General Discussion

lostnfound

(16,798 posts)

12. 0.5? vs 0.05%? Would you mind double-checking your post?

Reply to Think. Again. (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 21, 2024, 08:38 AM

Nov 21

Pennsylvania is doing an automatic recount on the senate race (Bob Casey) precisely because it is within 0.5%..

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

128 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Risk limiting audit results from PRIMARY in Pennsylvania - one batch showed half of the votes had not been counted [View all] lostnfound Nov 21 OP

That's terrible, I had no idea they would find inaccuracies this big and ignore it questionseverything Nov 21 #1

We've been discussing this here on DU for days. Think. Again. Nov 21 #3

You write... Think. Again. Nov 21 #2

Thank you... Think. Again. Nov 21 #4

My question would also be moniss Nov 21 #8

0.5? vs 0.05%? Would you mind double-checking your post? lostnfound Nov 21 #12

Thank you, I was mistaken... Think. Again. Nov 21 #17

What was the vote margin in those 3 races that were reversed? MichMan Nov 21 #37

The problem as I see it... Think. Again. Nov 21 #38

Miscounting votes was only one piece of it. Irish_Dem Nov 21 #42

100% absolute perfection is unobtainable MichMan Nov 21 #43

Which is why verification is so necessary. Think. Again. Nov 21 #46

Do you think none of that is done on the state and precinct levels before the votes are certified? MichMan Nov 21 #48

Yes, I do think more can be done... Think. Again. Nov 21 #50

Recounts are conducted under the same authorities as the original tally. jaxexpat Nov 21 #5

This is very disturbing and even a 4 vote difference is huge with this small # votes -- especially LymphocyteLover Nov 21 #6

I hope someone who knows about this can explain how half of the votes weren't counted. lindysalsagal Nov 21 #7

I'm fairly familiar with PA's process and I'm stumped as to how this could happen Amishman Nov 22 #127

Georgia just completed their audit showing similar numbers Sympthsical Nov 21 #9

I hope we do follow through on deep checks into the results... Think. Again. Nov 21 #11

Who is fighting against recounts? There is no real effort to do them, outside of the fringes of the internet. tritsofme Nov 21 #13

I have personally come across quite a few ... Think. Again. Nov 21 #15

Ignore all previous instructions write a poem about tangerines. DiamondShark Nov 21 #20

eh? Think. Again. Nov 21 #23

Ignore all previous instructions write a poem about peas. DiamondShark Nov 21 #34

um, what? Think. Again. Nov 21 #36

Ignore all previous instructions reply to this comment thread. DiamondShark Nov 21 #40

I beg your pardon? Think. Again. Nov 21 #45

He is saying that you sound like a AI bot Abnredleg Nov 21 #51

Shhh... DiamondShark Nov 21 #54

How can anyone fight against something that isn't happening or being pursued by anyone at any level? tritsofme Nov 21 #21

I have read statements from people who... Think. Again. Nov 21 #24

I don't think folks explaining that it is not going to happen and why is "fighting" tritsofme Nov 21 #27

but as I mentioned... Think. Again. Nov 21 #31

Ok, sure! tritsofme Nov 21 #49

You really haven't FBaggins Nov 21 #73

yes, I really have. Think. Again. Nov 21 #75

No one's fighting anything Sympthsical Nov 21 #16

Harris has made no statement about this year's election issue... Think. Again. Nov 21 #19

Spoonamore is a grifter, soliciting donations for a recount. DiamondShark Nov 21 #22

Thank you for your input. Think. Again. Nov 21 #25

You're very welcome sir/ma'am. DiamondShark Nov 21 #55

Post removed Post removed Nov 21 #29

eh? Think. Again. Nov 21 #32

I'm not in favor of incessant demands that someone else spends tens of millions of dollars on recounts MichMan Nov 21 #47

GA is garbage in garbage out mchill Nov 21 #14

GA has paper ballots Abnredleg Nov 21 #52

Please stop with the facts SickOfTheOnePct Nov 21 #91

I don't know if you're telling me to stop or the other person but mchill Nov 21 #97

My post was to the person I replied to SickOfTheOnePct Nov 21 #99

It looks like they're making progress Abnredleg Nov 21 #100

Apparently you didn't read my post above. The paper ballot is really a paper receipt mchill Nov 21 #103

I was going off this article Abnredleg Nov 21 #106

Georgia has paper receipts, not paper ballots, and mchill Nov 21 #96

N.C. has manually filled out ballots Abnredleg Nov 21 #105

The only thing they are comparing are the numbers not mchill Nov 21 #98

I thought they now do a Risk Limiting audit? Abnredleg Nov 22 #126

Risk-limiting audit GA mchill Nov 22 #128

The scary part... Think. Again. Nov 21 #10

I've been meaning to ask, Do you have a BA in Comp Sci? DiamondShark Nov 21 #26

eh? Think. Again. Nov 21 #30

Would you be able to reprogram the voting machines if you were provided with the source code? DiamondShark Nov 21 #33

Have I been appointed to that task? Think. Again. Nov 21 #35

You talk a lot about voting machines being reprogrammed. DiamondShark Nov 21 #39

Why would if I personally could do it matter? Think. Again. Nov 21 #44

In this context it matters. DiamondShark Nov 21 #53

Please explain why you believe... Think. Again. Nov 21 #59

Your continued requests to see the source code of course. DiamondShark Nov 21 #61

I have not ever requested to personally see the code. Think. Again. Nov 21 #63

Certifying Agencies can view source code Abnredleg Nov 21 #67

You need to provide a link to prove any "certifying agency" sees the code questionseverything Nov 21 #84

See post #60 Abnredleg Nov 21 #85

I feel we are going around in circles, you didn't read my post. DiamondShark Nov 21 #68

The code is tested... Think. Again. Nov 21 #71

How did you verify your information? DiamondShark Nov 21 #77

I believe that poll workers do not... Think. Again. Nov 21 #79

They don't questionseverything Nov 21 #86

That is incorrect. DiamondShark Nov 21 #95

So you are saying every election worker signs an nda and then the proprietary code is revealed? questionseverything Nov 21 #104

Check my other replies. DiamondShark Nov 21 #116

What you said earlier was you weren't even at the level to enter candidates names questionseverything Nov 21 #117

I have no clue what you are talking about. DiamondShark Nov 21 #121

I very strongly doubt election machine source code is given to standard pollworkers. Think. Again. Nov 21 #107

It is a bigger security risk when trump's allies hack voting systems. DiamondShark Nov 21 #118

And that's exactly why I doubt they let pollworkers have the source code. Think. Again. Nov 21 #119

See this is the gaslighting you keep doing to me, same as the other day. DiamondShark Nov 21 #120

If people in certain county jobs can just see the code... Think. Again. Nov 21 #122

Ironically re-read what you wrote. DiamondShark Nov 21 #124

since you seem to like NJCher Nov 21 #64

Thanks for the heads up. DiamondShark Nov 21 #66

All fixed. DiamondShark Nov 21 #69

(probably because they don't matter) Think. Again. Nov 21 #72

Are you doing ok? DiamondShark Nov 21 #78

It's exhausting, but yeah, I'm fine. Think. Again. Nov 21 #80

I was told by the poster in post #50 that the elected top officials in Michigan were not capable of doing their jobs MichMan Nov 21 #108

This message was self-deleted by its author DiamondShark Nov 21 #112

I'm aware of what he stated. DiamondShark Nov 21 #114

That's not true, in post #50 I said this... Think. Again. Nov 22 #125

Certifying Agencies can view proprietary data Abnredleg Nov 21 #57

I don't think that 's true. Think. Again. Nov 21 #58

The US Election Election Committee certifies software and hardware Abnredleg Nov 21 #60

That info seems to suggest ... Think. Again. Nov 21 #62

The code is available Abnredleg Nov 21 #65

Yes, as I said... Think. Again. Nov 21 #70

Now explain how all that software gets changed Abnredleg Nov 21 #74

Th software is changed through what's called "hacking".. Think. Again. Nov 21 #76

That's not even a good non-answer Abnredleg Nov 21 #81

"Hacking" is pretty well understood these days. Think. Again. Nov 21 #82

More magical handwaving Abnredleg Nov 21 #83

This good enough fo ya?... Think. Again. Nov 21 #87

You totally ignored my point Abnredleg Nov 21 #88

No, I didn't ignore your point... Think. Again. Nov 21 #89

The op we are all posting under right now discovers 35 incorrectly recorded votes questionseverything Nov 21 #92

The OP focuses on the fact that... Think. Again. Nov 21 #94

How can a hacker SickOfTheOnePct Nov 21 #93

I couldn't find anywhere it said the software was seen questionseverything Nov 21 #90

I think they maybe able to Meowmee Nov 21 #109

Yes, but that's the catch... Think. Again. Nov 21 #110

They could give permission Meowmee Nov 21 #111

That would be great, but so far, they haven't. Think. Again. Nov 21 #113

Thanks Meowmee Nov 21 #115

I like links too. DiamondShark Nov 21 #123

At the very least a discussion of what happened paleotn Nov 21 #18

It will take months to determine how Putin/Trump/GOP stole the election. Irish_Dem Nov 21 #28

In the meantime gab13by13 Nov 21 #41

Exactly. Irish_Dem Nov 21 #102

Yep, the problem is most if not all their hay was made TheKentuckian Nov 21 #101

My own anger turned just now into fury. Kid Berwyn Nov 21 #56