- 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
re: Meanwhile, in another Georgia election back in 2022.…
Posted on 12/21/25 at 1:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 12/21/25 at 1:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So, the system works? Is that the story the conspiracy theorists are pushing now?
If I’m reading this correctly, the primary winner had to challenge the election board to do a recount, which showed a massive shift in votes. Only because she received no votes in her precinct, and knew she voted for herself
So, you are saying that candidates challenging election results is a designed control which was operating effectively here? Interesting, albeit logically inconsistent with your labeling of conspiracy theorists. Seems like “mitigating controls” would be better.
1
Posted on 12/21/25 at 2:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So, the system works? Is that the story the conspiracy theorists are pushing now?
That is not the "system working" you stupid frick, The system working would be this not happening in the first place because it would be impossible to have it happen.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 2:21 pm to OceanMan
quote:
If I’m reading this correctly, the primary winner had to challenge the election board to do a recount,
Correct, a safeguard built into the system (that was utilized in 2020)
quote:
So, you are saying that candidates challenging election results is a designed control
That's why we have a specific legal process to review it and force a recount if necessary. Safeguards built into the system.
quote:
Interesting, albeit logically inconsistent with your labeling of conspiracy theorists.
Naw, because the CTs ignore that these same safeguards were used in 2020.
This story from 2022 shows the safeguards will catch issues, proving the system works.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 2:22 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
That is not the "system working" you stupid frick,
Except, it is?
quote:
The system working would be this not happening
There will be outlier events in any system, more frequent as the system relies on humans. That's why the systems have safeguards and review processes.
quote:
because it would be impossible to have it happen.
That's retarded. No system, especially one involving humans, will make outliers and/or failures "impossible".
Posted on 12/21/25 at 2:36 pm to Placekicker
Jody Hice also questionably lost the primary to crook Brad Raffensperger for the elections important seat of Secretary of State.
The left and establishment had to secure that seat in both Georgia and Arizona. Probably Colorado, Nevada and California, too.
The left and establishment had to secure that seat in both Georgia and Arizona. Probably Colorado, Nevada and California, too.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 3:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It doesn't take a large IQ to see these stories are nonsense
If you are intending to imply that this case "proves' anything at all with respect the security of election results, you lose.
Obviously the counting process within the machine does the arithmetic correctly..
What all of us who challenge the security of the 2020 election is not that the machine code failed to count the one and zeros properly.
Everyone, including you, knows that the root of the problem is the CHEATING by those involved in delivering the results to the public.
There should have been a full audit done - as was done in this case.
Certainly you are not still asserting that the results of the 2020 election is so obvious that no serious person could possibly doubt the results.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 3:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
30th downvote!
Posted on 12/21/25 at 7:54 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's why we have a specific legal process to review it and force a recount if necessary. Safeguards built into the system.
Again, her precinct showing zero is the only indisputable argument for a recount. That’s not a safeguard, it’s an almost impossible last resort.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 8:18 pm to SlowFlowPro
Ah yes, the ole “system recorded not votes for one person” outlier event
You are truly a dishonest POS
Muh safeguards
You are truly a dishonest POS
Muh safeguards
Posted on 12/21/25 at 9:44 pm to DawgCountry
If there is one person whose arse I would truly enjoy whipping , it is Sloproeunuch. He is the Adam Schiff of message boards. He is the most detestable and dis-honest person I have ever known to exist who is not a politician.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:04 pm to OceanMan
quote:
Again, her precinct showing zero is the only indisputable argument for a recount
The safeguards don't require an indisputable level of proof just FYI. The threshold is much lower.
The important aspect of this discussion is the safeguards in place that have been proven to work. The conflict is how people are claiming they didn't in 2020 when they clearly did in 2022.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:04 pm to Dirk Dawgler
quote:
He is the most detestable and dis-honest person I have ever known to exist who is not a politician.
That sounds like a "you" problem
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
Not a problem for me…or you since the odds of us ever meeting in person are astronomically unlikely. But a man can ponder such an occasion.
Posted on 12/22/25 at 8:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The safeguards don't require an indisputable level of proof just FYI. The threshold is much lower.
You don’t understand the difference between internal and external controls and their place in a control environment. In this case, they had to actually publish results in order to detect the error. There were literally no adequate safeguards in place that avoided publishing results with material error.
As I’ve told you before, there is an entire profession dedicated to designing, implementing and monitoring controls in order to produce credible results. You are so dumb and arrogant you don’t realize that you are arguing that system “safeguards” require public intervention, while labeling those calling for intervention as conspiracy theorists.
Posted on 12/22/25 at 8:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
quote:FINALLY!!!!
Fail
Something which you and I can agree upon.
Posted on 12/22/25 at 9:01 am to OceanMan
quote:
In this case, they had to actually publish results in order to detect the error.
You keep focusing on this when it's not really relevant, especially when this story enters into "dot connecting" phase with 2020 (which OP was doing 100%)
Why the safeguards were necessary isn't important when the focus is on the safeguards fixing the problem itself.
Every system will have errors and every system that relies on humans will have a lot of them. I already conceded this. This means the error has no relevance anymore to the discussion, as it has been conceded that these initial voting systems are not perfect.
quote:
You are so dumb and arrogant you don’t realize that you are arguing that system “safeguards” require public intervention
In a legal system, the will always require public intervention. This is another failure in your argument.
quote:
while labeling those calling for intervention as conspiracy theorists.
No. I'm labeling those ignoring the intervention in 2020 as conspiracy theorists.
As I already posted, the same safeguards were also utilized in 2020 and the election was certified. Again, another example of why the underlying issue isn't relevant.
The reason the people ignoring this are called conspiracy theorists is because the results have gone through multiple safeguards and analyzed from multiple parties and were still validated. The reason why a conspiracy is necessary is to deflect form the impact of these safeguards, which requires adding another layer to the conspiracy.
Posted on 12/22/25 at 9:04 am to texag7
quote:
His job here is to play contrarian. He is not a serious person
1000% Zero principles.
Posted on 12/22/25 at 9:05 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
1000% Zero principles.
wut
The reason I went form incredibly respected on here (2005-2015) to villain (2016-present) was maintaining my principles
Posted on 12/22/25 at 9:14 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's retarded. No system, especially one involving humans, will make outliers and/or failures "impossible".
Which is the entire reason automation is used. The human error is simply to check the calculations of the system. Both failed here, because there was little human oversight, presumably because we would hope that an automated system designed to count votes could actually count votes. We are talking about counting, this is not a complex system.
Your entire stance implies the dominion voting system cannot be relied upon and that a hand count tallying the actual results is superior. You are explicitly saying that publishing results and having the public challenge them is part of the system. However your purpose in this thread is to insult those that are still challenging them. It’s so logically inconsistent that it could only be explained by emotional and response or plain inability to understand the subject.
If you don’t read all of this and conclude “I am wrong”, I would consider not calling others retarded, unless you want to sit alone at the lunch table
Posted on 12/22/25 at 9:42 am to Placekicker
TDSFP - "NUH UH!!!!!!! 
"
" 
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News