- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 7/20/21 at 10:51 am to Drury01
Appeal - it wasn't tossed on merit.
Posted on 7/20/21 at 10:58 am to Gifman
Does that mean that the suit can be refiled? Thanks.
Posted on 7/20/21 at 10:59 am to Drury01
Let me guess, standing??
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:09 am to Drury01
In the article, it mentioned an appeal likely. That's all I know. Judge may not want to touch this anyway though.
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:12 am to VoxDawg
According to Erick Erickson, the scanners will accept and count ballots that are scanned more than once but because each ballot has a unique bar code, the system will only count a ballot one time. So, if a ballot bar code appears more than once, the subsequent votes under that same ballot number are discarded. It does not matter how many times a ballot is scanned, it will only count once. Erickson does know a lot about election processes but I suspect there are technilogical holes in his claim, like scanning the same ballots in another county or precinct. Or, can the system be programmed to accept a ballot multiple times? Are the systems corruptible so that one reads the barcode one way and another reads it differently? Another question is why are poll workers scanning stacks of ballots multiple times? How could they be so incompetent to do it, accidentally?
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:19 am to ibldprplgld
quote:
Let me guess, standing??
No not standing. Something about not filing in time and not serving the two dem senators "properly."
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:23 am to bizeagle
quote:
According to Erick Erickson
Um....
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:25 am to Gifman
quote:
No not standing. Something about not filing in time and not serving the two dem senators "properly."
On the surface when I read yesterday's ruling it seems like judge Amero is actually doing the plaintiff a favor by denying it at the moment. Its grounds for dismissal of the case right now seems like he's appeal proofing it by helping them eliminate potential complaints.
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:40 am to bizeagle
The only way a logging system like that would work is if the system is connected to all machines….. via the internet…
So they either have to be connected to the internet for this to work as intended or it doesn’t work this way and you can scan all ballots…
This viewpoint also doesn’t make any sense since the ballot counts and the images do not remotely match the official counts on the audit. Even if they are saying duplicates didn’t get counted we would now have the officially tally not match the audit which doesn’t match the scanned images….
So which tally is right?
So they either have to be connected to the internet for this to work as intended or it doesn’t work this way and you can scan all ballots…
This viewpoint also doesn’t make any sense since the ballot counts and the images do not remotely match the official counts on the audit. Even if they are saying duplicates didn’t get counted we would now have the officially tally not match the audit which doesn’t match the scanned images….
So which tally is right?
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:55 am to VoxDawg
Posted on 7/20/21 at 11:55 am to laxtonto
I agree, there are so many technological holes in the system, how can it possibly be trusted? USB drives, communication cards in the tabulators, laptops, software updating during tabulation runs, etc., etc. There are way too many points of compromise.
Page 20 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News