5 ms·

> Are there people here on HN that believe the election was stolen? There are. One sent me to this [1] resource earlier. I do not endorse this source, and have

> Are there people here on HN that believe the election was stolen? There are. One sent me to this [1] resource earlier. I do not endorse this source, and have not manually verified their claims myself. If anyone else would like to check the source, that would be good, I intend to manually check their claims myself later, but don't have time now. [1] https://hereistheevidence.com/ https://hereistheevidence.com/ Edit: I would ask anyone checking the source to not use the tool that the source provides, for obvious reasons. Also, we should probably see if the datasets provided are available elsewhere.

eli 6y ago
The evidence is just laughably bad. But there is a lot of it and if you wanted to explain why each claim is either meaningless or outright false would take a lot of time. I guess that's the point.
- Shared404 6y ago
  I suspected that would be the case, but as you pointed out, they have many claims. At work currently, so haven't really looked at it. Probably will tonight, maybe make a post refuting it.
  - eli 6y ago
    I doubt it's worth your time. You can't refute a conspiracy theory with facts.
    - Shared404 6y ago
      You can't refute those deep in, but you can help protect those who could be swayed by lots of "data" and a fancy web page. I may or may not get around to it, but I could see it being worthwhile.
      - eli 6y ago
        Respectfully disagree. I don't think you can. People are reading a website like this because they are looking for confirmation of what they already feel must be true.
        Shared404 6y ago
        I agree mostly. I partially just want something to link to if I happen to see it linked in the wild again, it rubs me the wrong way to see it uncontested in a conversation. I figure that at least that way new people aren't getting sucked in when they click thinking "Well, I should check the other sides view."
        dhruvkar 6y ago
        Thanks for sharing. While I agree with eli, this is an insight into what the other side is looking at. And the "other side" is definitely a spectrum of people -- ones who are open to reason and others that are absolutely not.
    - Jtsummers 6y ago
      A common response I've received when refuting part or all of various conspiracy theories, young Earth creationist, or flat Earth type logic: "It doesn't matter that that's not true, it still could have been true." Like the possibility of a truth is all they need to believe in it. And then shifting goal posts.
      - eli 6y ago
        I can only imagine how much worse this all would be if the Presidential election had actually been close. We should be thankful that only an incomprehensibly vast conspiracy could possibly have "stolen" the election.
      - PenisBanana 6y ago
        > ... then shifting goal posts. Exactly, exactly the same as dishonestly conflating (a) a serious real world (it exists) situation involving many features including vast election fraud - which, yes, may or may not have swung the result with (b) " young Earth creationist, or flat Earth " Here, on HN, let's try and stay on topic.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        Jtsummers 6y ago
        Do you have real proof/evidence of this "vast election fraud"? So far none has been presented. And what "proof" is out there are either known falsehoods, crazy theories (zombie Hugo Chavez wants Biden and not Trump to win), or nonsensical (CIA/DOD/NSA radioactive isotope watermarks are applied to all legitimate ballots, any day now they'll show that x million ballots were fakes). Other than the dishonest (to themselves or others), few are claiming no fraud. There's always fraud (either intentional or not), but usually (and so far this election seems no different) in the tens to hundreds of cases. But there's no evidence of millions of faked votes.
- PenisBanana 6y ago
  > The evidence is just laughably bad. That's simply a straight-out lie. Review twenty examples, say - even the least intellectually curious can do that - yes, you can. It will take 20 minutes and a bit of thinking. Each item, classified, is linked to documentary evidence. Of the twenty that I checked to test if "The evidence is just laughably bad" was a lie or not (it was a lie): - most link to serious articles describing a single item of election impropriety - the links to twitter always include a photo of the evidence the tweet was supporting - the remainder went to independent sources - a valid criticism would be a reliance on secondary media, which are possibly as unreliable as MSM. - No Mainstream Media source are relied on, which is great plus.
  - eli 6y ago
    C'mon are you serious? I'm not getting trolled into fact-checking 20 bogus claims. Why don't you pick one. What's the single most convincing evidence of election fraud in that list?
    - tartoran 6y ago
      Don't bother, by the name of the account alone I can guess they aren't very serious. Keep the energy for non-trolls
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      the video from Georgia still hasn't been explained satisfactorily.
      - eli 6y ago
        This video? https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-georgia-media-social-media-e9a73462e39e7aa39683f0f582a6659e https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-georgi...
        chordalkeyboard 6y ago
        presumably? I'm not sure how many videos of alleged ballot fraud are floating around and the link you posted doesn't have a link to the video so I can only assume we are talking about the same thing. >> No one told observers they had to leave, and both an independent monitor and an investigator oversaw the vote count, according to state and county officials. The observers dispute this, and reaffirm their claim that they were asked to leave. >> Confusion arose when election workers thought they were done for the night, but then were instructed to continue scanning ballots. Yes, everyone was aware that vote counting was supposed to stop at 11pm but after they got rid of everyone else, this one team continued to count ballots that had been prepped and hidden. > But investigators who reviewed the entire surveillance tape confirmed it showed “normal ballot processing,” according to Gabriel Sterling, a top official in the secretary of state’s office. It's normal to do this? Perhaps the problem here is that the actual activities are not in dispute, but one party considers them normal and one party is unhappy that fraud is considered normal. >> After a short period when observers weren’t present, an independent state election board monitor arrived to oversee the scanning at 11:52 p.m., Barron said. A state investigator arrived at 12:15 a.m. Both individuals remained at the facility until the count concluded for the night, he said. The Georgia secretary of state’s office said it was aware of the late-night counting, and confirmed that both its investigator and an independent monitor observed scanning “until it was halted for the night.” The office said it had launched an investigation into why partisan poll observers left before scanning ended. Sounds like we really need to get that investigative report.
- driverdan 6y ago
  It's called the Gish gallop after a creationist who used this technique during debates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
ascagnel_ 6y ago
I think it's also worth considering that none of this evidence has been through any sort of judicial review -- at no point in the Trump campaign's barrage of lawsuits did they litigate any election fraud, only procedural questions around the inclusion or exclusions of ballots.
- ansible 6y ago
  Yes. Also consider that 45 is not the typical poor defendant, who cannot afford adequate representation in court. He is (theoretically) a billionaire, and can afford $1K/hour constitutional law experts. The fact that 45 and his crack team of lawyers (more like, "on crack", right?) have failed so completely tells you there just is no actual evidence there.
RealityVoid 6y ago
So, I am certain, _somewhere_ in this whole election _someone_ surely stole some votes. I can almost guarantee that on such a big number of people voting that at least some number of votes were stolen, probably by representatives from both parties. What I strongly doubt is the fact that this was widespread, organized or the numbers of these frauds were in any meaningful way impacting the election. The difference between parties was not insignificant. In other election cycles you had much lower differences but the other party conceded to the process ( looking at 2000). So this whole thing is, IMO, predicated on one side simply refusing to admit defeat.
akiselev 6y ago
I clicked on one in the list randomly. #38 8,000 voter application submitted by couple on behalf of homeless and the dead - https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/pair-charged-with-voter-fraIud-allegedly-submitted-thousands-of-fraudulent-applications-on-behalf-of-homeless-people/2464168/ https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/pair-charged-with-v... A man who tried to run for mayor in Hawthorne is among two people charged in a voter fraud case in which thousands of fraudulent voter registration applications were allegedly submitted on behalf of homeless people, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office announced Tuesday. It doesn't even allege that any votes were submitted, the article was published Nov 17 so the investigation must have been going on for months. Clicked on #237: Posted confidential voter information on website - https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/elections/20_gen_ab_ev_reports.php https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/elections/20_gen_ab_ev_re... That's the official website for Washoe County and the page is a voter turnout report so yeah obviously it's evidence of fraud (/sarcasm). #356: Count the fraudalent [sic] ballots https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eH3FpIy3TE&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eH3FpIy3TE&feature=youtu.be It's just a youtube video of voting officials talking at a desk or something. That website is evidence of nothing more than someone with too much time on their hands and ideology to push.
- Shared404 6y ago
  Sounds about right. I didn't have time to get past the landing page when I pulled it up. I'm kinda regretting wasting everyone's time now.
  - cyberlurker 6y ago
    If it makes you feel better, I thought it was interesting to see how thin the “evidence” is. In some cases there appears to be no evidence, just the “possibility” that there could be some and that there should be an investigation to find it. I should point out there is a substantial amount of evidence that there is no notable voter fraud. This evidence helps justify not wasting more time and giving oxygen to this conspiracy.
- thu2111 6y ago
  I think your comment is probably the most deceptive I've ever seen on HN :( "It's just a youtube video of voting officials talking at a desk or something." The discussion they're having at the desk is about fraud. It's a vote counting operation. The counting volunteers say they found a pile of ballots with identical signatures and the woman running the vote is telling them to ignore it because it's not their role to flag this or investigate it. In a vote audit. The video description text has a transcript of what's going on. The female counter asks, “So when we’re done with the audit, there’s still the opportunity to challenge the fact that we have multiple ballots with the very same signature?” she asks. “I don’t know if ‘challenge’ is the right word,” the SOS official says ... “And again, we know that you have a concern with this precinct,” she tells them, explaining, “That’s not your role at this very moment,” A video of counting volunteers discussing fraud they detected and being explicitly told to drop it is very far from "just talking at a desk or something".
swyx 6y ago
not a supporter, but i like that the author has taken the time to distinguish what they consider "verified" and the rest they consider "unverified". quite a few of the 80 "illegal votes" accusations here bear very big numbers - would be nice to crowdsource an effort to provide the other side to each of them. unfortunately, like i suspect many here, i'm not particularly inclined to spend time going thru them, particular the ~30% of those that link to youtube and twitter accounts. Brandolini's law, aka the bullshit asymmetry principle comes to mind - "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it."
Hnrobert42 6y ago
Well, the fact that the site lists stats like number of court cases with evidentiary hearings blocked without a companion stat of cases allowed to proceed is evidence of bias.

eli 6y ago

The evidence is just laughably bad. But there is a lot of it and if you wanted to explain why each claim is either meaningless or outright false would take a lot of time. I guess that's the point.

Shared404 6y ago
I suspected that would be the case, but as you pointed out, they have many claims. At work currently, so haven't really looked at it. Probably will tonight, maybe make a post refuting it.
- eli 6y ago
  I doubt it's worth your time. You can't refute a conspiracy theory with facts.
  - Shared404 6y ago
    You can't refute those deep in, but you can help protect those who could be swayed by lots of "data" and a fancy web page. I may or may not get around to it, but I could see it being worthwhile.
    - eli 6y ago
      Respectfully disagree. I don't think you can. People are reading a website like this because they are looking for confirmation of what they already feel must be true.
      - Shared404 6y ago
        I agree mostly. I partially just want something to link to if I happen to see it linked in the wild again, it rubs me the wrong way to see it uncontested in a conversation. I figure that at least that way new people aren't getting sucked in when they click thinking "Well, I should check the other sides view."
        dhruvkar 6y ago
        Thanks for sharing. While I agree with eli, this is an insight into what the other side is looking at. And the "other side" is definitely a spectrum of people -- ones who are open to reason and others that are absolutely not.
  - Jtsummers 6y ago
    A common response I've received when refuting part or all of various conspiracy theories, young Earth creationist, or flat Earth type logic: "It doesn't matter that that's not true, it still could have been true." Like the possibility of a truth is all they need to believe in it. And then shifting goal posts.
    - eli 6y ago
      I can only imagine how much worse this all would be if the Presidential election had actually been close. We should be thankful that only an incomprehensibly vast conspiracy could possibly have "stolen" the election.
    - PenisBanana 6y ago
      > ... then shifting goal posts. Exactly, exactly the same as dishonestly conflating (a) a serious real world (it exists) situation involving many features including vast election fraud - which, yes, may or may not have swung the result with (b) " young Earth creationist, or flat Earth " Here, on HN, let's try and stay on topic.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - Jtsummers 6y ago
        Do you have real proof/evidence of this "vast election fraud"? So far none has been presented. And what "proof" is out there are either known falsehoods, crazy theories (zombie Hugo Chavez wants Biden and not Trump to win), or nonsensical (CIA/DOD/NSA radioactive isotope watermarks are applied to all legitimate ballots, any day now they'll show that x million ballots were fakes). Other than the dishonest (to themselves or others), few are claiming no fraud. There's always fraud (either intentional or not), but usually (and so far this election seems no different) in the tens to hundreds of cases. But there's no evidence of millions of faked votes.
PenisBanana 6y ago
> The evidence is just laughably bad. That's simply a straight-out lie. Review twenty examples, say - even the least intellectually curious can do that - yes, you can. It will take 20 minutes and a bit of thinking. Each item, classified, is linked to documentary evidence. Of the twenty that I checked to test if "The evidence is just laughably bad" was a lie or not (it was a lie): - most link to serious articles describing a single item of election impropriety - the links to twitter always include a photo of the evidence the tweet was supporting - the remainder went to independent sources - a valid criticism would be a reliance on secondary media, which are possibly as unreliable as MSM. - No Mainstream Media source are relied on, which is great plus.
- eli 6y ago
  C'mon are you serious? I'm not getting trolled into fact-checking 20 bogus claims. Why don't you pick one. What's the single most convincing evidence of election fraud in that list?
  - tartoran 6y ago
    Don't bother, by the name of the account alone I can guess they aren't very serious. Keep the energy for non-trolls
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    the video from Georgia still hasn't been explained satisfactorily.
    - eli 6y ago
      This video? https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-georgia-media-social-media-e9a73462e39e7aa39683f0f582a6659e https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-donald-trump-georgi...
      - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
        presumably? I'm not sure how many videos of alleged ballot fraud are floating around and the link you posted doesn't have a link to the video so I can only assume we are talking about the same thing. >> No one told observers they had to leave, and both an independent monitor and an investigator oversaw the vote count, according to state and county officials. The observers dispute this, and reaffirm their claim that they were asked to leave. >> Confusion arose when election workers thought they were done for the night, but then were instructed to continue scanning ballots. Yes, everyone was aware that vote counting was supposed to stop at 11pm but after they got rid of everyone else, this one team continued to count ballots that had been prepped and hidden. > But investigators who reviewed the entire surveillance tape confirmed it showed “normal ballot processing,” according to Gabriel Sterling, a top official in the secretary of state’s office. It's normal to do this? Perhaps the problem here is that the actual activities are not in dispute, but one party considers them normal and one party is unhappy that fraud is considered normal. >> After a short period when observers weren’t present, an independent state election board monitor arrived to oversee the scanning at 11:52 p.m., Barron said. A state investigator arrived at 12:15 a.m. Both individuals remained at the facility until the count concluded for the night, he said. The Georgia secretary of state’s office said it was aware of the late-night counting, and confirmed that both its investigator and an independent monitor observed scanning “until it was halted for the night.” The office said it had launched an investigation into why partisan poll observers left before scanning ended. Sounds like we really need to get that investigative report.
driverdan 6y ago
It's called the Gish gallop after a creationist who used this technique during debates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

ascagnel_ 6y ago

I think it's also worth considering that none of this evidence has been through any sort of judicial review -- at no point in the Trump campaign's barrage of lawsuits did they litigate any election fraud, only procedural questions around the inclusion or exclusions of ballots.

ansible 6y ago
Yes. Also consider that 45 is not the typical poor defendant, who cannot afford adequate representation in court. He is (theoretically) a billionaire, and can afford $1K/hour constitutional law experts. The fact that 45 and his crack team of lawyers (more like, "on crack", right?) have failed so completely tells you there just is no actual evidence there.

RealityVoid 6y ago

So, I am certain, _somewhere_ in this whole election _someone_ surely stole some votes. I can almost guarantee that on such a big number of people voting that at least some number of votes were stolen, probably by representatives from both parties. What I strongly doubt is the fact that this was widespread, organized or the numbers of these frauds were in any meaningful way impacting the election. The difference between parties was not insignificant. In other election cycles you had much lower differences but the other party conceded to the process ( looking at 2000). So this whole thing is, IMO, predicated on one side simply refusing to admit defeat.

akiselev 6y ago

I clicked on one in the list randomly. #38 8,000 voter application submitted by couple on behalf of homeless and the dead - https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/pair-charged-with-voter-fraIud-allegedly-submitted-thousands-of-fraudulent-applications-on-behalf-of-homeless-people/2464168/ https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/pair-charged-with-v... A man who tried to run for mayor in Hawthorne is among two people charged in a voter fraud case in which thousands of fraudulent voter registration applications were allegedly submitted on behalf of homeless people, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office announced Tuesday. It doesn't even allege that any votes were submitted, the article was published Nov 17 so the investigation must have been going on for months. Clicked on #237: Posted confidential voter information on website - https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/elections/20_gen_ab_ev_reports.php https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/elections/20_gen_ab_ev_re... That's the official website for Washoe County and the page is a voter turnout report so yeah obviously it's evidence of fraud (/sarcasm). #356: Count the fraudalent [sic] ballots https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eH3FpIy3TE&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eH3FpIy3TE&feature=youtu.be It's just a youtube video of voting officials talking at a desk or something. That website is evidence of nothing more than someone with too much time on their hands and ideology to push.

Shared404 6y ago
Sounds about right. I didn't have time to get past the landing page when I pulled it up. I'm kinda regretting wasting everyone's time now.
- cyberlurker 6y ago
  If it makes you feel better, I thought it was interesting to see how thin the “evidence” is. In some cases there appears to be no evidence, just the “possibility” that there could be some and that there should be an investigation to find it. I should point out there is a substantial amount of evidence that there is no notable voter fraud. This evidence helps justify not wasting more time and giving oxygen to this conspiracy.
thu2111 6y ago
I think your comment is probably the most deceptive I've ever seen on HN :( "It's just a youtube video of voting officials talking at a desk or something." The discussion they're having at the desk is about fraud. It's a vote counting operation. The counting volunteers say they found a pile of ballots with identical signatures and the woman running the vote is telling them to ignore it because it's not their role to flag this or investigate it. In a vote audit. The video description text has a transcript of what's going on. The female counter asks, “So when we’re done with the audit, there’s still the opportunity to challenge the fact that we have multiple ballots with the very same signature?” she asks. “I don’t know if ‘challenge’ is the right word,” the SOS official says ... “And again, we know that you have a concern with this precinct,” she tells them, explaining, “That’s not your role at this very moment,” A video of counting volunteers discussing fraud they detected and being explicitly told to drop it is very far from "just talking at a desk or something".

swyx 6y ago

not a supporter, but i like that the author has taken the time to distinguish what they consider "verified" and the rest they consider "unverified". quite a few of the 80 "illegal votes" accusations here bear very big numbers - would be nice to crowdsource an effort to provide the other side to each of them. unfortunately, like i suspect many here, i'm not particularly inclined to spend time going thru them, particular the ~30% of those that link to youtube and twitter accounts. Brandolini's law, aka the bullshit asymmetry principle comes to mind - "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it."

Hnrobert42 6y ago

Well, the fact that the site lists stats like number of court cases with evidentiary hearings blocked without a companion stat of cases allowed to proceed is evidence of bias.