Less than a year to go until the 2024 election and the pundits are out in force with their analysis. There are whiteboards, videos, polls, graphs, and lots of posturing.
All the normal ways of analyzing election outcomes are a complete waste of time unless the issue of fraud is addressed. The sad truth is, that in many parts of the country, the voters really have no choice.
Take the case of the current president. He didn't even have to show up in 2020. He was promised the win and he got it. The election was over before the voting began.
Then there's the case of Lake vs. Hobbs in Arizona. Subtleties of computer malware weren't even needed in Arizona when the strangely vague Katie Hobbs was declared the winner. Through the entire campaign season, she didn't bother campaigning, she refused to debate and was rarely seen. Her opponent counted on people showing up at the polls on election day -- so what could go wrong? The voting equipment was simply disabled in Republican-heavy precincts, resulting in long wait times, lost ballots, and ballots that were promised to be "counted later." Subsequent investigations have shown video of tampering with sealed machines -- mountains of evidence have shown the election was fraudulent.
Evidence of fraud was met with a big "so what." The Arizona election tampering was so heavy-handed, one can easily assume the cartels were involved. Cartels were not about to have Kari Lake become governor of Arizona, and military-industrial types were not about to have a change in the U.S. Senate representation either. Neither of these parties care what voters want or what they do.
Polls and pundits used to matter before 2000. There was a good chance that experienced "experts" could really give you some insight into trends. The distillation of 19 "bellwether counties" was insightful and helpful. Well, Donald Trump won 18 of the 19 counties and still "lost."
A case in point--this morning I heard Karl Rove say that in the 2020 presidential election, a third-party candidate had received 3% of the vote in a couple of swing states and that the number of votes they received were more than the amount Trump had lost by, therefore, if that person had not been in the race, Trump would have won. This whole statement is full of logical fallacies, but it doesn't matter. The simple fact is that the Democrats just would have printed more ballots.
The increased rate of election fraud has really obviated any traditional technique for predicting elections. Now it's just Kabuki theater. The emperor of analysis has no clothes.
Why do they still do the same thing, even though it is hopelessly without meaning? There are two reasons; first, it's all they know. They have no way to factor in the obvious fraud, so they don't. Secondly, these election analysts burnish their reputation by publishing articles and appearing on media shows. Any talk of fraud and their career is over. The reality is that their whole profession is pretty much over. News show hosts play along and act interested--they would lose their job immediately if they spoke up about what they know to be true.
The complete corruption of the Justice Department has allowed sincere, diligent, competent researchers and election fairness activists to be stalled until the next election is upon us. It is mind-boggling that not one court would take up documented claims of 2020 fraud that were clearly worthy of consideration. Chief Justice John Roberts will be harshly judged by history for his clear capitulation to Democrat pressure. What are they afraid of? Could it be that Democrat globalists have a dossier on everyone involved?
It seems clear that government election methodology has been ripe for manipulation for a long time. There used to be an underlying assumption that everyone wanted a fair election -- at this point that seems overtly childlike.
All improvements don't have to be high-tech. For example, we have cameras on every doorstep, every corner and most streets. Why can't we have a camera record the opening and registry of every mail-in ballot? This would give us the link -- which is now lost -- between the ballot and the envelope it came in. How a person voted would be recorded as data and can be protected -- just use a device that's not connected to any communications and produces a digital result. If you think that would be too expensive, just think how the insertion of Joe Biden into the presidency has cost us in every way.
There are people who know how to overcome the pervasive fraud that has infected our voting systems. If the media keeps ignoring this total dismissal of the voter's role in the selection of our leaders, we're well and truly screwed. Our ability to influence the election of our leadership would be quaint history.
Image: RawPixel.com
Campaign Kabuki
10
21
22.11.2023
Less than a year to go until the 2024 election and the pundits are out in force with their analysis. There are whiteboards, videos, polls, graphs, and lots of posturing.
All the normal ways of analyzing election outcomes are a complete waste of time unless the issue of fraud is addressed. The sad truth is, that in many parts of the country, the voters really have no choice.
Take the case of the current president. He didn't even have to show up in 2020. He was promised the win and he got it. The election was over before the voting began.
Then there's the case of Lake vs. Hobbs in Arizona. Subtleties of computer malware weren't even needed in Arizona when the strangely vague Katie Hobbs was declared the winner. Through the entire campaign season, she didn't bother campaigning, she refused to debate and was rarely seen. Her opponent counted on people showing up at the polls on election day -- so what could go wrong? The voting equipment was simply disabled in Republican-heavy precincts, resulting in long wait times, lost ballots, and ballots that were promised to be "counted later." Subsequent investigations have shown video of tampering with sealed........
© American Thinker
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
