Vote rigging: How to spot the tell-tale signs (2016 BBC article)

This BBC article dated 2 September 2016 talks about some of the "tell-tale signs" of vote rigging and coincidentally everything they list has been observed in this election. Just look at an analysis of this election using Benford's Law and it's virtually impossible to deny some fraud occurred and that it strongly benefited the Dems.

Too many voters

Watch the turnout figures ‒ they can be a big giveaway.

You never get a 98% or 99% turnout in an honest election. You just don't.

Voting is compulsory in Gabon, but it is not enforced; even in Australia where it is enforced, where you can vote by post or online and can be fined for not voting, turnout only reaches 90-95%.

The main reason that a full turnout is practically impossible is that electoral registers, even if they are recently compiled, can rarely be 100% up-to-date.

A high turnout in specific areas

Even where the turnout is within the bounds of possibility, if the figure is wildly different from the turnout elsewhere, it serves as a warning.

Why would one particular area, or one individual polling station, have a 90% turnout, while most other areas register less than 70%?

Something strange is almost certainly going on, especially if the high turnout is an area which favours one particular candidate or party over another.

Results that don't match

Mobile phones have made elections much more transparent.

It is now standard practice to allow party agents, observers and sometimes even voters to watch the counting process and take photographs of the results sheet with their phones.

They then have proof of the genuine results from their area ‒ just in case the ones announced later by the electoral commission don't match.

Delay in announcing results

Finally something that is not necessarily a sign of rigging, but it is often assumed to be so.

Election commissions, particularly in Africa, can appear to take an inordinately long time to publish official results.

This is not helped by local observer networks and political parties who, tallying up the results sent in by their agents on mobile phones, have a good idea of the result long before the more cumbersome official process is completed.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Trump said The BBC is fake news.

So ignore this.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

All these people just bring up the past. That was 4 years ago dude. Duh. That was before Trump was president. It doesn't count any more. If only people could just stop remembering things longer than a few months ago.

Hmmm well maybe we can prescribe some more anti-depressants and anti-anxiety drugs to fog things up.

Uhhhh yeah covid causes anxiety and depression better pop some pills to make you feel better.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Trump said The BBC is fake news.

So ignore this.

what was said is irrelevant, who said it is paramount.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Trump said The BBC is fake news.

So ignore this.

So you agree with Trump.
Noted.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Trump said The BBC is fake news.

So ignore this.

So you agree with Trump.
Noted.

If Trump said it, then it has to be true.

He has never been found out to be lying about anything has he ?

Why is Alaska taking so long to count their votes? Why is South Carolina taking so long?

Maybe, because there are lots of postal ballots, and if like Pennsylvania, the ruling Republican Party refused to allow any postal votes to be counted prior to Election Day?

Anyway, they are investigating any legitimate sounding claims of voter fraud, an order from the Trumpster himself no doubt. Relax, you have all said that we will be looking foolish when they find just how widespread the fraud was and Biden will be tried for Treason. In addition, those who supported old sleepy Joe will be rounded up and made to give old Trumpster a sloppy kiss. Only the nice looking women though, but all the men.