I'm content to let the courts settle the outcome. No matter who wins, half the country will think the other half cheated. Where did those mystery 200,000 Biden votes in Michigan come from? Did Wisconsin really have more votes than registered voters, as I read today? Now the lawyers for both sides earn their money.
California's statewide propositions are a little more sure. The results will not be certified until December 11th, whatever that means, but here are current results from the Secretary of State's web site:
Uber, Lyft, and Doordash are big winners (Prop 22). Prop 15 would have been the camel's nose under the tent of eliminating Prop 13 (1978) protections, and while it lost, it didn't lose by a comfortable enough margin. Prop 14 is a continued waste of money, and Prop 17 is an unneeded "gift" of more Democratic voters. An unnecessary additional cost on kidney dialysis facilities (Prop 23) failed by almost 2:1, which is nice.
Keep an eye on these. If I recall correctly, the last time we voted for Superintendent of Public Instruction, my guy had won--but a couple days later the numbers had changed and CTA's candidate won. I'm hoping most of these results hold up, YMMV.
The report of more than 100% turnout in Wisconsin was incorrect, I believe. But they're saying turnout was 88%, which is very, very high.
ReplyDeleteIf so, I'm glad no one is *so* blatant!
ReplyDeleteYou forgot a big one: 16 Affirmative Action in Government Decisions 5,021,498 43.9% 6,411,136 56.1%
ReplyDeleteI am so happy that blatant racism got crushed.
Isn't it odd that California voted 2:1 against the president but voted fairly conservatively on the propositions?!
ReplyDeleteThat is indeed odd, Darren - how can they be in favor of one without the other? What makes the difference? I suspect it's the constant drumbeat of the media, pounding out the Trump BAD Trump BAD message for the past 4 years.
ReplyDelete"Where did those mystery 200,000 Biden votes in Michigan come from?"
ReplyDeleteLet's not hide behind implications and conjecture, here. Mr. Miller, are you attempting to say that these votes are falsified? And if so, do you have any evidence of this or can you even visualize an avenue through which this could have happened?
President Trump has been attempting to undermine public confidence in the results of this election for over a year now, especially in regards to mail-in voting, and yet no proof of wrongdoing has emerged.
As a former student of yours, the difference between the burden of proof you place on climate change versus the burden of proof you place on voter fraud is staggering.
Joanne, I followed up. Some of the wards around Milwaukee have over 100% turnout, and turnout in some major population areas was over 90% (hardly believable). Then there are the 120-yr-old voters in Michigan, and a few other "discrepancies".
ReplyDeleteAgain, if the president wants this enough, he'll fight for it in court and let the chips fall. There's not much *I* can do about it.
After 3 years of RussiaRussiaRussia and a freakin' impeachment, and *now* a leftie wants evidence?
ReplyDeleteMy only evidence is statistical anomalies. Aren't you interested in knowing if only legal votes were counted, or do you just want your side to win at any cost?
By the way, those 200,000 votes were already admitted to be data entry error. It should only have been 20,000. Quite a difference, wouldn't you say? And even still, there's a place with 20,000 Biden votes and not a *single* Trump vote, that doesn't sound strange to you? Are those 120-yr-olds who supposedly voted in Michigan of interest to you, or do you just dismiss them?
I'd be interested in the 20,000 votes you've mentioned, as that definitely would arouse suspicion in a reasonable person. Do you have a source, or if not so a name? I'd say that's worth continued discussion.
ReplyDeleteAs for the 120-ish year-old voters, these claims seem to have stemmed from a Twitter user by the name of Essential Fleccas, who posted three instances he'd found of these voters. They were, in order of greatest age to least, June Aiken, who should be 120 years old, Donna Brydges, who should be 119 years old, and William Bradley, who should be 118 years old.
Here is Fleccas' post for Mr. Bradley https://twitter.com/fleccas/status/1324216584219623424
While this does seem suspicious at first glance, it happens that the William Bradley of 1902 has a descendant of the same name, William Tarnell Bradley, who is 61 years old and lives in the same ZIP code. https://www.michiganresidentdatabase.com/person/777535/william-bradley#overview
The case is the same with the other two. A 75-year-old Donna Bridges and a 94-year-old June Aiken also live in Michigan.
Unfortunately, it seems that the necromancers have not joined the Democratic party quite yet, as they remain quite frustrated over the far left's views on the estate tax.
Since impeachment was mentioned, though, I'll throw my hat into that ring while we're at it. In my opinion, it was a blunder by the Democrats. While there was fishy evidence, I don't think there was enough to bury President Trump in the Ukraine scandal department. It would have been far smarter to focus on the continued human rights abuses at the southern border.
To give a more official source, by the way, it seems the disinformation around William Bradley got so popular that Michigan's Secretary of State felt the need to respond to the allegations.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.clickondetroit.com/news/2020/11/05/did-a-dead-118-year-old-man-vote-absentee-in-michigan-state-says-no/
https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/04/yes-democrats-are-trying-to-steal-the-election-in-michigan-wisconsin-and-pennsylvania/
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/election-fraud-allegations-lodged-in-michigan
ReplyDeleteI'm not in a position to judge the validity of these accusations, but I don't think we should dismiss them out of hand, either.
If true, this should be investigated: https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/watchdog-finds-21000-dead-registrants-on-pa-voter-rolls-in-final-weeks-of-election/
ReplyDeleteLet us note that the Washington Free Beacon article claims there were around 21,000 deceased voters on the Pennsylvania voter roll this year, not that they actually voted.
ReplyDeleteBut for the sake of the argument, let us do a thought experiment. If we assume all 21,000 deceased voters voted through unscrupulous means, and that all of them voted for President-Elect Biden, this still does not change the outcome of the race. As of writing this comment, it seems Biden is ahead in the votes by 30,000 and change.
You assume that's the only discrepancy. It's not.
ReplyDelete