💯
Verifying the vote isn’t denialism. The evidence is compelling and coherent. Too many whiners not enough debunkers!
auraithx
joined 1 month ago
Of course it’d be both sides. They use projection to shield themselves. So if they were going to steal an election, they’d accuse the dems of doing it first.
This isn’t conscious but they think everyone thinks like them so if they’re trying to steal the election obviously the dems are too.
I don’t think that’s the right bit. He said something like ‘and Elon knows those computers so well, those tabulators, and then we won PA’
There was a ton of irregularities reported btw. I forget the exact number but like 20-40 with enough evidence that they were bringing the cases forward. But when Trump came in he appointed someone to a role who dismissed them all.
While it might seem simple to attribute the drop-off phenomenon to personal preferences for Trump or against Harris, the SMART Elections analysis shows that this pattern is far more complex and inconsistent with such an explanation. For instance, if Harris were uniquely unpopular, you’d expect her drop-off to be uniformly large across all states, but it isn’t. In Michigan, her drop-off is negligible (0.87%), while in Montana, it’s a staggering -19%, even though Montana has little connection to the pro-Gaza movement that critics say might have influenced her support. Similarly, the Republican drop-off (votes for Trump but not for down-ballot candidates) is just as significant, sometimes exceeding the margins of victory in key swing states. Down-ballot candidates refer to those running for lower-profile positions, such as governors, state legislators, or other local offices, as opposed to high-profile ones like the president. This suggests the issue isn’t simply about liking Trump or disliking Harris but instead points to a mix of unusual voter behaviors or even potential systemic issues in how votes were cast or counted. The consistent pattern of drop-off across vastly different demographics and states demands more scrutiny, not simple assumptions.
I’m not getting any red flags I think they’re just a bit disorganised. Here’s the name of someone involved
https://bsky.app/profile/electiontruth.bsky.social/post/3lhpbvqswak2d
Seems if it were a scam they wouldn’t register as a non profit in the us they’d be anon and taking crypto donations.
I know Spoonamore said he was working with a new team to verify the claims. I’m not sure which one that is though.
They did, the early versions of the first ones anyway. They’re adjusted afterwards and weighted to match the alleged vote counts as they come out.
Exit Polls were spot on for all down ballot races, but were wildly off base with Trump.
State Edison Exit Polls (EEP) (MoE 3%) vs. Reported Results. In Swing States. EEPs show Harris wins 4 beyond MoE, Trump 0. 3 within MoE. Returns Trump wins all 7. 6 of 7 beyond MoE. But DownBallot EEPs are right and falloff counts are hard to believe.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/11/05/politics/how-exit-polls-work-election
Debunked how?
Not sure how you could rationalise all those shown breaches.
It’s a psychological thing. People think he won decisively so they fall in line in a rallying effect even if they hate his guts.
It's been ran by a few different independent orgs. I believe it all began from
Then some independent data scientists got in touch with him and ElectionTruthalliance and SmartElections was borne out of it.
I haven't verified the data in-depth, but AFAIK there are inconsistencies like this pattern only appearing on a certain brand of tabulator. I'm pretty sure you're missing something either way or someone else would've as easily refuted it. There is a lot more information posted on https://old.reddit.com/r/somethingiswrong2024/ and https://www.reddit.com/r/Verify2024/
There is a recent AMA from the SmartElection founder here with some more details:
even the exact method has been uncovered.
There's actually quite a lot of evidence.
https://electiontruthalliance.org/
https://smartelections.substack.com/p/so-clean
The tabulators switched after 500 votes and restricted dems to 45%, the data looks artificially smoothed to hide this. The same pattern is visible on elections going back to 2014.
They also found the remote access code for Dominion machines on a public repo with the private admin password in it, there's evidence of breaches all around the country from people associated with Trump. They got caught red handed, told us they were doing it the full time.
And that's before we get to the voter suppression, and 10-20% of the country being in a state of algorithmically induced psychosis.
It’s not really denialism when there’s evidence. Verify the evidence.
It’s only denialism when it’s irrational and not based on coherent arguments. (Ie. Trump in 2020)