2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumElection officials dismiss scanning machine reporting significant differences from hand count
Chicago Election Fraud proof
Beginning 25min mark to 45 min mark
In one example noted during video, 21 Bernie votes were erased and 49 Hillary votes added to audit tally in order to match machine count. In this one precinct, this change from the actual results accounted for nearly 20% of overall votes cast. The actual tally was 56.7% in Bernie's favor. After count was manipulated by machine he lost with 47.5% of vote. A whopping 18.4% swing.
EDIT: This is probably happening everywhere. The only way anything positive will out of this is if people in Illinois share this with their Delegates and Super Delegates and ask them (politely) to look into it and consider not supporting HC during the Democratic Convention.
( From reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/4fvner/election_official_ousted_for_error_that_purged/ )
dchill
(38,502 posts)so it's working fine!
apcalc
(4,465 posts)We need to go back to paper....
djean111
(14,255 posts)That means, if Hillary is the nominee, my vote is OUT.
questionseverything
(9,656 posts)they say @ 1:17 they have evidence of erasing bernie votes and adding hc votes....lets help them get the boe in court
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)3 for Bernie and 11 for Hillary, so I ADJUST my recount totals to say I counted 3 votes for Bernie and 11 Votes for Hillary.
Do you understand what a SCAM that is. They need to change the law to allow filming of the recount to be publicly aired.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Skwmom
(12,685 posts)Otherwise, what use is there in even auditing the results?
reformist2
(9,841 posts)What the auditors need to do whenever there is a discrepancy, is to get an accurate count from the paper printout, perhaps requiring multiple people counting the same paper printout, and then changing the official results to match the paper results, not the other way around!
This issue is not going away.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)questionseverything
(9,656 posts)this is clear cover up for inaccurate results by democrats
pa28
(6,145 posts)Too bad there is such a wall of denial still over election fraud.
kaleckim
(651 posts)Isn't it odd that whenever there are odd things happening like this, it always benefits one candidate? Has there been any of these types of voting issues that would have likely hurt Clinton? Anyone have a background on statistical probability?
questionseverything
(9,656 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)"There is a 99.9% probability that this anomaly was not due to chance and must have been the result of election fraud."
A quote from the linked article by Richard Charnin
I'm assuming election fraud at local levels by some individuals. Somehow we Americans need our elections removed from LOCAL control. Even local and state elections need OUR Federal Governments control of voting.
questionseverything
(9,656 posts)when they cover up inaccurate results, as we have seen with the chicago board of elections
northernsouthern
(1,511 posts)Can we get the UN to come count our votes for us?
smiley
(1,432 posts)The enthusiasm for Hillary seems to exist only on DU, Kos, and the MSM. I suspect most of this support is bought and paid for. And without a doubt I believe the numbers have been doctored to give her win.
Anyone who thinks that democrats are above this kind of behavior are being naive to the real world of politics.