BREAKING: Election Advocates Demand Recount in Tennessee

[sheshe2]

BREAKING: Election Advocates Demand Recount in Tennessee
open.substack.com/pub/narativ/...

— @KeepItBlueDems.bsky.social (@keepitbluedems.bsky.social) 2025-12-04T21:19:20.735Z

Election integrity advocates are demanding a hand recount in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District after data shows more than 31,000 votes materialized after 99.4% of ballots were already counted.

At 99.4% reporting, Decision Desk HQ displayed 148,853 total votes. The final certified tally: 179,899.

The math doesn’t work. The remaining 0.6% of precincts should have produced roughly 1,000 ballots — not 31,000.

Republican Matt Van Epps was declared the winner over Democrat Aftyn Behn by approximately 15,700 votes. But without knowing how those late-arriving ballots broke, the true outcome remains uncertain.

MORE:
https://www.narativ.org/p/breaking-election-advocates-demand?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true

[SSJVegeta]

1. 1% of precincts could be 31,000 votes. A precinct isnt defined by number of people or % of votes

It is defined as part of the county. Some precincts can have 5 people. Some can have 5,000

[Wiz Imp]

4. It would be nearly impossible for 0.6% of the precincts in the District

to account for 17.2% of all of the votes. The average precinct size in the US is only 1,100 with the highest average precinct size in DC at 2,704.

[SSJVegeta]

5. Those are still averages though. We are talking about a county with both a large rural and urban population

There are going to be dramatically smaller precincts that will create a substantial imbalance between percentage of precincts and percentage of votes. They are not even remotely the same thing.

I'm not an expert by any means but have spent some time working for the registrar of voters. I can assure you that precincts are not even close to equal in population depending on where they are located. So trying to determine how many votes are left by percentage of precincts alone -without knowing where exactly they are, makes no sense.

[Wiz Imp]

6. Update: it would be absolutely impossible for 0.6% of the precincts

in this district to account for 31,000 votes. In 2024, the most votes in a single precinct in that district was just over 4000. The total number of precincts in the district is just 230. That means, 0.6% of the precincts represents a single precinct.

Sorry, your speculation is easily proven wrong in this case.

Complete data by precinct available here: https://sos.tn.gov/elections/results#2025

[SSJVegeta]

7. (Post deleted due to being off a factor of 10)

Last edited Thu Dec 4, 2025, 09:06 PM - Edit history (1)

(See edits for hilariously poor
Math skills)

[mackdaddy]

13. 0.6percent of 230 is 1.38 not 13. Something isn't mathing.

Don't know about any of the other things, but I would be asking questions too.

Somebody's numbers are off.

[SSJVegeta]

17. So the claim is that DDHQ reported 99.4% reporting

And added 30,000 more votes after. Not that 99.4% of precincts were reporting. When I watched the vote counts, it was closer to 90% of precincts reporting (based on the county results I was following) even when the NYTimes had closer to 95% reporting.

Ddhq could have easily been wrong (and likely were) in their guesstimation of expected votes counted. But I promise you there were not 99.4% precincts reporting before those votes were added. I followed it closely and there were at least 50 precincts that were added at the last minute (or last 30 minutes) from various counties.

(There. That should make sense. Sorry for trying to do basic math in public. That was embarrassing).

[Deminpenn]

21. My experience was voters

per precinct is around 1000.

Perhaps the dump was mailed in ballots that were reported after the in person votes plus stragglers.

[Wiz Imp]

25. That would have been my guess, but I'm pretty sure I read

on Tuesday when the results started coming in, that the mail-in ballots were counted first.

Also, you gotta figure that they wouldn't have called for a recount if there was a simple logical explanation for all those votes.

[Wiz Imp]

32. Scrap that. I see now this was brought forth by Thhis Will Hold

They have zero credibility and are not to be taken seriously.

[spanone]

2. K&R

[FBaggins]

3. You don't get hand recounts in a nine point loss

And DDHQ isn't evidence of anything (certianly not that 31k ballots were "late arriving&quot

[cmmngrnd]

8. There was no 31k vote "jump" and nobody is calling for a recount

The 31,000 vote jump was claimed by This Will Hold (TWH) and Decision Desk Headquarters (DDHQ) but they never put forth any evidence that it happened, or any explanation of why they claim it happened. Every graphic shown on their sites show vote totals contradicting their claim - no 31,000 vote jump.

Now these people are repeating the unverified 31k vote claim - still with no evidence - and claiming un-named election advocates are demanding a recount. If somebody was demanding a recount they would be named. It would be Marc Elias or the Tennessee Democratic party or some other named organization. By the way, whoever demands a recount in a race this far apart has to pay for it.

Whenever anybody says "they" are doing something without naming them, be suspicious. And use the same logic we use when Republicans claim antifa is a real organization -- they say it but can't name a single actual organization.

If somebody shows an actual jump of 31k votes (meaning documentation that at some point 94.6% of the vote was counted and the 100% vote was 31k higher) and names an actual organization that is on record as having filed for a recount I'll happily concede the point.

More detailed discussion in this thread.

[Silent Type]

12. I'm afraid it will become the norm to claim "We was Robbed," every time someone loses "on both sides."

[Jack Valentino]

26. which the Trump maggot Republicans 'normalized' !

[Silent Type]

27. Exactly, but we ain't got to do it too.

[Jack Valentino]

28. Yeah, that last poll that showed the race within two points

gave us too much hope--- but the final election margin
in that +22 Trump district is still great news!


BUT---- I think the Republicans DESERVE to have
charges of "election fraud" SHOVED right into their maggot faces!

[Silent Type]

29. That is true. I'd applaud the changes, but not in a sure loser like this one unless some honest to gawd bombshell

is reported. I do credit people who analyze this stuff. That will always be important. Though, don’t care much for Greg Palast’s semi-annual election fraud stuff.

[sheshe2]

31. I love your post.

BUT---- I think the Republicans DESERVE to have
charges of "election fraud" SHOVED right into their maggot faces!

[iemanja]

34. That's it

and the effect is to undermine democracy and further authoritarianism.

[Chemical Bill]

9. It would be easy to prove the election advocates wrong.

Do a hand counted recount. Oh, wait, that might prove them right....

[iemanja]

15. Recounts very rarely change the outcome by 0.5%

Over 9% is absurd. The result of these sorts of arguments is to discourage people from voting. When you tell everyone that any election Democrats lose is stolen, why should they vote at all?

This was a deep red district. Of course the Republican won. He was always going to win.

This isn’t a news article, and it doesn’t identify who the “election advocates” are.

Next they’ll be bilking people out of money for a recount like Jill Stein did, only to keep the money when there was no recount.

[Chemical Bill]

18. I think cheating by Republicans...

discourages people from voting. I don't care if it doesn't change the outcome this time, I care if it changes the outcome next November.

I first saw this information in an email from Election Truth Alliance. If you want more information about who "election advocates" are, you might start there.

Jill Stein didn't prevent the recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania in 2016. Republicans did. The fact that recounts were not done does not support your arguments. Do you have a source for your information that Jill Stein kept the money?

Republicans stopped the recount in Miami Dade County in 2000. The recount done by the media consortium found that Gore won every statewide recount scenario. Yes, I believe your assertion that recounts rarely change the outcome by 0.5%. Do you not believe that Republicans cheat, and recounts might find more cheating than we can prove without recounts?

[iemanja]

22. I can tell you my recollection

of the fine print on her donation link. It said the money could go for a recount or other purposes. I remember posting here about it at the time. People gave sway their hard-earned money anyway.

Do you recall her giving back money? She didn’t. There is your evidence.

I didn’t give because 1) Jill Stein and 2) I try not to fall for cons.

Of course the FL case was egregious, but the margin there was minuscule, not 9%. SCOTUS stopped the recount in the entire state, not just Dade.

[Chemical Bill]

24. My recollection is...

That the states took payments before starting the recounts. Then the GOP sued to stop recounts, were successful, and the states didn't give refunds. Interestingly, search engines don't give results from left wing media, so it's hard to source this.

But I found this:
2016 United States presidential election recounts - Wikipedia https://share.google/USm1P0fGFEM5faoU1

But this isn't about Jill Stein. This is about Republican cheating. I want to stop the gerrymandering, the purges, the bomb scares coming from Russia, the lack of voting machines in Democratic areas, and yes, the machine counts that are not verified by hand counts. Have you read Was The 2004 Presidential Election Stolen, by Freeman? You might want to.

[iemanja]

33. It's about Jill Stein in the sense she collected money

from desperate people, after doing everything she could to defeat Clinton and put Trump in office. Do you know of any of the funds paid to states came from her?

I agree about voter suppression, gerrymandering and the coercive tactics that Republicans use. I do not agree that any election a Democrat loses, even by a wide margin in a deep red district such as this case, is rigged. I have no respect or tolerance for those who promote such ideas. All they do is harm the party and democracy in general.

I haven’t read the book you reference.

[Chemical Bill]

35. You said Jill Stein kept the money...

when there was no recount. I said the states charged and kept the money but did not deliver a recount.

[KPN]

11. This is what Trump and his supremacist,

greedy and/or brainless supporters unleashed on America.

Right or wrong, like it or not, eventually what goes around comes around.

[H2O Man]

20. Recommended.

They are snakes.

[Jose Garcia]

23. Let them pay for it

[Boo1]

30. Same grifters

that are always claiming they have proof that Kamala won 2024.






No better than Cyber Ninjas.




Even if everything they said was true. Do you really think it's evidence of a grand conspiracy to rig the election, or that Decision Desk had a bug in their precinct count?