You act like it’s easy. Republican states shred their data before turning it over (like what happened in Georgia a few years back over one of the state races. It’s a cyclical issue. You can’t look at the data if you don’t have the evidence to warrant looking at it, and you can’t get the evidence if you can’t look at the data.
But no…the anomalies aren’t made up. You just haven’t been paying attention to what’s been going on with it, and that’s okay, it’s a lot to keep up with.
You act like it’s easy. Republican states shred their data before turning it over (like what happened in Georgia a few years back over one of the state races. It’s a cyclical issue. You can’t look at the data if you don’t have the evidence to warrant looking at it, and you can’t get the evidence if you can’t look at the data.
But no…the anomalies aren’t made up. You just haven’t been paying attention to what’s been going on with it, and that’s okay, it’s a lot to keep up with.
This looks somewhat credible.
https://apnews.com/press-release/access-newswire/diane-sare-kamala-harris-kamala-harris-es-kirsten-gillibrand-new-hampshire-225173eaaf66b420844508516b365caf
Specifically they have nine people who signed an affidavit saying they voted in a precinct where there were only five votes recorded.
Or it’s a conspiracy theory meant to distract us. I haven’t seen anything credible.
I especially don’t want to call wolf now when it may very well happen soon.