PD

Long time listener, first time caller. Don’t follow me unless you have actually posted a comment. otherwise afaik bot.

[PD @pd3three]

@vegasstarfish 30 dollars. And I would draw a big heart and put thank You!

[PD @pd3three]

@thesnawn @marcel_aromeh Surety bond is not for a public defender.

[PD @pd3three]

@ChristieFL88 @Mappy6984 Jesus was gay.

[Vivia Johnson @vivia_johnson]

@NHnewsUpdate @mariashriver This RFKJR?
https://t.co/zf4VLq4u5l

[PD @pd3three]

@MilleyMich39119 He needs to see a barber.

[PD @pd3three]

@NHnewsUpdate @mariashriver You should read that article below. Do a little bit of research before you claim that RFK Junior is not a womanizer.

[PD @pd3three]

@AAll1776 @TheOnionKnight @EvanRobertsWFAN He made it about himself. Why is he even there?

[Caring Guy💙🇺🇸🌈✌🏻 @caringguy1957]

That is not what “statistically impossible” means.

Raman passing Pratt was not statistically impossible. It was not even a statistical anomaly.

There were still uncounted ballots. Those ballots were counted. More of them went to Raman than Pratt. That is how counting works.

Pratt was ahead in the earlier count. Raman gained ground as later-counted mail ballots were added. Reports showed she moved narrowly ahead by about 3,000 votes, with more ballots still being processed.

You can dislike that. You can be surprised by that. But surprise is not statistics.

A statistical impossibility would require actual math showing the result could not reasonably occur under the known ballot universe. You have not shown that. You just declared it.

“Late-counted ballots favored a Democratic city councilmember over a Republican in Los Angeles” is not evidence of fraud. It is one of the least shocking election developments imaginable.

Evidence of fraud is evidence of fraud.

Not understanding statistics is not evidence.

[Just Jack @7Veritas4]

Hard to believe Spencer Pratt lost the election despite having no experience, being highly unpopular and running in a 4:1 democratic stronghold.

Makes no sense.

[Stephen Richer @stephen_richer]

Sigh. Why won't anyone do research before posting?

Responding to your six points.

1. Yes. It is legal. States have different laws.

Still has to come from a registered voter, has to be returned in the return envelope assigned to that voter, there is no evidence of mass mail theft, and it has to have the voter's signature, which is checked (part of why it takes a long time).

2. California verifies identity through return envelope barcode and signature verification -- as is done for many financial and legal instruments.

This is the same way it's done in Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, etc.

3. Unattended drop boxes. You do realize that every USPS box is an "unattended drop box," right?

That's why it's nice that all Californians can track their mail ballots. And so too can the election officials.

4. Homeless regularly paid to vote. I'll settle for 5 proven examples in recent elections. Also, homeless are allowed to register and vote.

5. You're just pointing out that California is an "all mail" state and that almost everyone votes by mail as a result. Yes. And that's part of why it takes so long.

California does voter list maintenance. Otherwise it would have a laundry list of lawsuits under the NVRA.

And, for better or worse, you can't remove somebody from voter rolls just because he doesn't vote. So if you, e.g., move out of an apartment, but don't tell the registrar, and don't fill out change of address with USPS, then a mail ballot is still showing up to your address. And if the new resident simply throws it in the trash, then you're not taken off the voter rolls just because you didn't return a ballot.

Now, if you're suggesting that states should share information with each other, such that they know when somebody registers in a different state, then I agree with you.

That's why California should join ERIC. And it's why it's a shame that some states have left ERIC in recent years. That's bad for voter list maintenance.

6. This is just comparing apples to oranges. And you can easily Google the differences in the two systems.

But first, as a factual predicate, you might want to be more careful. I'd suggest you start with this New York Times article: "Why Do Elections in India Take So Long?"

https://t.co/FxLClkvYrv

[PD @pd3three]

@RubytomTam19276 @jacobsoboroff 2000 mules , part 2? You know what happened to that nonsense, right?

[PD @pd3three]

@FilmThePoliceLA You’re right, but of the three I picked Raman. Bass has done Absolutely nothing for Los Angeles. LA politics have always been a cesspool.

[PD @pd3three]

@SouthDallasFood Yeah, it’s delicious but veal makes me too sad.

[PD @pd3three]

@dochonda @IRMettler @DerrickEvans4WV You let memes do your thinking for you. that might be the problem.

[PD @pd3three]

@grok @missyannnn1 @ladyperpetuall Exactly.

[PD @pd3three]

@grok @missyannnn1 @ladyperpetuall Grok . As moronic as ever. Why would anyone pay for it?

[PD @pd3three]

@IRMettler @DerrickEvans4WV lol. I wish you luck in that effort . Turns out we didn’t want former reality tv villain, Spencer “Mayan apocalypse” Pratt on the ballot. How was this accomplished? Voting! Votes are not counted in a backroom in a partisan effort. Trump really got ahold of your brain.

[PD @pd3three]

@est_MCMLXXVIII @atrupar … prove it.

[PD @pd3three]

@Tron5pt0 @damintoell @GrageDustin But those numbers check out? If the younger people are waiting to send their ballots (procrastination!), that’s when the surge comes in. Anyway, there is no plot afoot. The general election will not include the former reality tv villain( speaking of not a serious person)

[PD @pd3three]

@Tron5pt0 @damintoell @GrageDustin She’s winning! Because of voting. Pratt didn’t get so many votes . Because he’s a maga moron. Surprising he got as many as he did, really. Got me on the spelling though! Zing!