Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 17:24:51 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Mail-In Voting
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
References: <68-cndeZBcdJV5n7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> <uu3vv9$3kt4j$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-02C92E.10572328032024@news.giganews.com> <uu6j76$b577$14@dont-email.me> <atropos-C94F52.11271729032024@news.giganews.com> <hd5e0jhgvifuqb437hutgp0vl04revgaos@4ax.com> <atropos-6BCDD3.13024929032024@69.muaa.rchm.washdctt.dsl.att.net>
Content-Language: en-US
From: moviePig <never@nothere.com>
In-Reply-To: <atropos-6BCDD3.13024929032024@69.muaa.rchm.washdctt.dsl.att.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 78
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.endofthelinebbs.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 21:24:54 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 4080
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17c15946cdd0b61f$195366$3326957$c6d58c68@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 4491

On 3/29/2024 4:02 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <hd5e0jhgvifuqb437hutgp0vl04revgaos@4ax.com>,
>   shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:27:17 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <uu6j76$b577$14@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/28/24 1:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <uu3vv9$3kt4j$1@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/27/24 9:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> France banned mail-in voting in 1975 due to fraud.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mexico banned mail-in voting in 1992 due to fraud.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Belgium banned mail-in voting in 2018 due to fraud.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sweden rejected a mail-in voting proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Italy rejected a mail-in voting proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ukraine rejected a mail-in voting proposal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Russia and Japan do not permit mail-in voting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No Middle Eastern country permits mail-in voting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No Latin American country permits mail-in voting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the United States, Democrats love mail-in voting and are trying
>>>>>>> their damnedest to get instituted everywhere.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why don't we just go back to making a mark on a piece of broken pottery,
>>>>>> and put it in a big wine jar?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Because that's WAY better than requesting a ballot online and filling it
>>>>>> out and putting it in the mail - and then track it online so you can see
>>>>>> it was received and accepted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because one of those ways is a 21st century innovation, and the others
>>>>>> are as incredibly outdated as stone knives and bear skins.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet it'd still be better than what we have now in mail-in
>>>>> California, where they're *still* counting the March primary votes. And
>>>>> not only does Schiff keep gaining votes, but Garvey seems to somehow be
>>>>> *losing* them.
>>>>>
>>>>> How do vote totals for a candidate go down? Only in California...
>>>>>
>>>> By math, stupid. The same way they go up.
>>>
>>> How do you count ten votes for Garvey and then an hour later reduce the
>>> total to eight? Did those two mystery votes exist or not? Did you count
>>> them or not? If you counted them, how could they go away and reduce the
>>> total?
>>>
>>> If someone gives you a pile of apples to count and then periodically
>>> checks in to see how you're doing, why would there be less apples at the
>>> last check-in than there were at the first?
>>
>> Someone made a mistake in the count in the first place, or someone
>> counted votes for Garvey but it was provisional and those votes were
>> later removed. Without hearing from the people responsible there's no
>> way to know just what happened.
> 
> It's weird how this only happens to the Republican candidate. We didn't
> see any reduction in votes for Schiff. His numbers only rise. Same with
> the other Democrat, Katie Porter. Her numbers only go up. Just like
> trunk ballots always favor the Democrat by some wild coincidence.

How large were the adjustments?  Enough to remotely matter?  If not, why 
would you suspect a daring  -- not to mention risky -- conspiracy?