Yeah, but are the election “security” measures many Republican states are enacting going to suppress these fraudulent Republican votes and jail the Republican frausters?
Of course they are. To say otherwise would suggest that the Republicans had some sort of ulterior motive behind all their shiny new election laws.
Well you see the Heritage Foundation is really a false flag Soros front run from a pizza parlor basement. Wake up sheeple!
It will all come out as soon as Pillow Guy arrests and jails the 300,000,000 (three-hundred-million) of us fraudsters.
Trust me, in the past the Dems had their share. But now, no real reason for it. We have the votes, we don’t need to cheat, we just need to get the legit votes out.
The GOP does not have the votes, so they cheat and accuse everyone else of cheating.
I think a lot of it is due to the Republicans drinking their own kool-aid. They believe that voter fraud among the Democrats is rampant, but is never caught because the voting laws are so lax. So they believe that are justified in committing fraud and they’ll never be caught. Turns out they’re wrong.
And I think the fact that Trump urged his fan boys to try and vote twice in order to test the system might have something to do with it.
Yeah, it’s almost as if their goal is not to actually prevent fraud, but to prevent minorities from voting.
NO! Next thing, you’ll be telling us that there is gambling happening at Rick’s.
I’m shocked, shocked!
And if it’s a Trump casino, he won’t let Sam play the piano.
just seen this …note its the “Washington examiner” so take it with the great salt lake
That’s how far I got.
Reading the entire article, that looks like nothing. Not a single actual act of fraud, and not even any “excess votes” - just wild guesses. Nothing about any actual votes for Biden.
I’m sure we’ll be hearing all about this “peer reviewed” study from the right wing propagandists soon enough.
Technically, an idiotic study reviewed by other idiots could be described as “peer-reviewed”, but that it not the standard usage.
Rather like Trump’s team of crack lawyers found in 60+ bites at the apple.
We’ve had discussions on the nature of what peer review means on this board before. What it does not mean is that it has been independently verified, that the information and conclusions reached are valid.
Different journals have different standards, but the least of them are reviewed by idiots, and even the best aren’t going to actually replicate the study. I don’t know where Public Choice stands on that spectrum, but digging in a little makes it look like they have a strong partisan bias.
Is this a new “study”? Because it’s a recurring theme for him:
(From his Wiki):
I’m not holding my breath for this one to be any different.
Yawn, it looks like another correlation =\= causation issue. The finding seems to be the areas in which election irregularities were alleged, have different election statistics than those areas where irregularities weren’t reported. Given the only people reporting irregularities were Republicans, and the places they would be most likely to complain about would be Democratic strongholds. So its the same “OMG! Democratic voters don’t vote exactly the same a Republican ones! (p<10^-58)” therefore there must be fraud, and if we throw out all of the Democratic votes that make up this difference Trump wins.
Of course I haven’t seen the paper and so I might be totally wrong about this, and in reality its some new and different way to totally misapply statistical test to reach a faulty conclusion. In that case there is at least a silver lining that there might soon be a fourth enertaining Matt Parker youtube video to go with his other three, debunkng the math behind the bogus claims.