The Art of the Steal

ballot box stuffing

People much closer to the scene of the crime(s) are looking very closely at how ballots are being counted and how ballots arrived to be counted in the US Presidential election. It is going to take a while.

Rigging an election is tough. Somehow you have to get enough ballots in the count for your guy (and get rid of the other guy’s, if possible). Mail-in voting made this, in principle, easier as there are all sorts of ways to get ballots which have been mailed out ranging from simple theft to outright purchase. The trick being to avoid over egging the pudding, that is bringing in more ballots than are plausible.

But it is more complicated than that. What do you do with down ballot races – every ballot will have a congressional race and some will have a Senatorial race and other items to vote on. Moreover, because of Congressional Districts you can’t really just roll in with a couple of hundred thousand “generic” ballots. If you want to cheat in Philadelphia you need ballots which have the correct Congressional races on them.

With mail in votes there is also the added problem that the person ostensibly mailing them in a) needed to be alive, b) at a specific address at the time the ballot was sent. These are checkable facts so, if you are going to steal you need to get them right.

If you want to add a couple of thousand ballots to the count, none of these issues will be insurmountable. But the whole thing gets a lot more complicated and prone to detection if you need to add tens or hundreds of thousands of ballots to drag your man over the line.

As things get more complicated the likelihood of detectable errors increases. So does the number of people who have to be in on the “steal”. Every additional person increases the risk of detection.

Was 2020 stolen for Biden? I don’t know and neither do the Trump people; but, if it was, there is every chance that the theft will be detected in one or more states with a bit of scrutiny. At this point, the Trump lawyers are attempting to have the Courts require that scrutiny. The precedents set back in the Gore/Bush election suggest that the Supreme Court of the United States will be perfectly willing to make such orders as are required to “true the vote”.

If the steal is on the scale of hundreds of thousands of votes it will almost certainly be proven and those tainted votes could be excluded from the final count.

What then? Nothing good I am afraid. The Democratic faithful will demand that every vote be counted, the Republicans will say, except the illegal ones. Do overs in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia and Arizona would be one way out; but the logistics would be a nightmare.

The problem with cheating is that it ruins the game for everyone.


9 thoughts on “The Art of the Steal

  1. Justausername says:

    Quite the sh*tshow.

    Funny, the system is simple. Show up on voting day to vote. Ah, but we need to give people a chance who can’t show up. Now it gets more complicated. Show up early to vote. Still means you show up in person but on a different day. That catches some, but not all. More complications. Let’s let people who can’t vote on election day, or in an advanced poll, vote by mail. But, only under special circumstances. This is harder to control and easier to cheat. But, hey, we trust people, and it gives everyone an opportunity who can’t be there in person. Sounds good! heh.

    Now it gets fun, why not just let everyone vote by mail and not in person at all! lol Lo and behold we have the show where it seems that voter turn out in Wisconsin is at an all time high of about 90% voter turn out. Possible, of course, that is what makes this kind of cheating viable, but probable, not really.

    The worst thing is that voter rolls are so terrible in the US that ballots are sent to dead people, to old addresses, to persons who are not legally allowed to vote, and so on. Vote harvesting is caught on camera and posted to the internet to show how easy it is. There are numerous news articles, from this year even, where illegal voting is shown to happen. And, not to mention, the USPS losing ballots, having people just dump bins of mail, just adds to the sh*tshow.

    Someone down there needs to find a way to get back to basics, but we know, cheaters don’t like basics, so the Dems will never support such a thing.

  2. John says:

    Jay, I can agree with the conclusions of your post. If there is voter fraud I think it will be detected. Everything I have read points to a fair process. The Biden bias in the mail in vote was a known and predicted factor. So, like you said if fraud has happened there will be a trail of it and it will be found out.

    I don’t trust the Trump administration at all since they seem to have adopted the philosophy “it doesn’t matter if it is true or not”. For example the claim that Wisconsin had 90% voter turnout is ludicrous at best. Again I can’t post a link on your site but there are plenty of links out there that go through the math and show that the turnout was about 73% which is in line with other elections. Another thing about the Wisconsin turnout is that while it translated into an increase of about 248,000 votes for Biden over what Clinton received, it also showed an increase of 205,000 votes for Trump. So I don’t see anything wrong with the numbers. I do see things wrong with people who have made this claim not retracting it – but that is just the nerd in me.

    Now, I have been thinking about this and I have absolutely nothing to back this up so you can throw it on the pile of WAGs – but what if the Democrats realized the power of Trump’s get out the vote process. They realized that they couldn’t match it on election day so came up with the solution to mitigate it through a solid effort to vote early. Perfectly legal but to be honest I don’t know if the Democrats were that smart.

    I now see that Biden is ahead in GA and PA so I suspect that we will see recounts in these states at least. Lots of fun to come yet.

    • Terry Rudden says:

      I saw the “Vote Early” push by democrats as a two-pronged strategy. It was part of a larger push to mobilize their supporters, and particularly those who loathed Trump but were unenthused about Biden. It was also an prophylactic measure against the October surprise we were all expecting. That turned out to be a particularly damp squib in a long string of damp squibs from the Trump campaign.
      So no “win bigly” for either party, it seems.

    • Jay Currie says:

      John, I have no doubt that there was a sincere effort by the Dems to do the early vote thing. They did it well. And there is nothing wrong with that.

      My concern is that having done it well and fairly, when they realized it was not enough, they went to the dark side and began manufacturing ballots. Which should be evident if it occurred. A large number of “Presidential Only” ballots would suggest follow ups as to origins. This is not impossible as the ballots will be easy to spot and then fairly easy to trace.

      Taking a microscope to a few states makes a lot of sense at the moment. I don’t think Biden won on a fair count, but I am open to evidence that he did. That means tracking back several million ballots. A big job but not beyond the capacity of the Americans.

      Running a few cross checks on address, date of death, other votes in same election, will either prove Trump’s points or ensure that Biden’s claim is legitimate.

      That said, the more odious examples of excluding Rep observers are going to pose real questions about 100’s of thousands of ballots. While I do not think they should be summarily discarded, I do think the onus rests on the state to prove that they should be included. Were I a judge looking at ballots counted without oversight from both parties I would be inclined to say, “Show me”. If, as I suspect, there are more than a few ballots in the current count which would not pass that test, there will be changes in the tallies.

      • John says:

        Jay, we agree that suspected cases of voter fraud must be examined. But (and I am so familiar with this from my experience with discussing global warming), we need to base our results on evidence.

        For example you said “odious examples of excluding Rep observers”. I poked around on line to see what I could find and I found two cases that people seem to be referring to. However, the first thing that needs to be clearly understood is that Republicans were heavily involved in all aspects of the election process. What is in question are the observers from the Trump campaign.

        The first case I found was in Philadelphia where there was a court case filed because the observers were standing further away than they thought they should be. To be clear, the observers (Trump and Biden) were placed exactly where they were supposed to be according to the COVID plan that the election officials made. The Trump camp had access to this document before the election so the whole issue could have been addressed before election day. But for some reason they didn’t so on election day they didn’t like where they were positioned. When they wanted to move the election officials pointed out that this was not in accordance with the COVID plan in place for the facility and so they couldn’t be moved. And you know the rest. So, I don’t see an attempt at keeping anyone away from observing the process, I see a party who did not think the rules applied to them and tried to make changes the day of.

        The second case I found was in Detroit where a number of Trump observers were barred from entering the processing facility. While this is true, the reason is that there were already so many observers in the facility (both Trump and Biden observers) that the facility was over the capacity limit. Apparently they were approved to have 130 observers but had over 200 Trump observers alone. At this point all observers – both Trump and Biden were barred from entering until some people left.

        Those were the two cases that I found and in neither of them do I see any evidence for fraud, however please point out the others you are referring to?

  3. Justausername says:

    By using “covid” as the excuse the Democrats created the perfect storm of fraudulent voting. Mail in voting isn’t like absentee voting, where registered voters request ballots. Mail in voting is the state blasting out ballots to everyone on their rolls, which are known to be pure dog sh*t. These ballots are easily harvested. Care homes with dementia patients no doubt voted for Dementia Joe, in solidarity. People received ballots for people that moved. Illegal aliens vote via ballots that were mailed out. What a system.

    Anyone saying that 80 – 90% of the mail in vote going to Dementia Joe is just happy to see the bad orange man go. The fraud is so blatant, they are beyond caring. Videos of poll watchers cheering as Republican watchers are forced to leave in Detroit. Poll watchers blocked from counts. Court orders to allow watchers ignored.

    This guys gets it:

    “Plus we are supposed to believe that Joe Biden, the guy barely campaigned, who got like 12 sad looking people to his rallies, was more popular than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? This election was just that much more special? Uh huh… Except that these few battleground state blue cities vote ratios don’t match up with other blue cities around America, where it appears Trump’s support among every demographic group other than white males went UP.”

    At this point it doesn’t matter who wins, the entire USA has lost. Usually the margin of fraud is pretty slim, but this year is special. It is going to be a wild court ride. But no one can convince me that there was no fraud, or so little of it that it doesn’t matter.

    • Terry Rudden says:

      ““Plus we are supposed to believe that Joe Biden, the guy barely campaigned, who got like 12 sad looking people to his rallies, was more popular than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? ”
      Well, you could flip that around, and assume that Trump’s divisive, incompetent, incoherent presidency was appalling enough to motivate Americans to get and vote for an uninspiring but rational candidate.

      • Jay Currie says:

        Well, you could flip it and you might be right.

        But, at a guess, it was cheating. Whether or not it is provable cheating is another question. It degrades the political process.

  4. Justausername says:

    Stolen from Insta commenter:

    The Democrat playbook

    1) “There’s NO EVIDENCE of election fraud!”

    The narrative is already starting to shift to

    2) “There’s no evidence of SERIOUS election fraud!”

    And onward we go through all the expected stages of this fiasco.

    3) “There’s no evidence of WIDESPREAD serious election fraud!”
    4) “There’s no evidence that the widespread election fraud CHANGED the result!”
    5) “There’s no evidence that any of the widespread election fraud was COORDINATED!”
    6) “There’s no evidence that any top Democrats even KNEW about the coordinated widespread election fraud!”
    7) “There’s no evidence that any top Democrats ORDERED the coordinated widespread election fraud!”
    8) “Those Democrats are NOT REPRESENTATIVE of the Democratic party!”
    9) “Republican election reforms based on a ONE TIME episode of A FEW people engaging in election fraud isn’t reason to disenfranchise people!”
    10) “Republicans are engaging in widespread voter suppression because they don’t want to COUNT THE VOTES!”

    And they will defend each of these positions, in sequence, for all their worth, because they’re barely capable of independent thought.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: