Isn’t it ODD?

 The only states where (significant numbers of) Absentee/Early votes are being “found” are those where the race hangs in the balance




and AZ.

(There are rumors of GA, but nothing substantiated…yet)

Funny how that works, innit?

I am not wanting a revolution-like war….people DIE in a war….but this is looking more and more like a reason to have one. 

I’m not so sure I can stand by this time.


The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything

Joseph Stalin

9 thoughts on “Isn’t it ODD?

  1. Indeed, very strange how the states that take the longest to count end up being the ones that decide the result in the end. Similarly, it seems odd that the states with the closest races are the hardest to call before nearly all of the votes have been counted. Can't figure out why that would be…

    (CA, MD, MS, NJ, UT all have far more votes outstanding than the ones you listed, it's just that there's very little uncertainty as to their ultimate outcomes)

  2. I am going to repeat something I posted in a previous comment. Both campaigns have observers in the vote validating and counting locations. While the trump campaign is suing MI and PA to stop the vote counting process, I am yet to hear any of their observers cite specific incidents of wrongdoing or impropriety.

    I saw a tweet from Richard Engel of NBC News that said he had just seen a Fox News reporter do a report lamenting the lack of transparency in the vote counting process from INSIDE a vote counting location. Sort of sums up the madness.


  3. It's not the vote COUNTING, Pete…but rather the fact that votes keep appearing…..and that their composition (percentage for Biden VS Trump) are so statistically improbable.
    Add in that Pennsylvania is allowing votes well past the due date, and votes that have an illegible or missing postmark, and it appears to be….wrong.
    Plus the fact that missing or illegible (or non matching) signatures are still being counted.
    And once these votes are in the mix, they can't be singled out as late or non-matching or otherwise ineligible….and they are overwhelmingly for Biden.

    Even if it is on the up and up, it appears to be full of impropriety.

  4. B,

    Not sure why you're so surprised that the votes being counted now are slanting heavily towards Biden. The only votes being counted now in GA and PA are absentee ballots. Absentee ballots were expanded due to the pandemic. Democrat-leaning folks showed more concern for the pandemic than Republican-leaning folks. It just makes sense that there would be more Democratic absentee ballots than Republican ones.

    Additionally, the PA Sec. of State asked the PA State Legislature to allow her office to start counting absentee ballots before election day because she knew they were receiving a ton of them. The State Legislature (Republican controlled) rejected that request, so PA didn't start counting all the absentee ballots until election day. That is why the process is taking so long.

    As I said in a previous comment, all absentee ballots arriving after close of business, Nov. 3rd, are being sequestered (thus not counted) due to pending litigation.

    Finally, are you concerned about NC and Ohio? NC is counting Nov. 3rd-postmarked ballots that arrive by 5 pm, Nov. 12. Ohio is accepting ballots with a Nov. 3rd postmark for 10 days after the election.


  5. Pete: You should perhaps take a Statistics course. The votes being counted now (the "late" ones) are highly slanted towards Biden. Slanted so heavily that it is statistically unlikely that they are not fraudulent.

    Further, you claim that vote counts take more time to be tabulated in "Blue" areas…why is that? Why does it take more time to count a "Blue" vote than a "Red" one? Texas, and even Florida, could count 100% of their votes in less than 24 hours. Why are the folks in "blue" precincts and counties in Pennsylvania and other states so incompetent that it takes them 3 or more days to do a count?

    Further, why are they not sequestering the votes that are suspect? Those with non matching signatures and/or missing or illegible postmarks so they can be reviewed before being certified? Once they are mixed with the "regular" votes, they can never be unmixed, and there fore this throws the legitimacy of the election results into great doubt. It COULD be incompetency, but it appears more to be fraudulent action. it would be simple to keep those suspect votes sequestered if honesty and transparency were the goal, but that is not being some, is it?

  6. Reference your 1st paragraph. Would a statistics course tell me that fraud is rampant in all the rural GA counties that are so heavily slanted to Trump. One rural county in GA voted over 90% for Trump. Most are in the 70-80%. How can that be? It must be fraud!

    Trump told (all) voters to not vote by mail. Republicans listened. Democrats didn't.

    Re. your second paragraph. More time to count in blue states? CA, MA, MN, NY, OR, WA are all blue states that counted as fast as FL and TX. The five states still counting are AZ, GA, NC, NV and PA. You're high if you consider AZ and especially GA blue states. And NC is at best purple. Additionally, all 5 remaining states were not allowed to start counting their absentee ballots until election day. FL did start counting their absentee ballots early, I'm sure to avoid a replay of the 2000 election. Also, cities take longer to count because they have more votes than rural areas. Two examples: first, Maricopa County, AZ (Phoenix) has over 62% of AZ's population; second, Clark County, NV (Las Vegas) has over 70% of NV's population. More votes take longer to count.

    The states that are taking the longest are the most highly contested ones, not red ones or blue ones.

    3rd paragraph. Where are you getting your info, because they are sequestering. Example: an official from Allegheny County, PA (Pittsburgh) said that as of 3 pm yesterday, they had approximately 35,000 absentee ballots left to count. 29,000 were because they were damaged or in some other condition that made them unable to go through the ballot readers. 6,000 had questionable signatures, addresses, postmarks, etc. Additionally, there were less than 500 ballots that had been received after close of business on Nov. 3rd.

    Look, I and others (in other forums) have presented you with ample information that makes it clear that voter fraud in the US is EXTREMELY rare.

    If you can't overcome your addiction to conspiracy theories and your paranoia, that is a "you" problem. Good luck with it.


  7. Thanks for your comments Pete.

    If the shoe were on the other foot, and tens (or hundreds) of thousands of votes for Trump suddenly appeared JUST as he was about to be declared the winner in that state, then you'd be as disturbed at that as I am with the current events.

    I find your excuse as to the delay in vote counting to be dubious at best. Yes, more votes take longer to count…except that they have more counting machines, as well. If it were a 2:1 delay, Urban vs rural, I would buy your story. It is more like 10:1 time wise, so I cannot buy the theory.

    Look: One oddity is by itself merely an anomaly…2 is a strange coincidence. Three becomes suspicious. 4 or more…well, that starts to smell of fraud.

    We have more than 4 oddities in these "contested" states.

    Just because you want your guy to win is no reason for you to embrace the lack of integrity in our election system. Seriously, the fact that the apparent fraud is happening should frighten and anger you, no matter who benefits.

  8. B, the shoe has been on the other foot. Remember 2000, when Bush beat Gore by a vote tally of 5 to 4. I don't look at that election as stolen, but I do think it was not allowed to run its course. I was certainly frustrated, but I didn't believe that the entire US election process had been destroyed. I also knew that I would be able to vote again in 2004, 2008, 2012, etc.

    And I could ask you: Do you want your guy to win so bad that you are willing to trash the integrity of our election system with unfounded claims of rampant voter fraud?

    B, I have produced researched information and specific examples of why the election is proceeding as it is. Is this info and data complete? Of course not. I am not an election expert or specialist. And although I'm not busy with a multi-million dollar lawsuit, I do have a life that requires my time. (And at this point, I don't believe there is any amount of data that will change your mind.)

    Now, what have you produced? Nebulous claims of hundreds of thousands of votes appearing out of nowhere? Unspecified oddities? Show me one claim made by a Trump campaign official who has spent time as an observer (not Trump's twitter account, not Hannity) of illegal or illegitimate ballots. I'll help you get started. In NV, when the Trump campaign advised that it was going to file suit, they produced a woman who claimed that her mail-in ballot was stolen from her mail box, and when she went to vote in person, the state said they had received her mail-in ballot. State officials say they had found her ballot and it appeared to have her signature, which leads to one of three conclusions: someone forged her signature well enough to fool ballot readers, she is confused or she is lying. The state investigation is ongoing, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and tally this one as voter fraud. That's one vote! By the way, that was the only proof they provided of rampant fraud their suit claimed.

    Midwest Chick had posted an article about a 170-year-old who cast an absentee ballot in MI. Most everything I've seen online dubs this claim as dubious at best, but, again, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. That's two votes! Out of almost 160 million!

    You cite statistical theory, but it appears you are assuming that absentee ballot percentages will match any given locale's overall vote percentage. Here in GA, that is mistaken logic. Even in counties that voted 70-80+% for Trump overall, absentee ballots averaged 60+% towards Biden. Democrats requested more absentee ballots (where available) than Republicans in overwhelming numbers and turned them in vastly greater numbers than Republicans.

    Until you provide some concrete data supporting your position, I believe this conversation, much like our discussion on race, has come to an impasse.


Comments are closed.