2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumOdds Hillary Won Without Widespread Fraud: 1 in 77 Billion Says Berkeley, Stanford Studies
excerpts:
"Standford University researcher Rodolfo Cortes Barragan to a subset of the data found that the probability of the huge discrepancies of which nearly all are in favor of Hillary Clinton by a huge margin was statistically impossible and that the probability of this this happening was is 1 in 77 billion.
"Namely that Hillarys win was could have only been possible a result of widespread election fraud."
" the data found that the probability of the huge discrepancies of which nearly all are in favor of Hillary Clinton by a huge margin was statistically impossible and that the probability of this this happening was is 1 in 77 billion.
"Furthermore, the researchers found that the election fraud only occurred in places where the voting machines were hackable and that did not keep an paper trail of the ballots."
"In these locations Hillary won by massive margins."
"On the other hand, in locations that were not hackable and did keep paper trails of the ballots Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton."
http://alexanderhiggins.com/stanford-berkley-study-1-77-billion-chance-hillary-won-primary-without-widespread-election-fraud/
Pick it apart all you want but it is the truth. Four studies..........the same truth. Another stolen election and the winners of the fraudulent election are gleeful. Democracy has a problem. My opinion of course.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,211 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)But, given the inevitable outcome of the nomination process, this post is not helpful to the overall goals of both Senator Sanders and Secretary Clinton supporters, which is to deny the Presidency of the GOP (specifically, the grifter and overall scumbag that goes by the moniker Donald Drumpf)...
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)Trump must be stopped. THIS should be our #1 goal. *I'm REALLY not happy that Senator Sanders didn't prevail*, but my pragmatism directs me to a shared, common goal going towards November 8th.
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The attitude that "As long as we win, no matter how much we cheat", is not a true democratic value. No one should be proposing any such thing.
The programmers of the vote counting software now control the vote counts. Some people are fine with that?
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)A very simple goal. We will have time after the election to straighten out the inter-party stuff.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Shows you have no clue about this and you have not done any research, so none of your words are worth considering when it comes to this matter.
Election fraud is what gave us GWB. And still today we have people thinking it doesn't happen? FTS.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)Your hostility and personal attack, in the face of what is probably the most IMPORTANT election in our lifetimes, is neither helpful to both Senator Sanders or Secretary Clinton.
Save your hostility for Drumpf supporters, my friend! We're all on the same side, despite how the sausage was processed.
votesparks
(1,288 posts)and everyone who fought and died for an actual democracy.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)My Dad was in WW2 and fought in the Battle of the Bulge. If you think you're in a position to lecture ME about "insulting veterans" you're sorely mistaken.
Scurry off now...
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #36)
Post removed
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)...just, wow.
Pastiche423
(15,406 posts)Don't you get it? There has been election fraud recorded in ELEVEN states.
There are two huge lawsuits already filed regard the ELECTION FRAUD.
There are also state election fraud lawsuits.
This election has been a FRAUD.
And you're cool with that?
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)...and I fucking GET it!
OUR party has been corrupted by ugly, fucking politics.
Triangulation, "third way", DLC, ALL of that horseshit, has robbed us of what we were in the New Deal and the Great Society.
But, guess what? We're facing a danger of which I have, in my 45 years of being a Democrat, NEVER EVEN FATHOMED. This Drumpf clown is a danger to our very way of lives.
*Yes, our day-to-day lives*.
I sincerely, ideally, would like a different outcome than the one we have been dealt. But it is what it is and we need to focus, like a laser beam, on defeating this populist fascist.
Many years ago, I read "It Can't Happen Here". It seemed, to me, a quaint tale of a long-bygone era in human history (even though it proved to be prescient afterwards).
We're at the same precipice, that Sinclair Lewis predicted, again.
*drops mike*
Pastiche423
(15,406 posts)Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)*drops mike again*
Amaril
(1,267 posts)sweeping this issue under the carpet. That's what we keep doing every time something happens, and we're fucking running out of carpets!
........but this post literally made me
Well played, sir / madam. Well played.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)kstewart33
(6,551 posts)The website looks like a political version of The Onion.
If the study was credible, it would be all over the web.
In less than 48 hours, nonsense like this will be banned.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)snot
(10,538 posts)kerry-is-my-prez
(8,133 posts)instead of trying to call our Dem candidate "illegitimate." I personally have very little faith in the caucuses and open primaries that Bernie won. A caucus is no way to pick a candidate IMO.
randome
(34,845 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)kerry-is-my-prez
(8,133 posts)vdogg
(1,384 posts)What the actual fuck?!?! What in the world? So some random dude on an unknown/obscure network puts forth a non-peer reviewed study and we're supposed to take this as Gospel? There are so many better things you can be doing with your life right now. Go peddle this stuff over at JPR. You'll find a far more gullible and accepting audience over there.
http://alexanderhiggins.com/
Literally EVERY single headline on this sites front page is a different, unfounded Hillary conspiracy. Yeah, this is a reputable source.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)You consider your time well spent condoning election fraud?
If you had done much research you wouldn't be posting attacks on those who have.
MH1
(17,600 posts)I'm gonna fill that in with, you would be posting from reputable sources, not hit sites.
Don't deflect the question about your sources to an attack the person for something they didn't state. Come up with good sources, they (and I) might be all ears. Until then, not so much.
(As you know by now, that "Stanford Study", for one, is no such thing. Posting drivel detracts from worthy points that could be made.)
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)I don't think so, if you had you wouldn't be harping on me, you'd be harping on the e-voting that has been proven, time and again, to not only be prone to glitches, but complete miscounts.
You are not all ears, so don't even try that with me. Go read the DU Election Reform Forum as a place to start research. Although you will find many deniers in there, there are many who have researched this matter.
Just remember how bush got elected twice and then you'll know what's bullshit and what's Truth.
kerry-is-my-prez
(8,133 posts)reputable sources. Your article is only as good as your sources.
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)please make this an OP.
obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)apcalc
(4,465 posts)The guy cook this crap up in his basement?
Too funny.
BootinUp
(47,186 posts)brush
(53,851 posts)bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to even post these lies lying ascribed to Stanford and Berkeley researchers.
"Namely that Hillarys win was could have only been possible a result of widespread election fraud."
This hostile propaganda is refuted completely by every reputable political statistical group, who all predicted that her great advantages would cause her to win the primary by substantial margins, no fraud of any kind needed. Through most of the primaries it has been increasingly impossible for Sanders to catch up, his chances of winning always only theoretical at best.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)msongs
(67,441 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)The MIC never bends any politician over for Military contracts! They can just move their manufacturing to another state and blame said politician for the job losses.
And then when said Politician who opposed the war votes to support the troops, he's also guilty of voting for war.
It's all just very simple, the Government and the MIC are wholly honest entities that would never do anything wrong or lie about anything! EVER!
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)or maybe the Bilderberg group, assisted (as usual) by the Masons and the NWO troops. I know it's true - Alex Jones told me so.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)Faux pas
(14,690 posts)TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)This has been covered a dozen times already in GDP. It's nonsense.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)one might consider that one is making a point, just not the point that one thought one was making.
Further, using things like self-selected "favorability rating" polls as some kind of proof of voter fraud, while pretending that real-world things like mail-in ballots don't exist, is rather ridiculous.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)I'm not calling you a liar. I'm calling the idiot who wrote the article a liar. It's complete nonsense, based on nothing but conjecture and distraction.
It's also not a Stanford study - it's a grad student who threw a bunch of nonsense together and called it a day. Don't be so gullible.
Squinch
(51,004 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)Squinch
(51,004 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)No luck!
yardwork
(61,703 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)MadBadger
(24,089 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)GO BLUE DAVILLS!!!
yardwork
(61,703 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Hav
(5,969 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)It's
http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-1/
Hopefully someone else will explain why this source is no longer considered trustworthy on DU.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)no desent against their chosen one or the word is fuck or or any other insult. The irregularities WERE RAMPANT in this primary yet those on here will only turn their heads and go ahead with their one sided belief that everything is fine. It is not fine and will not be fine for millions of Americans who now have their eyes and ears wide open to the corruption in our voting system and the Oligarchy's control over our Country.
hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)BBV was revealed right here as film flam back in 2004, when DU was DU.
TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)dating back to 2004.
Here's an archive thread about her:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x340188
Enjoy.
Note: bailey77 in those threads was determined to be (more likely than not) Bev Harris herself trying to do damage control.
hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)dlwickham
(3,316 posts)and I could have gone much longer without seeing it again
that was a nasty time on here
MattP
(3,304 posts)100%
yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)still_one
(92,394 posts)when the voting is finished, based on the current lead, distribution in f the votes, and remaining votes to count
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts).......counting and including delegates that now AP seems to think was wrong. It was very wrong and intentional to suppress the vote...but you as a HRC supporter probably don't mind that.
still_one
(92,394 posts)ballots left to count, and while the results for the presidential primary will narrow, the distribution and votes coming in make it very unlikely that Bernie would win, though based on the proportional allocation of delegates he will gain a few delegates, but it appears Hillary will still win the state
As to the view that the votes were suppressed, that announcement was made after the polls closed, so there was no suppression of votes
For vote by mail the ballot must be postmarked or delivered to any polling place by June 7th, and arrive in the county office up to 3 days after the election
This is made very clear at the SOS website, and voter pamphlet every registered voter should receive
TwilightZone
(25,479 posts)Source? They have said nothing of the sort.
They can count to 2383. They did so and reported it.
This isn't difficult.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Hillary had already won before CA voted. The AP is capable of counting delegates and she'd crossed the 2383 threshold. And your assertion that the AP now thinks it was wrong is nonsense.
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)Tarc
(10,476 posts)See, it's easy to pluck big numbers out of one's backside.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)Tarc
(10,476 posts)I mean, if this alleged "FRAUD" is so widespread and rampant, his legal team must have investigated themselves and filed in court to challenge the results of one of the states he lost?
So by all means, provide evidence of these challenges. We'll wait...
PS - Yes, Arizona's GOP closed polling stations, and I believe both camps filed challenges there...but that hurt Hillary more, given her strong Latinx support
obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)It's actually one in a quillion zillion willion.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)apcalc
(4,465 posts)Totally unreliable...shown time and time again...
Unbelieveable any mathematician would rely on them to conduct a 'study'....
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)he's in the psychology field.
And, from what the internet says, he's quite the Bernie fan.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)To all the people who say it's not possible, remember when the GOP told us it was not possible in 2002 with Max Clelland in Georgia and with John Kerry in 2004 in Ohio? Why is your reaction so different now?
glennward
(989 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Derp
realmirage
(2,117 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Pure tinfoil hat bullshit.
LexVegas
(6,094 posts)Hekate
(90,793 posts)Last I checked, the counting was proceeding as normal, and none of the statewide office or national office results had changed, percentage-wise. BERNIE STILL LOST BY 11+% IN CALIFORNIA.
But y'all carry on.
Response to bkkyosemite (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)So they just, lied.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)It is the study you posted.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)LenaBaby61
(6,977 posts)But that tin-foil house is hilarious
And quite fitting of this thread.
Now as I think about it, did Hillary win ANY primary states? Maybe Sen. Sanders won 'em ALL--even the Southern states which were too conservative to compete in.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Hillary held no rallies in any state or city ... it was all green screen.
And the voting booths ... all done with Minecraft.
obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Tin foil house. Fantastic!
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... crazy being posted in OPs these days is making it harder and harder for me to keep up.
I fear I'm going to have to find a picture of the entire Earth covered in tin foil in the not too distant future.
Rex
(65,616 posts)If this is true, then it should be easy to reproduce the results.
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Unless you are going to tell me the world is bought and paid for?
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Thanks, I thought not. Like I said, this should be all over the place is true...don't get mad at me for pointing out the obvious.
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)And that America is an oligachy, I don't give two fucks about a conversation with someone like that. You and yours are going to get exactly what you have coming. Too bad the rest of us will be dragged further down with you. What's sad is you really think they care about you, the depth of that cluelessness is truly sad and pathetic. #block
Rex
(65,616 posts)Was it when Bernie Sanders decided to run for POTUS? Just the facts, please.
Oh right, you ran off to block me or whatever...
LenaBaby61
(6,977 posts)That Sen. Sanders didn't give a damn about early in the campaign and said so during one of their first debates?
But then as soon the handwriting was on the wall as in Hillary Clinton was moving on and become the party nominee the emails 'suddenly' became important? Would that be the same Sen. Sanders whose now looking forward to working with presumptive Dem nominee Hillary Clinton--so they can take down Donald tRump?
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)Of Intel officers in unsecured emails to a person the white rejected as an aid. The same emails under criminal investigation. Ya know the ones hacked by Russia and China.
THOSE EMAILS.
LenaBaby61
(6,977 posts)The same emails that Sen. Sanders said in front of the world that even he didn't give a damn about then
obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)Beacool
(30,251 posts)Hilary lost by a hair in 2008, but I don't recall all these endless conspiracy theories.
Sanders lost by a large margin. Denying reality is not healthy.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)radical noodle
(8,013 posts)Alexander Higgins is a well known Sanders' supporter.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Snopes did not dispute the allegation of election fraud.
http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)That speaks volumes for their (lack of) credibility.
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)Which is to say - weren't the odds of her winning always better than 50/50?
BreakfastClub
(765 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)One of the main premises is that we must accept our current reality if we ever hope to move past it. It could really help some BSS deal with all the negativity that they continue to spew against Hillary on behalf of Sen Sanders. The current political reality, even tho very painful for some BSS, is that Hillary is the Democratic nominee and most likely will be President.
creeksneakers2
(7,476 posts)to their lib college professors. If they had they would know that correlation is not causation. There could be a million explanations for why Hillary did better in machine voting states.
Making judgments based on exit polls is wrong too.
http://www.thenation.com/article/reminder-exit-poll-conspiracy-theories-are-totally-baseless/
senz
(11,945 posts)I see you're enduring the usual abuse from the usual suspects and hope it doesn't bother you too much.
MaeScott
(878 posts)spooky3
(34,476 posts)tom-servo
(185 posts)... to convince the US public that one candidate is better than another, even though one candidate is manufactured and one is real. It's legal fraud. There may have been actual fraud, but I think it would have been used judiciously by experts.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)obamanut2012
(26,137 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)Nor do I think it ever will be.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)That's right
Response to bkkyosemite (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed