Cheating in elections is as old as–well, as old as elections. Cheating in elections using paper is as old as the use of paper in elections.  Are we supposed to just assume that cheating in elections using computers is going to be much younger than the use of computers in elections?

I have now come to believe that it is more likely than not that there was electronic cheating in the 2020 election, but this is a defeasible conclusion — meaning that my reasons for thinking this could easily be refuted.

The voting machines America is currently using need to go.  They breed mistrust, and there’s a reason for that: They are not trustworthy. They are also inherently undemocratic.

No, I’m not talking about 2020–well, not as such.  I’m talking about all the past elections since we started using these machines, as well as all the future ones until we come to our senses.

Do the voting systems really use fractions to report votes–like 100 votes, with Biden getting 55% of them?  Do they really report impossible results–like 101 votes, with Biden still getting 55%?  People say that sort of thing, for example Just a Mom here. And some old news called the Ramsland Affidavit here talks about using vote ratios to cheat.

Now it would be a really big deal if the critics of the 2020 election were correct that statistically impossible vote ratios occurred in the vote updates–like a string of new vote-counts from numerous different times and places having the same ratio down to 8 or 9 decimal points.   It’s even somewhat of a big deal if all we have is the fractional reporting in the first place. It’s just weird to convert an addition of 5 votes for Trump and 4 votes for Biden to a fraction instead of just . . . adding them. It’s unsettling. This isn’t how you’re supposed to do elections. One vote is supposed to just be one vote.

While continuing my quest to figure out the 2020 election, I recently did some Google searches to see if anyone had refuted the claims about the statistically impossible ratios from Just a Mom and others.

I didn’t watch the debate Wednesday night, nor was I planning to. Every candidate is going to say they won, and every pundit is going to let you know their preference with their critique. For example, we have this “hot take” from Mary Katherine Ham (whom I like, though I also think she has lost touch with the base).

https://twitter.com/mkhammer/status/1722421008353693934?t=mVwEPeVBazP46s777-yuEA&s=19

I’ll admit that I really didn’t follow this election too much.  Where I live all we had on the ballot was some school board and water district seats where the candidates were essentially carbon copies of each other and some Constitutional Amendments that are worded so carefully that it is nigh impossible for people to vote against them (of course they never talk about how they will pay for all of these things).  For example:

PROPOSITION NUMBER 1 (HJR 126) THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROTECTING THE RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN FARMING, RANCHING, TIMBER PRODUCTION, HORTICULTURE, AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT.

No, I’m not talking about the voting machines, the piles and piles of votes illegally cast, the scads and scads of votes illegally counted, and all the usual stuff.  Some of that stuff had some real problems, and that stuff matters, a lot.  But I’m not talking about that.

I’m talking about the Twitter Files.