Here you go, a “real” source. He said there were more bullet ballots than there likely really are, but there’s still a really suspiciously high number of them. How is this not at least worth investigating?

    • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Considering how much trump and his supporters tried to steal the election last time around, this almost certainly means something, and we’d be idiots to ignore it

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    The key flaw in this idea that fake bullet ballots put Trump over the top ignores the fact that Republicans won House and Senate seats as well.

    If it were bullet ballots, we would have seen split tickets where Trump won but Dems won House and Senate seats at that did NOT happen.

    So, no, this is all specious reasoning from the start.

    Look at the Abortion bill in Arizona:

    https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Proposition_139,_Right_to_Abortion_Initiative_(2024)

    Yes - 2,000,287 - 61.61%
    No - 1,246,202 - 38.39%

    3,246,529 votes cast.

    Now look at President:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election_in_Arizona

    Republican - Donald Trump - 1,770,242 - 52.2%
    Democratic - Kamala Harris - 1,582,860 - 46.7%
    Green - Jill Stein - 18,319 - 0.5%
    Libertarian - Chase Oliver - 17,898 - 0.5%

    3,389,319 votes cast.

    There were 142,790 more votes cast for President than in the abortion race, but Trump beat Harris by 187,382 votes.

    Even if all 142K overvotes cast in the Presidential race were fake bullet ballots, Trump STILL would have won by 44,592 votes.

    • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      “The election wasn’t stolen! And if it was then it actually didn’t matter and he would’ve won fairly anyway”

      What is your point here? Why are you so intent on making sure nobody discusses the evidence that trump stole the election? And why are you so intent on trying (and failing) to debunk it?

      Also I 1000000 percent trust an expert on voting machines over a mod of a random lemmy community. You’re gonna need more than your opinion on how one state went to debunk all of those bullet ballots my guy

      • SGforce@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Posting on a blog doesn’t make someone an expert on voting machines. This guy is no expert, no mathematician, no ‘cybersecurity’ expert. None of that.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The point is that the whole notion this guy is putting forward is bullshit and the reason he’s putting it forward is that he’s bad at math.

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    What seems more likely: 1) a vast conspiracy between the Trump campaign, a collection of hackers, Elon Musk and various workers at his super PAC, and any number of other insidious actors part of a shadowy cabal all conspired to hack the vote, and this one dude, who got almost every data point verifiably wrong and has demonstrated zero evidence for his other related claims, somehow “got it right.” 2) a small amount of Trump voters didn’t give a shit about or know much of anything about any other offices/candidates and just voted for Trump and left?

    Right.

    It’s so sad to watch people grasp at conspiracy theories like this. Conspiratorial thinking is highly correlated with feelings of insecurity, low agreeability, narcissism, intolerance of uncertainty, feelings of a lack of control, fear, and a tendency toward confirmation bias and proportionality bias. So I guess seeing people on the left start indulging this way of thinking just like Trump supporters did isn’t shocking, but it’s still sad to see.

    • Alteon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Within every election, there is a certain number of bullet ballots to be expected. The norm falls around 1-2% or so, with an expected margin of error. Every swing state (and ONLY swing states). Hit around 5-12%.

      There were 57 bomb threats that targeted ballot counting stations. All in swing states.

      In pretty much every swing states, Trump won the Presidency, but Democrats won pretty much every other down ballot race?

      The polls were pretty much correct for the swing states… except for the Presidency?

      There’s coincidences and then there’s fucking Looney Toons levels of improbability.

      I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but considering all that, you don’t think a single investigation should occur?

    • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      You didn’t read the article did you? Or even the snopes “correction” of it? Pls do that before discounting it as fake, being wilfully ignorant about this does nobody any good

  • SGforce@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    9 hours ago

    However, Snopes’ research, in which we compared the vote tallies cited by Spoonamore with the latest official election results, found his figures to be incorrect and his assertions to make no mathematical sense.

    Sure, investigate. But what though? You need evidence of something before even alleging a crime.

    • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I’d say the number of bullet ballots is evidence that something is almost certainly up that needs investigating. That’s not a normal occurrence

      • rigatti@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        So the assertion is that Republicans inserted a bunch of fake votes but only for president? Why would they not just make it down ballot?

        • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Ostensibly because the presidential election is the one that they really cared about this time around.

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    All good points here, but the clarification that Snopes and everyone else is missing and not talking about are kind of important:

    • “Bullet Ballots” are single votes for one candidate with nothing else filled out. In order to be valid that means…
    • A voters information would have to be put on a form and fed into a tabular, and in the case of Georgia and Arizona (I think?) physically reviewed before fed into said machine because…
    • The tabulation machines are set to confirm a specific amount of information, and if that information is wrong, it will error. This is a code on the form that can be machine scanned, so that makes sure it fits a specific location, precinct, county, whathaveyou., BECAUSE…
    • if someone were to get a grip of these forms and ballot stuff them, then counts would be meaningless.

    So really all that needs to be done is to find a large enough sample of size of consistent voters who had a flipped vote, find their forms, ensure nothing is fucky with the forms, then interview to confirm with the voter. Do that for a few thousand people in Wherever, USA and you’ll have your answer.

    It’s not hard, it’s just time consuming and costs money. Voters don’t generally have a way to even check their vote was counted for all the candidates they chose in most states, which I think is fucked up, otherwise this might be a bit easier.

    • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      find a large enough sample of size of consistent voters who had a flipped vote

      Is that possible in AZ? In my state the poll worker records that you appeared to vote, then gives you a generic ballot. The ballot is not tied to you. Your vote is completely secret with no way to trace it.

  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I don’t believe there was fraud but I do believe statistical anomalies are worth a second look. Some people won’t ever be convinced but I’m certain the various audits of 2020 that came up empty swayed at least a few people (on that topic, not Trump as a whole).

  • macniel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Damn imagine if true, knowing that your US Government was illegally elected. This really should be investigated for the sake of the entire world.

      • macniel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        according to that planetcritical post I shared, it seems that the public still doesn’t know the actual results of the 2000 election? Doesn’t seem democratic to me.

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It doesn’t seem democratic because America is a corporate plutocracy masquerading as a democracy.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Seems it’s been investigated enough and no surprises, the numbers are off and allegations based on no evidence.

      Remember when there was a bunch of idiots from the red camp, all bent on the idea Biden stole the election? Well, it’s that and the blue camp has idiots too. This is something we’ll have to get used to now, a bunch of idiots from X claiming Y stole the election.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Remember when they demanded a hand recount, got it, and then kept lying about the results even after they were verified?

        That’s the difference.

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Except for one MASSIVE difference, Harris isn’t making the claims, calling for violence and to “stop the count”

      • macniel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        but it can’t be that off the margin. from 1% to 7.2% in the case of Arizona, thats highly suspicious. Also the theory shared by those computer scientists is too damn convincing so those ballots should be hand counted, imho.

        https://www.planetcritical.com/p/cyber-security-experts-warn-election-hacked

        Also I will never understand why USA insist on using Computers for voting.

        Or how a winner-takes-it-all approach is in any way fair or reasonable to the people.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Their “theory” amounts to, “the Internet exists”. They make no specific claim of a breach in election security and have no evidence of a breach. It’s all purely, “somebody could have reprogrammed the machines at some unknown time and place.”

          They have no theory for how such a reprogramming would be distributed. Just fear mongering about how computers can be programmed to do anything.

          • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            “partially debunking” here basically means “correcting numbers that were slightly too large and clarifying the explanation given is a hypothesis”. This is still suspicious as heck, especially given all the other ways republican politicians and voters and funders have tried to influence and tamper with the election

            • naught@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 hours ago

              I mean this puts a bad taste in my mouth for the credibility of the letter:

              In an email, North Carolina State Board of Elections spokesman Patrick Gannon told Snopes, “Without access to confidential data, there is no way that anyone could know what this individual claims to know about North Carolina’s presidential election. North Carolinians cast secret ballots, and cast vote records and ballot images that could potentially provide this information are confidential in North Carolina. My first step in fact-checking this would be to ask the writer to show his work.”

              I welcome investigation & would fully believe if this is corroborated and true. I won’t believe it until then especially when there are crucial discrepancies in tallies that invalidate some (not all) claims from the letter