This article unfortunately misses the point. Bullet ballots in and of themselves aren't a problem. The problem is that, from what I've read, they appear in statistically anomalous numbers in the swing states. None of the states next to swing states saw an increase in the percentage of bullet ballots from previous elections, so that fact,…
This article unfortunately misses the point. Bullet ballots in and of themselves aren't a problem. The problem is that, from what I've read, they appear in statistically anomalous numbers in the swing states. None of the states next to swing states saw an increase in the percentage of bullet ballots from previous elections, so that fact, by itself, should raise significant questions about those ballots. All that has to be done to confirm the validity of the election is to make sure the paper bullet ballot count matches the digital count, but for some reason, none of the states where we saw this strange activity are willing to verify the results. Again, the question is why? Why leave this open question about the validity of the election when it's so easy to verify?
This article unfortunately misses the point. Bullet ballots in and of themselves aren't a problem. The problem is that, from what I've read, they appear in statistically anomalous numbers in the swing states. None of the states next to swing states saw an increase in the percentage of bullet ballots from previous elections, so that fact, by itself, should raise significant questions about those ballots. All that has to be done to confirm the validity of the election is to make sure the paper bullet ballot count matches the digital count, but for some reason, none of the states where we saw this strange activity are willing to verify the results. Again, the question is why? Why leave this open question about the validity of the election when it's so easy to verify?