Good question and I don't know what Rand was getting at. My
assumption is that he was referencing that the voter participation rate of
registered voters is being pumped up by actively giving them VBM options. Typically, special elections have low turnouts. Allowing all registered voters to request a VBM (or absentee) ballot flips that equation on it's head. That marginal voter that typically only shows up every 4 years to vote for President may vote now that it's a little easier to vote absentee. Again....that was my assumption but it seems logical.
In GA they aren't all being "sent absentee ballots". This is critically important word play. They are being sent absentee ballot
applications. You have to apply for an absentee ballot. Only after being accepted are you sent a VBM/Absentee ballot. I'd wager the legislator has not codified into law in any form rules around the SOS sending out these applications. In cases I've looked at like PA, the rules were around who is
eligible for an absentee ballot, not who can apply nor how they receive the application. Has a court case been brought in GA challenging eligibility of absentee ballots? If so, I'm not aware and given that hasn't been challenged then that should be evidence that even #TheKraken and Lin Wood don't think the SOS is doing anything illegal.
On the Covid front I haven't seen any analysis on whether voting offices were superspreader events or not. Of course, that's a bit like a chicken and egg situation, right? Election offices took a lot of precautions
and VBM reduced the volume of voters in the booth. If a quality research analysis was completed and found them not to be superspreader events then I'd simply proclaim SUCCESS!.
I was with you until you went all conspiracy theorist. I for one
did appreciate you trying to defend your position with facts and data. You and
@mchammer deserve credit in that regard. Alas, what I saw posted was anonymous internet twitter accounts with claims, analysis results but no mention of their methodology or any ability to verify the claim. Call me skeptical but my roles in the past have revolved around data/analytics for large corporations. For example, depending on the methodology that we've used, the turnover rate look really bad or really good. Our diversity metrics were the same which is why we always aligned with leadership on the methodology pros/cons before publishing dashboards. It's that way with any data. Absent exposing the methodology used most analyses are bunk as you can't tell the creator's bias. So, please forgive me if I didn't give the anonymous internet twitter users as much credibility as you chose to grant them.
We did get some insight into the data being presented in court that were making serious claims. Russel Ramsland is an idiot. Whether he simply signed off on the work of his team's shoddy work or actually did the analysis himself the information and charts he presented to justify his claim of voter fraud was pure unadulterated kindergarten quality work. You didn't back him (unlike
@Garmel ) but his was the only affidavit that included data that you could actually verify/dispute. Ramsland is the guy who first popped up in Lin Wood's GA suit who noted that many townships/precints in MI had a higher voter participation rate than registered voters. He proudly proclaimed some were as high as 450%. Of course, a quick Google search of the precincts determined that ~50% of the list he claimed for Michigan (MI) actually were in Minnesota (MN). Furthermore, I'm not sure what data he was using because you could go to the publicly available reports from those Counties to see that his analysis was WAAAAAAAYYYY off. Take 2, Ramsland submitted an affidavit in #TheKraken's case in Michigan. Good news, he didn't include MN data this time. Unfortunately. a 10 second review of his charge
duplicate entries. Yes, in the chart 30% of the entries had the same township named albeit with
different voting percentages. For me, that was strike 3. This "expert" being promoted by Lin Wood, Sidney Powell and
@Garmel is either a functional idiot or was dumb enough not to review the information he signed the affidavit for. Either way, his credibility is less than 0. Oh yeah...he's also the guy that supposedly completed the forensic analysis an Antrim County, Michigan for #TheKraken. You tell me whether he's believable after the kindergarten cop routine of his previous affidavits?
Why don't you think judges gave any credence to the lawsuits? If amateur
@Seattle Husker can see the grave errors in the analysis you don't think a judge can too? Further add on unbelievably un-credible affidavits by people like Melissa Carone and it's not hard to imagine a judge siding with the Defendants, especially after reading their responses.
