Brand new website that covers all the basics of machine-free voting! http://machinefreevoting.com

The Plan 🇺🇸

#elections #electioncrime #wmd #electionfraud #americafirst #causeofamerica #coa #election2020 #elections202

Elections are complicated. Some processes are essential and others are detrimental. Some are a little bit of both. For example, the logic and accuracy test is both necessary and inadequate. We can't skip it, but we can't rely on it either.

You should be able to argue both sides of the debate.

Previously I shared something explaining how logic and accuracy tests are a joke. And they are. But until we change the process, we rely on that test to check the programming of the election definition files.

There should always be someone there from your team to observe the L&A test. It may get boring after a few times of seeing it, but if it doesn't pass, someone needs to be there to make sure proper steps are taken.

Our election, our responsibility.

What is The People's Audit Cooking Up Next?

The analytics that we have created in just the last month are breathtaking.

We can now catch mass address flips as as they happen instead of having to wait for the address to flip back.

We can now see not only the list maintenance patterns of every county, but also how they effect each party. That includes mass additions/activations from any party.

But the next report that is coming will change the game entirely.

Be sure to tune in next week ;)

I have been overwhelmed with gratitude for the outpouring of donations in just the last 24hrs. It really means a lot and reinvigorates me to put in the long hours this solution needs.

We will win this war.

If you feel you can contribute, your help is very appreciated as we are working on adding more states.
https://the-peoples-audit.org/donate/

As a reminder, the four videos we did which show you how to audit an election though public records can all be found on our rumble channel by clicking HERE.

Voter Turnout Trends

Anyone interested in doing a formal voter turnout analysis based on publicly available data found on this Wikipedia page?

A cursory look already suggest this would be very fruitful.

1) Establish a linear baseline trend between 1952 and 2000 for both voter turnout and voting-eligible population (VEP). (After WWII and before the "internet age")

2) Calculate the z-score for each election year between (and including) 1952 to 2000, taking into account the trend.

3) Use the 1952-2000 baseline trend to calculate the z-scores for 2004 to 2020.

———

Based on this simple analysis 1992, 2004 and 2020 stick out (2020 is in a league of its own, but relatively speaking 2004 was pretty bad).

People who deny election fraud in 2020, will have to explain why so many books were written after the 2004 to expose election fraud... most of these books were written by Democrats.

This simple trend analysis clearly identifies 2004 and 2020 as massive outliers. How can you claim 2004 was fraudulent but 2020 was not when the z-score for 2020 looks twice as large as 2004?

———

Is there anyone interested in doing the formal analysis and sharing their results?

KN

Here is a taste.

The trend is very linear and "robust" over a 50 year time span... what changed in 2004 and especially in 2020?

(As if this alone was not convincing enough the trend for VEP between 1980 and 2020 is even more robust... something isn't adding up and we are not doing complicated maths here...)

RFK Jr. on the 2004 election fraud. (Old article)
It's not just one party who commits election fraud, nor is there only one victim.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2006/06/01/was-2004-election-stolen

Here is another one from RFK Jr. in 2008 talking about how the GOP targets minority voters and disenfranchises them by challenging their registrations. It also goes into HAVA and some other topics of interest.

Read both articles and take them with a grain of salt.

At the same time, some of these old articles sound an awful lot like what we experience still and are some of the same accusations we hear today.

Just sharing because I thought it was interesting due to the author being a presidential candidate.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2008/10/28/drinking-acorn-kool-aid-how-cries-voter-fraud-cover-gop-elections-theft

Please ignore the typos. I can't edit a poll apparently.

At the farmers market a couple weeks ago I noticed a FairVote booth there. They are one of the organizations promoting ranked choice voting and are in several states. There are others as well.

Just because you may have been lucky enough this last legislative session to avoid RCV, these people pushing it will not give up. They have a longer plan.

This is the simplest way I can explain why RCV is not a good idea. It completely eliminates the idea of one person, one vote.

It's time to start getting your plan rolling for 2024. The clock is ticking and it will only speed up from here.

Sit down with your team and re-evaluate the game plan. Your plan should be unique to your state's needs.

We need to prepare for everything we can, because they will still throw us some curve balls which we will have to adapt to on the spot. That will be easier if the other stuff is already thought out.

Run through the scenarios and prepare accordingly.

(This is not a complete list.)

Washington State changed what it means to conduct a recount. I suggest you all keep an eye out for small changes to the state administrative code in your state (and/or election law) that would change the meaning of recounts and audits. This happened a few years back, so it's likely coming to your state soon.

To clarify, they aren't recounting the votes. They are counting the undervotes, overvotes, and write ins. If those match the machine's original results, recount is over. No actual votes are counted for the candidates in the race. I'm not kidding. It's a joke.

Looks like the FEC is seeking public comment, stating it's "an opportunity to identify any issues or concerns with the report filing process, as well as potential solutions to those concerns.

The Commission is also seeking comments on how to improve its website, including the site’s organization, substance, ease of access to information and report filing."

Sounds like an opportunity to improve the twisted and confusing reporting currently provided by their website.

It also appears that public comments include personal information, so only provide what you want everyone to see.

https://www.fec.gov/updates/comments-sought-on-improvements-to-report-filing-process-and-fec-website/