Reply #12: I believe it too.

[emcguffie]

And you're right, there's no way to prove it.

Every time they add one more of those machines, there's less chance of proving anything, either way.

There is evidence that can be gleaned from results and lots of details about those results using mathematics, though, isn't there?

I'm sorry I can't recall what I saw mathematically that supported what I happen to believe to be the truth. But I reserve the right to trust myself, and that includes my observations, including but not limited to factual observations, and my instincts. And I can form my opinion that way. I do not have to be able to prove my opinion is accurate. I can even voice my opinion without proving it is accurate.

Since we are in a fix where pretty much nothing can be proven about who is being elected these days, all anybody can say then is pretty much opinion, yes? At least until somebody counts paper ballots by hand. And that's not going to happen where I live, as there aren't any paper ballots.

I think TIA is right. He may not be, but I think he is. And all your insistence that he isn't certainly doesn't accomplish anything but chase people off who don't happen to agree with you.

We're all on the same side.

I happen to think he's pretty smart, and he's probably right, and his tool probably works. Just like back in 2004 I was quite sure I was right, and that opinion was based to some degree on math.

What about the returning dead voter? Does that mean nothing to you? That's not what he calls them. The returning voter that they have to create in order to make all the numbers add up?

Truth is, right now I'm too lazy to go back and figure it all out. One of these days my sick (I mean physically ill) brain will wake up a little bit and I"ll figure it out again, and then perhaps I can have an honest conversation with you about it.

TIA certainly could be right, and you could, just possibly, be wrong.