump is doing exactly what he accuses the Dems, without any proof, attempting to steal the presidency - classic 'big lie' propaganda.

 

'Big lie' meaning:

 

the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

[Jeffr2]

9 hours ago, evadgib said:

The WH Press Sec pointed out the comparisons between 2016 & 2020 post election shenanigans at the end of yesterdays press briefing. The clip is well worth watching for any that haven't already seen it but I doubt if Biden supporters will enjoy it too much. 

Why listen to more lies? That's the problem in the U.S. Too many listen to lies and actually believe them. As proven by a few members here.

[placeholder]

‘This is simply not how the Constitution works’: Federal judge eviscerates Trump lawsuit over Pennsylvania results

A federal judge in Pennsylvania eviscerated President Donald Trump’s attempt to throw out millions of votes Saturday, dismissing his campaign’s lawsuit with a withering opinion that described a dearth of proof to justify the drastic demand.

“This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence,” U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann wrote. “In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state.

Judge slaps down Trump appointee who has sought to reshape Voice of America and related agencies - The Washington Post

Edited November 23, 2020 by onthedarkside
hidden quote removed

[RocketDog]

10 hours ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

The Georgia Law was not a recount law, it was an audit.  An audit in this case is usually a random selection of samples that would then be used to verify statistically that there were no major malfunctions etc. generally speaking with the process.  It was abused to a certain point, but I had no issue with it (though I doubt it would have been abused if the Republicans were ahead by the same number of votes - this was purely a political maneuver to try and placate Trump.... it did not work).  I did not expect the vote count to change enough for it to matter (never does).  Even if the audit turned up something it could not have changed the results -- only a recount can.   Now that the election in Georgia has been certified, Trump can (and likely will) request a recount.  BTW, States usually have a threshold at which the losing party can request a recount (paid for by taxpayers)... above that threshold some states allow for it to be requested if the party requesting puts up a bond and is responsible for paying for the recount.

You're correct. I didn't know the audit/recount wrinkle. Thanks for that fact. I knew states have different thresholds for recounts though. But it's around 0.1% differences I think. And candidates must have plausible reasons but can demand a recount. 

 

So I'm not categorically against anybody exercising their rights in that regard, but of course in the recent cases it just obstruction and face-saving for his rabid base. Well, whatever gets them through the night I guess. I've had four years of getting thru the night so don't have much sympathy for them. 

Things like the impeachment are similar examples on the Democrat side, but again, it's just emotional salve for our wounds. Nobody on the left ever talked about assassination or coups though. 

[CharlieH]

Reported post and those responding to it removed.

[evadgib]

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

Did she point out that Hillary Clinton conceded on the night of the 2016 election, even though the election was much closer than the 2020 election?  Or did she go into the standard 'alternative facts' rant?

What's stopping you finding out?

[heybruce]

10 minutes ago, evadgib said:

What's stopping you finding out?

It was a rhetorical question, I know that she did not. 

 

Under past Presidents the White House Press Secretary had the job of spinning facts and events in the best way possible for the President.  Under Trump, beginning on his first day in office, the job of the the Press Secretaries has been to repeat Trump's lies.

 

BTW:  This is a forum for written posts.  People should stop expecting forum members to waste time on videos.

Edited November 22, 2020 by heybruce

[evadgib]

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Why listen to more lies? That's the problem in the U.S. Too many listen to lies and actually believe them. As proven by a few members here.

Enlightening the board of the existence of pushback from an interested party is no indication of the belief or otherwise of the person doing so.

We Brits refer to the practice as being "ficker than us" whenever it pops up in our (Brexit) threads.

[Lacessit]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

It was a rhetorical question, I know that she did not. 

 

Under past Presidents the White House Press Secretary had the job of spinning facts and events in the best way possible for the President.  Under Trump, beginning on his first day in office, the job of the the Press Secretaries has been to repeat Trump's lies.

I'd hate to play poker against them, how they can parrot the lies with a straight face is beyond me.

[ballpoint]

Now that it's all over, bar the dragging of the screaming current occupant out of the White House, I look forward to visiting the Donald J Trump Presidential Library sometime in the not too distant future, and looking at the book.  If only to see how many pictures he managed to finish colouring in.

[heybruce]

4 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Enlightening the board of the existence of pushback from an interested party is no indication of the belief or otherwise of the person doing so.

We Brits refer to the practice as being "ficker than us" whenever it pops up in our (Brexit) threads.

You posted "The WH Press Sec pointed out the comparisons between 2016 & 2020 post election shenanigans at the end of yesterdays press briefing.", implying the paid professional liar had valid points to make regarding Trump's refusal to concede the obvious. 

 

Clearly Trump is not the only one who refuses to concede the obvious.

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

Now that it's all over, bar the dragging of the screaming current occupant out of the White House, I look forward to visiting the Donald J Trump Presidential Library sometime in the not too distant future, and looking at the book.  If only to see how many pictures he managed to finish colouring in.

There are ghost written and co-authored books Trump takes credit for writing .  It is unknown if he has read any of them.

[evadgib]

19 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You posted "The WH Press Sec pointed out the comparisons between 2016 & 2020 post election shenanigans at the end of yesterdays press briefing.", implying the paid professional liar had valid points to make regarding Trump's refusal to concede the obvious. 

 

Clearly Trump is not the only one who refuses to concede the obvious.

"The fat lady has yet to reach for the Listerine" ????

[simon43]

[quote]

It was obviously a good idea to do the recount, 12,000 is a close race. Hopefully they will continue the transparency with other close races. It is the right thing to do.

[/quote]

 

The vote counters must have failed kindergarten maths if they are 12,000 votes in error.........

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, simon43 said:

[quote]

It was obviously a good idea to do the recount, 12,000 is a close race. Hopefully they will continue the transparency with other close races. It is the right thing to do.

[/quote]

 

The vote counters must have failed kindergarten maths if they are 12,000 votes in error.........

Biden's winning margin was 12,000 votes.