Georgia Hand Count Quashed

Oopsie doopsie.

Time to get the Supreme Court out to bat for Donald again. But knowing the sluggish pace at which justices move, will there even be time for a verdict before the election?

Gripping stuff, eh?

US judge blocks Georgia order to count votes by hand

In his ruling, Judge McBurney said the "11th-and-one-half-hour implementation of the hand count rule" would diminish public confidence in the outcome.

"This election season is fraught; memories of January 6 [US Capitol attack] have not faded away, regardless of one's view of that date's fame or infamy. Anything that adds uncertainty and disorder to the electoral process disserves the public," he wrote

Scramble! Scramble!

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

Weak.

Even weaker that the link is no good, yet someone stars and flags it without reading the story.

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

This also comes from the same judge that, within the last couple days, ruled that the " county election officials may not delay or decline to certify election results based on suspicions of fraud."

thehill.com...


Why not put safeguards in place to ensure that you can make the election come out the way you want it to?

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

I would think the more secure, transparent and accurate the way the votes are cast and counted, the more confident the public would be in the outcome. Justice is not blind, it is dead.

The judge thinks the public is more confident with three monkeys, hear no evil, see no evil, speak on evil.

a reply to: RazorV66

What problem exactly are you having with one more click to get to the article in question? It is the second one shown.

a reply to: RazorV66

Link fixed. Mucho obbligatto, as we say down here in Little Spitaly.

So where's ya Big Meme 💪 then? C'mon, give us another flash!

originally posted by: BeyondKnowledge3
a reply to: RazorV66

What problem exactly are you having with one more click to get to the article in question? It is the second one shown.

I see the OP fixed it but why should I have to search for it?

To the OP, the fact that Harris's campaign is cheering the ruling should tell you all you need to know.

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy
Imo, Georgia was mostly Dominion machine fraud.

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

The real question is, why is the Left so afraid of an honest vote count ? I would think you'd want to verify all those voters who support Harris.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be afraid of, right ?

a reply to: RazorV66

To the OP, the fact that Harris's campaign is cheering the ruling should tell you all you need to know.

Thank you for posting something substantive for a change. Here's a substantive response.

What Team Harris's response to the ruling signifies to anyone depends on their opinion of the ruling.

Clearly you and others here take it for granted that hand-counting ballots yields a more accurate result. But if you google 'is hand counting ballots more accurate?' as I just did, you will see, from the number of contrary responses that make it through your personalised algorithm, that not everyone shares your opinion. And if you venture to read some of those linked pages, you'll learn that nobody who counts things for a living thinks hand counts are more reliable. Machines are much more accurate, and faster to boot.

Since I agree with those experts (I used to rely on them quite a lot back when I was in the advertising business), 'the fact that Harris's campaign is cheering the ruling' tells me that they hope to win fair and square, and are justifiably afraid (viz. 6 January 2020) that Trump and his followers will do everything in their power, fair or foul, to prevent that outcome and seize power for themselves.

And deep in your heart, I suspect you know that too.

It's opaque reasoning plus vapid logic and extremely short-sighted and leaves Georgians with a likely close razor-thin election likely up for court-ordered injunctions and cases NO MATTER who wins on November 5th.

instead of counting the votes on machine tallies and verifying with hand counts, at the precinct level,you know with full transparency and another layer of security

now we are just going to trust the machines were correct and dump potential spoiled votes with legit votes

Yay!!! Georgia

a reply to: DAVID64

The problem is counting illegal ballots over and over...

a reply to: putnam6

leaves Georgians with a likely close razor-thin election

Do you think it's okay to cheat a bit, then, to improve the margins? Make it easier for whoever's replaced Raffensperger to "find 11,780 votes" for Donald?

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

What's the problem ? Someone getting in the way of your agendas ?

a reply to: DAVID64

Looks like someone got in the way of MAGA's.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

This also comes from the same judge that, within the last couple days, ruled that the " county election officials may not delay or decline to certify election results based on suspicions of fraud."

thehill.com...


Why not put safeguards in place to ensure that you can make the election come out the way you want it to?

Democrat judges literally making it illegal to decline to certify a fraudulent vote.

Democrat DOJ suing Virginia to keep fraudulent voters on the voter rolls.

Democrats LOVE voter fraud, and they're not even shy about letting you know anymore.

a reply to: YourFaceAgain

They are the only ones against voter ID

Why would they be against it if there was no voter fraud going on?


They have, from the beginning, been planning to make sure Trump does not win this election.

originally posted by: Kallipygywiggy
a reply to: putnam6

leaves Georgians with a likely close razor-thin election

Do you think it's okay to cheat a bit, then, to improve the margins? Make it easier for whoever's replaced Raffensperger to "find 11,780 votes" for Donald?

Ah sweetie, what about checking totals at the precinct levels add up to what happened last time?

If the tallies were audited and double-checked at the precinct level, logic suggests there is less chance for malfeasance in collecting and counting the votes elsewhere in the system.

Yes or No

besides this time the shoe is on the other foot

The CANDIDATE Donald J Trump has no authority over any election or government official, whereas now Madame VP as part of the ENCUMBENT administration gets to converse with the vote counters, and government officials in every state.

Thus your 4 years of worrying and anxious concerns voiced in your reply, are only valid to those in authority over Raffensberger in 2024

ie this go around Raffensberger doesn't even have to take OMB's call

Yes or No

a reply to: Kallipygywiggy

And deep in your heart, I suspect you know that too.

What I know is that the Democrats have always been against better election security... universal voter ID etc.

Their answer is always that minorities are not smart enough to use a computer or can't find their way to the DMV or Secretary of State to apply for one.

If they verify how many votes were cast before going to the counting areas, how can they possibly find the votes, at the next stage.

Thought I read that all this did was count the ballots and compare it to the total number of cast votes at that location.

Makes for a rough day for the poll workers, but I dont see the problem.