Venezuela Shows What an Actual Stolen Election Looks Like
Whether it’s Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rhetoric or Hillary Clinton’s claim that Trump was not a “legitimate president,” unsubstantiated allegations of election fraud are unseemly.

Now that it seems like every single national election cycle in this country is suffused with accusations of fraud and malfeasance, it's worth looking to a country experiencing an actual stolen election to provide some sense of clarity.
Venezuelans went to the polls on Sunday, July 28. The incumbent president, Nicolás Maduro, stood for a third consecutive six-year term against Edmundo González, the country's former ambassador to Argentina.
Early the following day, the government announced that with 80 percent of votes counted, Maduro had prevailed with 51.2 percent of the vote to González's 44.2 percent.
To Maduro's opponents, this seemed fishy: Polls taken earlier in July and collected by the Americas Society and the Council of the Americas showed Maduro polling between 12 percent and 25 percent, with González comfortably ahead, anywhere from 59 percent to 72 percent. An exit poll conducted by Edison Research at 100 polling locations corroborated this, finding that González outperformed Maduro by more than 2 to 1, capturing 65 percent to Maduro's 31 percent.
In other words, the official government results suggest that Maduro at least doubled, and potentially quadrupled, his support literally overnight—at a time when the country is still experiencing an economic crisis marked by dire poverty, hyperinflation, and millions of Venezuelans fleeing the country.
Others have echoed this skepticism. "There are clear signs that the election results announced by Venezuela's National Electoral Council do not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people as it was expressed at the ballot box on July 28," U.S. National Security Council Spokesperson Adrienne Watson said in a statement.
"We have serious concerns that this result does not reflect the will and the votes of the Venezuelan people," a senior U.S. State Department official said after the results were announced. "We call for the immediate publication of detailed precinct-level polling to ensure accountability."
Private organizations sounded the alarm, as well.
"Venezuela's 2024 presidential election did not meet international standards of electoral integrity and cannot be considered democratic," announced a July 30 statement from the Carter Center, which had observers in the country on election day. "The Carter Center cannot verify or corroborate the results of the election declared by the National Electoral Council (CNE), and the electoral authority's failure to announce disaggregated results by polling station constitutes a serious breach of electoral principles." The statement did allow that its observers "noted the desire of the Venezuelan people to participate in a democratic election process," but "their efforts were undermined by the CNE's complete lack of transparency in announcing the results."
There is mounting evidence of government chicanery to secure Maduro's reelection. For example, González was not even the opposition's first choice of candidate: Former lawmaker María Corina Machado received more than 90 percent of primary votes in October 2023, but Maduro's government banned her from seeking office for 15 years. After the election, six masked assailants broke into and ransacked Machado's campaign headquarters. Machado now says she is in hiding, "fearing for my life, my freedom, and that of my fellow countrymen from the dictatorship led by Nicolás Maduro."
And even though the government has not released precinct-level voting data, the opposition has taken up the task itself.
Venezuela uses electronic voting machines which print out a tally at the end of the day. The tallies are signed by poll workers and observers, and the political parties are allowed to take a copy. Each tally sheet also has a QR code for authentication.
Even before the election, the opposition enlisted thousands of volunteers to collect tallies for verification. The results of the independent count are published online. As of this writing, with more than 25,000 tallies counted—representing 83.5 percent of all ballots cast—González received 67 percent to Maduro's 30 percent.

Over the weekend, The Washington Post reported that it was able to independently verify "23,720 of the tally sheets that were scanned and posted online by the opposition," constituting 79 percent of the total vote tallies, and determined the exact same 67–30 split. "Even if Maduro won every vote on the remaining 21 percent, assuming a similar turnout," the Post determined, "he would still fall more than 1.5 million votes shy of González." The research firm AltaVista also conducted an exit poll using 5 percent of total vote tallies as collected by the opposition; the results similarly show González with 66.12 percent and Maduro with 31.39 percent.
There are more granular problems with the government's position, too. Daniel Di Martino, a Ph.D student in Economics and a graduate fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, observed on X that in the government's official results, the percentages all end in zeroes at the hundredths position—clean and convenient, but statistically, a near impossibility. "They picked the share of the vote and they multiplied it times the number of votes," Di Martino surmised.
The likelihood of the Venezuelan election "result" rounding exactly as they reported is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 (1 trillion).
The Venezuelan socialist regime is INCOMPETENT even at election fraud. They picked the share of the vote and they multiplied it times the number of votes. pic.twitter.com/O225QOAXe2
— Daniel Di Martino ???????????????? (@DanielDiMartino) July 31, 2024
In other words, it's increasingly evident that the Venezuelan government cooked the books to achieve its desired outcome. So it's useful to contrast the Venezuelan election with some rhetoric that U.S. politicians have used in recent years to claim massive vote fraud when the results simply don't go their way.
Most prominently, former President Donald Trump obstinately refused to believe that he had not won reelection in 2020, filing numerous fruitless lawsuits and cozying up to whoever pushed the most asinine theories. To this day, Trump still insists—against all evidence and common sense—that he was robbed of an electoral victory.
Many Republicans followed his lead, echoing his stolen-election allegations and submitting bills that would make voting more difficult. In the 2022 midterm elections, garnering Trump's endorsement seemed to hinge on whether you proclaimed that the previous election was stolen. In fact, policing voter fraud has long been a Republican hobbyhorse, even though actual instances of voter fraud are vanishingly few.
Republicans are not the only major U.S. political party to engage in election skepticism. Since losing the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton has repeatedly floated the idea that Trump's victory was not on the up-and-up. In November 2017, Clinton told Mother Jones that "there are lots of questions about its legitimacy," primarily as a result of a Russian disinformation campaign that "wasn't just influencing voters—it was determining the outcome." (To be clear, this campaign largely consisted of targeted Facebook ads and coverage on the now-defunct news channel Russia Today.)
In a September 2019 CBS News interview, Clinton said that Trump "knows he's an illegitimate president" because of "the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories"—a grab bag of excuses, many of which have proven largely unfounded. In October 2020, she told The Atlantic's Edward-Isaac Dovere that "there was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level. We still don't know what really happened."
Similarly, after narrowly losing the race to become Georgia's governor in November 2018, Stacey Abrams gave a concession speech in which she pointedly did not concede.
"I acknowledge that former Secretary of State Brian Kemp will be certified as the victor in the 2018 gubernatorial election," Abrams said. But "I will not concede because the erosion of our democracy is not right."
"It was not a free and fair election," Abrams told MSNBC's Chris Hayes later that month. "We had thousands of Georgians who were purged from the rolls wrongly….Brian Kemp oversaw for eight years the systematic and systemic dismantling of our democracy and that means there could not be free and fair elections in Georgia this year."
To be clear, this is not to draw a direct parallel between Trump's actions after the 2020 election, and Clinton's and Abrams's grousing about their own respective electoral defeats. Trump went much further, filing dozens of meritless lawsuits trying to create a victory out of whole cloth; he even leaned on Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to "find" enough votes for him to win the state and implied that Raffensperger could face criminal prosecution if he did not. Trump's efforts, undertaken while he still held the presidency, would eventually lead hundreds of his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to subvert the results of the election and force Congress to certify Trump as the winner.
Meanwhile, neither Clinton nor Abrams held political office when making their claims of illegitimate elections, and no supporters showed up in droves to sack a government building.
But in either case, haphazardly throwing around allegations of election fraud is unseemly in a nation that sees blessedly little actual, verifiable fraud. American voting precincts regularly conduct recounts, in plain view of the public. And an American president has yet to ban an opponent from running for office.
In Venezuela, on the other hand, people are taking to the streets to protest actual, verifiable fraud in their own presidential election.
We should count ourselves lucky to have a largely free and fair system—Venezuelans certainly can't.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Gotta love how shameless Reason is about being 100% direct regime propaganda
STOP ASKING QUESTIONS!
Or else.
Meanwhile another J6 lie and Chemjeff narrative goes into the wood chipper with the release of Secret Service report.
Remember Cassidy Hutchinson, the former West Wing aide who swore that the hearsay evidence she would tell the J6 Committee was the truth, the whole truth, so help her God?
The new Inspector General’s report on the Secret Service’s activities on Jan. 6, 2021, has finally put this story and Hutchinson’s reputation into the wood-chipper.
Hutchinson said that on January 6, as President Donald Trump was driven from his speech at a Save America rally to the White House, he “lunged” at the Secret Service driver when he learned that he wouldn’t be going to the Capitol Building for a “peaceful and patriotic” protest. That was the story she told the January 6 Committee.
In 2022 she testified that “The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel [lead Secret Service detail agent] grabbed his arm, and said, ‘Sir you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we’re going back to the West Wing, we’re not going to the Capitol.’ Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel.”
Hutchinson’s “source” for the gossip was, she claimed, former Secret Service agent-turned-Trump White House Deputy Chief of Staff Tony Ornato. Ornato says he never witnessed the event, much less told her.
Furthermore, the IG’s redacted report says the Secret Service took more than four months before he made himself available where he reiterated that this Trump episode never happened. The other Secret Service agents who were in the car said Trump never lunged at the driver, though one reported that he was angry that he couldn’t go.
The footnote at the bottom of page 30 of the report refers to Hutchinson’s testimony and claims that after questioning all of the Secret Service agents involved, there was no there there. Ornato says that he didn’t recall any such incident and said, “I do not recall speaking to anyone about it.”
But on January 6, when things were getting unwieldy at the Capitol before the president was even off stage, the no became a hell no. It is easy to believe that Trump might be angry. After all, he thought, his supporters had never gotten violent before, so what was the harm?
But at 12:53, while he was speaking, there was trouble at the Capitol at the area where Ray Epps was stationed, and the breach of the bike racks began. At 1:16, Trump was in his limo. According to the report, at 1:19, Trump arrived back at the White House. This was the same time the Secret Service received an email (remember, the Secret Service erased its text messages) about “serious challenges” at the Capitol.
In short, there was never a plan to go to the Capitol.
Tellingly, the J6 Committee spoke with those Secret Service agents and never included their testimony in its final report.
Hutchinson would even write a book about her amazing White House exploits that the state-run media were more than willing to amplify for their girl. Today, she’s giving paid speeches about her White House story.
Indeed, nobody did.
“We asked [redacted] agents whether the president reached for the steering wheel of the limousine or lunged toward the detail lead when his request to go to the Capitol was denied, and witnesses said those actions did not occur,” notes the report.
Curious that Lancaster didn’t feel the need to mention this.
For a libertarian publication, they do a pretty good impersonation of a democratic action committee.
This should be fun.
Did I miss the evidence presented the election was stolen in Venezuela? At this point, the 2020 election and the recent one in Venezuela are pretty much at the same point. Sane people know it was fishy but the regime claims all is well.
The regime that claimed that all went well in the US 2020 election was the Trump administration. Trump own people knew he lost he just refused to accept the results.
The Trump admin ran the state election boards? God you are dumb fuck.
This is false. As shown below regarding Georgia. Barr admitted he didn’t look closely at any specific areas of interest. But good DNC talking point.
Did I miss the evidence presented the election was stolen in Venezuela?
Apparently:
“Venezuela uses electronic voting machines which print out a tally at the end of the day. The tallies are signed by poll workers and observers, and the political parties are allowed to take a copy. Each tally sheet also has a QR code for authentication.
Even before the election, the opposition enlisted thousands of volunteers to collect tallies for verification. The results of the independent count are published online. As of this writing, with more than 25,000 tallies counted—representing 83.5 percent of all ballots cast—González received 67 percent to Maduro’s 30 percent….
Polls taken earlier in July and collected by the Americas Society and the Council of the Americas showed Maduro polling between 12 percent and 25 percent, with González comfortably ahead, anywhere from 59 percent to 72 percent. An exit poll conducted by Edison Research at 100 polling locations corroborated this, finding that González outperformed Maduro by more than 2 to 1, capturing 65 percent to Maduro’s 31 percent….
Trump does not have any evidence of fraud nearly this strong even 4 years later.
Fuck off with that BS. Please explain the overnight shenanigans in swing states in a plausible manner. Fact is the AGs didn’t allow their party’s obvious fraud to be challenged and complicit drones like you use that as proof of election integrity.
Complicit drone eh?
I prefer to not I waste my time presenting and explaining evidence (which has already been explained ad nauseam) to those that only accepts evidence for what they want to believe and dismiss evidence against. The burden of proof is on your claim and the best your side has is that the evidence is hidden by a huge conspiracy. It could be, but it’s far from proven…unlike Venezuela which is much closer in 1 week than you are in 4 years.
You’re a faggot liar who needs to be excised like the malignant tumor you are.
Mom?
I have never seen you actually explain the anomalies away.
There are many better than me doing it.
If you’re talking about large vote tallies coming in for Biden overnight, that it simply due to the Replican policy of counting in-person votes first and mail-in votes later – because it was correctly believed that in-person voters leaned to Trump and mail-in voters leaned to Biden, and the policy was intended to produce an effect which would let them claim fraud and persuade addle-pated followers like you to believe it.
Biden didn’t get 90% of mail in ballots dumdum. It was around 60%. Except those late night batches.
The big difference is that Venezuela only allows mail in voting for citizens living abroad. Everybody else votes in person like we used to. In 2020 millions of mail in ballots were counted in the US with multiple examples on video of thousands being dumped into ballot boxes by single individuals. Signature validation was completely ignored. None of these votes have been audited. If the US had the same system that exists in Venezuela Trump would almost certainly have been declared the winner.
So you’re saying the Venezuela election was stolen from the top down leaving much evidence and the US election was stolen from the bottom up leaving little evidence? Perhaps.
Here is why I still have doubts. If it was just random individuals randomly deciding to cast fraudulent votes, there is no reason to suspect D’s would do this by the millions and R’s wouldn’t. If it was a conspiracy by the D’s, we’re back to the issue of too many need to be involved to carry it out and cover it up.
We’ve become aware of quite a few “conspiracies” that have been revealed because people can’t keep this stuff hidden forever. We had the lab leak, Twitter files and Russia-gate for starters, but this stolen election would need to be the biggest conspiracy with the most eyes on it and yet there’s no proof yet.
Please review the post on Georgia below.
Thanks. I did. It seems the truth can still be determined:
“However, thanks to the legislation Gov. Kemp signed today, the truth about the 2020 count, likely still confirming Biden’s win, will come out. Given that the public will be able to require a new scan of the ballots themselves…The ballots representing the 17,000+ final votes where the images cannot be located, can be examined now and their existence verified.” -Marylyn Marks
According to state election investigators, Fulton might not have all of the ballot images, but each of the original paper ballots are under seal due to pending litigation
https://georgiarecorder.com/2024/05/07/georgia-oversight-panel-ruminates-on-2020-election-hiccups-as-2024-showdowns-loom/
It is the same quality of evidence. Not 100% of voters handed over their ballots so you can male the same inference as a statistical survey that the US constantly does with exit voting. In fact those believing the election is fixed are more likely to work woth the activist groups.
If I remember right they collected around half of the ballots.
The fact is the totality of votes are owned by the government. In both cases it was the late at night make up votes non government auditors don’t have access to that matter.
I’m not getting your point here.
Venezuela looks pretty much like the US in 2020 –except that the actual winners can get their hands on tallies–something that the fortifiers made largely impossible.
Even Maduro’s crackdowns on protesters look like the crackdowns on the J6 protesters that the Biden junta executed after he was installed in the White House.
That, along with the relentless persecution of anyone who even suggests that not only was the election fortified, but the fortifiers bragged publicly about having illegally done it.
But the lack of evidence is PROOF that Trump won!
Poor sarc. Out of “ideas”.
“Tulpa” but it is so hard to tell.
They don’t care.
Almost impossible to tell the difference; you could just retire, and have the spoofer take over for you at this point.
This.
Another of sarc’s “I was just joking”.
I’ve got the fake one muted, which makes it a lot easier.
But not malt liquor.
What evidence sarc? Maduro is refusing to release the official voter material just like the government refused to do in 2020.
Those contesting it are relying on 2nd hand interviews and counts of non official state data.
What evidence is (d)ifferent?
You’ve been given all the evidence that can be given without state releasing material. I’m guessing you support Maduro here?
We’re pretty sure that Maduro stole the election even though no hard evidence has been presented to support that claim.
That seems to be the line. No election could be so perfect and so it must be fraud.
And an American president has yet to ban an opponent from running for office.
No, put one did try to put his opponent in jail. And his allies in dem run states tried to have him removed from the ballot, i.e. banned from running from office.
Don’t forget the sitting reps declaring it their responsibility to void the election results if their candidate doesn’t win.
2 states tried to ban someone from running for office.
How else can we have democracy?
Trump’s efforts, undertaken while he still held the presidency, would eventually lead hundreds of his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to subvert the results of the election and force Congress to certify Trump as the winner.
Got some wild revisionist fantasies there Joe.
Hey, you can’t expect Joe to not push the regime’s narrative.
Notice how Mr. Lancaster failed to explain how/why Trump was winning big in all swing states at 2AM after the 2020 election when the vote counting suddenly stopped (in all swing states), and by 4AM (when the vote count resumed) Biden was winning in those states.
You can call me an election denier, but none of the Trump haters have ever explained what happened to the massive and sudden change in vote count in swing states from 2AM to 4AM after the 2020 election.
They claim, that in each of those states, at the exact same time, a large cache of uncounted ballots from heavy dem districts arrived to tip the election in Bidens favor. The fact there were no other similar spikes, during the counting in any other state, at anytime during the counting, or any election in the entire history of the US is irrelevent.
Don’t forget that those ballot dumps at that time were 2 standard deviations away from earlier mail in ballot dumps with Joe winning 90% of the ballot batches where on average he only won around 60%
But…but! That’s only because Trump was bad mouthing mail in ballots! Or something like that.
Cite?
For the 50th time? It is the statistical analysis paper that has been available since 2020 shrike. If you actually did care you would have read it the last dozen times I linked it.
Pretty sure it is even in the hereistheevidence below.
“Shut up bigot!!” they explained. Don’t make them send the FBI to explain again.
Here is your explanation.
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/fact-check-vote-spikes-in-wisconsin-michigan-and-pennsylvania-do-not-prove-ele-idUSKBN27Q304/
The large urban centers in those states reported their absentee vote totals overnight, and they were heavily skewed towards Biden because large urban centers are generally more Democratic than Republican.
Basically: the first precincts reported were the ones that were easiest to count, the rural and suburban areas that have a lot of Republican voters. The later precincts were the large urban ones, which have a lot of Democratic voters.
Venezuela Shows What an Actual Stolen Election Looks Like
Ahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaa!
It certainly shows the difference in regime propaganda about an election they stole versus an election their opponent stole.
Early the following day, the government announced that with 80 percent of votes counted, Maduro had prevailed with 51.2 percent of the vote to González’s 44.2 percent.
You know who else?
In other words, the official government results suggest that Maduro at least doubled, and potentially quadrupled, his support literally overnight
You know who else?
Others have echoed this skepticism. “There are clear signs that the election results announced by Venezuela’s National Electoral Council do not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people as it was expressed at the ballot box on July 28,” U.S. National Security Council Spokesperson Adrienne Watson said in a statement.
You know who else?
The statement did allow that its observers “noted the desire of the Venezuelan people to participate in a democratic election process,” but “their efforts were undermined by the CNE’s complete lack of transparency in announcing the results.”
You know who else?
But after the election was too late to challenge the results and before was too early to challenge the changes so none of that is relevant to the US regime and it’s propagandists like Joe.
No standing in the courts leads to no standing in the streets. Stay in your home and shut up or else. Protests are only allowed for things that don’t involve important people.
How did I know that Reason was going to go with this angle?
In both cases:
Late night shifts in voter reporting
Government refusing to hand over vote evidence
Claims of the other side causing an insurrection
Locking up and censoring those who disagreed with the state results
Statistical analysis of why the state count was wrong.
Maduro used the same exact arguments you continue to use to dismiss 2020.
The same amount of evidence exists in both cases since government controls election material.
Venezuelan opposition: We have proof of fraud, here are the vote tallies from the precincts!
Jesse: We have proof of fraud, swearsies, but the government refuses to hand over the proof! But you ask, how do I know they have proof of fraud if they refuse to hand it over? Because their refusal to hand it over is proof that they are lying about the election and therefore proof of fraud!
Hey Reason, is this why you’re one of the worst offenders in the Global Disinfo Index?
YouTube to Terminate Content Questioning 2020 Elections Results
Will not allow videos claiming widespread fraud or errors
That, plus a few key cocktail party snubs.
ctl/F gore = 0/0
In an article about questioning elections.
Really?
Remember when Hugo Chavez pulled out an upset win despite ‘exit polling data’? Remember how the US Media gave Chavez a tongue bath? What changed? Hmmmm?
I do remember lots of Hollywood fanboys giving Chavez a good tonguing.
Is it that Maduro is an ultra-capitalist?
> In other words, the official government results suggest that Maduro at least doubled, and potentially quadrupled, his support literally overnight
Meanwhile Trumpistas convinced that 0.5% going the other way is PRUUF OF KONSPIRACY!
Holy shit, he won the electoral vote in 2016 but still claimed the popular vote was stolen from him. What a maroon. He’s weird.
weak
But also true.
you’re right – it is true that that was weak
It took less than 1% to change the 2020 results dumdum.
It amuses me that Brandy and some others who constantly tout “both sides” have latched on to the Democrat “slur” of weird.
Yeah. Without realizing they are constantly mocked for trying it. It is team virtue signaling at best. But none of them are on a team.
Didn’t sarc claim that if Harris became the Dem’s nominee, he would register and vote for trump, because he just “hates cops that much”? I haven’t heard much about this from him, wonder how that’s going.
I never said any such thing. That was probably the Tulpa account.
No. It was you during one of your drunken rages lol.
I assume this is the true tulpa account, since I’m a “gray box”
It took less than 0.5% to swing the 2020 presidential race. It has been a while since I crunched the numbers, but I am pretty sure it was less than 400K votes among the relevant swing states to flip the electoral college, which is less than 0.5% of Biden’s “most ever” 80some million votes alone. Is Brandy admitting he believes it was fortified?
Yes, AFTER THE FACT, it was known that less than 1% of the vote in a few key areas could have changed the outcome. BEFORE THE VOTE, there was no way to know how many votes would be needed to “rig” the outcome.
Meaning, if there was some coordinated conspiracy to “rig” the outcome, it would have had to encompass far more than a mere 1% of the vote. It would have had to include thousands and thousands of people among multiple precincts in multiple states. And that kind of conspiracy is unrealistically fantastical.
Trump was smart and planned ahead. Before the election he told his followers that mail in voting was rigged, and that they should vote in person. He went back on that, but only after the seeds of thought were sown. This meant that many of his supporters who would have voted by mail chose to instead vote in person. The result was mail-in ballots skewing towards Biden, because people who would have voted that way for Trump chose to vote in person. So he created the appearance of fraud by saying there was going to be fraud. Genius!
So, 4D chess in this case then?
This has been shown to be a false narratives if you bothered to even see the vote totals for mail in ballots. But keep pushing it. Lol.
A lot of conservatives used mail in votes retard.
https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/1820207872363360627?t=sJSBdEJFC8DVHq1siyOvdA&s=19
Here’s the reason that Brian Kemp is so pissed off about the fact that Donald Trump called him out last night and here’s also the reason why everyone of his foot soldiers are pissed off as well:
In Georgia, there was three hand counts at the precinct level and each one of them differed so significantly that President Trump‘s election day totals were off by nearly 50% in some cases. The tabulation machines actually under counted votes both times.
The second machine count and the hand count audit werethousands of votes short when they try to re-create their purported results in Fulton county. As a result of this, there were two state election board cases opened SEB2021-181 and SEB2023-025 and those cases have proven that the audit include
Brian Kemp‘s office was well aware of these problems because they signed off on a letter sent to the state election board which prompted the opening of SEB 2021–1 81.
The final count showed 506,948 votes but the certified vote count showed 527, 925 and of that 527,925 17,852 votes were missing ballot images from tabulators that do not exist.
What has Brian Kemp done to ensure this doesn’t happen again in 2024?
That would be a lot of nothing.
Brad Raffensberger and his general council Charlene McGowan are still claiming all three counts matched.
Donald Trump “lost” the Georgia by less than 11,000 votes.
The state election board had an opportunity to continue the investigation into SEB2023–025, which has documented all the discrepancies and the results were sent to an outside “consultant” chosen by Fulton county.
The matter will be discussed at the next board meeting on Tuesday, August 6, 2024.
So four years after the 2020 election, Brian Kemp knows damn well that there was serious issues in 2020 otherwise he would’ve never opened up a state election board case.
By the way, after the fact that he knew all this, he still refused to step up and do something about the fact that Fannie Willis was investigating Donald Trump for nothing, considering there are serious questions about the legitimacy of the 2020 election in Georgia.
People can look up these Georgia election state board cases if they want to.
Even journalists can look them up. Imagine that.
So all of the idiots who are Republicans saying that Kemp is so great. Do us a favor and do some research and use your brain.
Great post.
It won’t matter to the cleanest election ever, trust the government types though.
Amazing how all the cleanest election peeps above are ignoring this.
I sure am glad I live in the good ol’ USA where fraudulent elections never happen.
(Blows a bowel laughing.)
But in either case, haphazardly throwing around allegations of election fraud is unseemly in a nation that sees blessedly little actual, verifiable fraud. American voting precincts regularly conduct recounts, in plain view of the public.
Oh my fucking god. I cannot believe that Reason is still pushing “recounts” as proof of election integrity. You can completely believe that Donald Trump and his supporters are 142% full of complete shit on any election fraud claim… but when you tout “recounts” as proof of election integrity, you should tear up that college degree you got and learn to make coffee.
I wouldn’t want someone so stupid to even make my coffee.
…blessedly little actual, verifiable fraud.
No widespread fraud.
If we refuse to look it cannot be verified.
Recounts are not absolute proof against voter fraud. Recounts are ONE WAY that voter fraud may be caught, especially when it is done in public and election monitors can challenge specific ballots that they think are fraudulent or problematic, as is the case that happens here.
Fuck man, be better than this.
https://hereistheevidence.com/
My favorite:
WTF is a “ballot touched by anomaly”?
Put aside the “stolen” narrative, if you don’t have major concerns about how the 2020 election played out, you are the enemy of democracy.
But in either case, haphazardly throwing around allegations of election fraud is unseemly in a nation that sees blessedly little actual, verifiable fraud.
It may be unseemly but it is precisely what is needed to de-politicize elections. Separation of powers is always a good thing in government. Politicized election laws creates a massive de-representation of our people – via gerrymandering, freezing the representative assembly for a century+, ballot access, federal citizenship and state citizenship but only individual state run elections, etc. If people are now to the point where they distrust election outcomes – with all the ton of ways where there is no process reform possible – then maybe we need a fourth branch of govt.
making sure the standard is “T supporters get a fed setup and prison, but those crazy Venezuelans just might be onto something because smell test.”
Any word from the Russians about this? We know they have a finger in all other country’s elections. Let’s blame them, just to be safe.
Venezuela news, “The most secure election ever!!!”
Hmmmm… Sound familiar?
Since when did any [Na]tional So[zi]alist deserve trust be it in the US or Venezuela? Their very platform is to ‘armed-theft’ anyone who has *earned* anything because something something ‘their’ un-earned fair-share.
Funny, you managed to get all the way through your explanation without once mentioning the Hunter laptop (completely discounted by the media and their bosses) and the Steele dossier, which was a complete fabrication.
I remember the Time article afterward where they bragged about “fortifying” the election. That must be what “rigged” became, now it’s called “fortifying”.
A significant number of voters said they would have changed their votes if they thought Hunter’s laptop was real. All they heard was it was Russian disinformation. The Steele dossier WAS actual Russian disinformation, but ignored.
Great coverage.
Trump’s lawyers, outside court: Fraud!
Trump’s lawers, in court: “no fraud”.
Trump’s SC amicus brief: “no fraud”
Funny that. Almost as if when lawyers had to tell the truth, there was no fraud to be found.
This is another lie. Good work shrike. They are still showing courts the illegal votes as just one example. And many courts even agreed but said it was too late to change results. See Wisconsin and Pennsylvania shrike.
#3
You don’t like facts, clearly.
Without checking, I will bet that the Wisconsin and Pennsylvania cases were about voting procedures before the election, not claims of fraud, etc. afterwards – because you always deliberately confuse the subject.
It is a fact that Trump’s lawyers denied in court that they were claiming fraud. It is a fact that the Trump amicus brief to the SC in the Texas suit did not allege fraud, only that procedures made fraud more difficult to detect. (FWIW it is also a fact that no GOP state joined the Texas suit. They merely filed amicus briefs. Funny that,)
I still am not sure however whether you genuinely believe fraud, or find it necessary to keep spreading propaganda. The former would mean you’re a credulous cretin, the latter, that you’re a fucking liar. Not too difficult to conceive of you in either role – or indeed, both.
Again. The vast majority Venezuelans vote in person and there is a system in place to verify the vote. And there is exit polling to support the results. Beginning in 2020 the majority of votes in US elections are fortified mail in votes. Verification of the results are in many cases are left to the whims of state actors who have been found to have violated state law. We do not have worthwhile exit polling because a minority of votes are in person, nobody to poll. Comparing our 2020 election to Venezuela is apples and oranges. We no longer have election day it has become election week a period wherein vote totals always seem to change in favor of the ruling regime. If you want to convince me that we have free and fair elections you’ll need to return to the system we had in 2016.
“And if I don’t get to personally inspect every ballot, I won’t believe the election is free and fair.”
Fact is, the trend to make voting more convenient was in place even before 2016. Why is this a bad thing? Most everywhere else in life, it’s been getting more convenient to go about our daily lives. We no longer have to go to the store to go shopping, we can get products delivered to us from Amazon. We no longer have to wait in line at a bank to get money, we can go to a drive-up ATM machine 24/7. Etc., etc. So voting is following the same trend and it isn’t going away. So you can either fight against it, and lose, or you can work with the current trend and work to make sure it meets your level of security.
And frankly, attempts to make it LESS convenient to vote are, quite often, a thinly veiled attempt to rig the vote in favor of Republicans, since Republicans tend to do better when voter turnout is lower.
In fact, policing voter fraud has long been a Republican hobbyhorse, even though actual instances of voter fraud are vanishingly few.
I just posted hundreds and hundreds of them the other day.
But regarding 2020, it’s this simple:
Joe Biden: 81,283,501
Donald Trump: 74,223,975
BOTH of these numbers strain credulity. I don’t need to get into anything beyond the numbers themselves – not mail in ballots, not quirky machines, not ballot dropboxes, none of it.
For the past four decades, popular vote totals against total population has been roughly 35-40%. And that jives with voter pool numbers. Of the people who are allowed to vote, and of those who actually go and do so (at least every four years), those numbers are relatively consistent when measured against the US population.
Then in 2020, it suddenly skyrocketed to 47%. A seven to twelve percent increase!!!
I don’t buy it. I don’t buy those numbers. I never have and I never will. For as contemptible as people found the Orange Clown and his gossamer “victories” of the prior four, and for as incredulous as it is to believe that people actually wanted Tapioca Joe and his archnemesis the Sinister Staircase – there is NO WAY that voting totals went up eight figures on BOTH sides.
Not without shenanigans. (Especially when you factor in that most of these “voters” suddenly decided to come out of the woodwork in the middle of a scamdemic, which had millions of people – especially “Biden voters” – cowering in place behind ten masks, bathing in Purell, and running UV lights over the doordashed groceries they demanded be shoved through their mail slot.)
Screw the comparisons to Maduro. Pretending the overtness of his machinations somehow excuses the slightly less unsubtle machinations in American voting – on both sides – is to legitimize the actual election fraud going on in this nation.
Which, of course, you desperately don’t want to talk about Reason, or even acknowledge as a possibility – unless a Republican wins.