Angehefteter Tweet
If the metric for success of all the current efforts to improve our systems - DOGE, etc. - is that those efforts make 0 mistakes then apply that same metric to the current systems and what do you get - EPIC FAILURE.
English
Scott Buchanan
1.9K posts
Scott Buchanan
@dscottbuch
Physics Ph.D. and background in medical device business/ neuroscience. Have been concerned about imposed biases in the sciences for years.
PNW Beigetreten Eylül 2009
243 Folgt287 Follower
It doesn’t matter if you audit a flawed process using the flawed rules of that process. All that does is verify that process was properly mis-applied. Multiple people on both sides of the aisle have just proclaimed on X in the last 24 hours that the California process is flawed. Just read a few threads. This demands an investigation, not an audit.
There is more that enough probable cause to launch an investigation.
English
@Chris_Liss "It's on the city to handle it in a timely, transparent and auditable way."
They do this.
There are literally RNC lawyers watching and Republicans as part of the volunteers. It is extremely transparent, and it is audited multiple ways.
English
This piece sounds reasonable, but it misplaces the burden of proof. It's not on the average person to prove fraud and articulate the manner in which the conspiracy took place. It's on the city to handle it in a timely, transparent and auditable way. If the process is opaque and unverifiable, if cheating is possible, you should assume cheating until proven otherwise. In other words, there are two kinds of voting systems: ones where cheating is impossible, and ones where cheating should be presumed.
Kaizen D. Asiedu@thatsKAIZEN
Yes - it is frustrating that Spencer Pratt was ahead on election night, and is now behind. Yes - California’s system gives Democrats a structural advantage by design. Yes - LA needs serious reform, starting with voter ID. No - fraud is not the most likely explanation.
English
@LACountyRRCC You can achieve your stated goal by counting everything you get - the good and the bad. Your goals are mid-aligned with the law, as expected.
English
Another busy day at the Ballot Processing Center!
This is the extraction process. It's one of many important steps to ensure every eligible ballot is counted accurately, securely, and in accordance with the law.
For election results and updates, visit RESULTS.LAVOTE.GOV
English
@LACountyRRCC Notice they never reference ensuring the ineligible are not counted. Interesting tell.
English
@jimiuorio It has nothing to do with ‘the prize’. It with the continued fall of our government officials in this country. Obvious violations of the law are ignored and defended by those who would pretend to govern us.
English
People getting defensive as we are discussing the LA election is beyond weird…I can’t understand why there’s emotion attached to it. I can’t understand how anyone would think it’s unreasonable to question election integrity. I think it’s really odd to blindly trust the process.
English
@politicalmath Sorry but what you describe is illegal and fraud.
English
I mostly agree with this with the following caveat:
It might not be legal fraud to grab 1,000 ballots, mark your favorite candidate, and have a homeless person sign it with a smiley face
But it is a moral fraud because you've just disenfranchised 1000 voters who actually care about their vote, care about the results, care about their city
If that is what is happening (which seems likely) then it calls into question the very nature of representative democracy. Why do we even have a vote if the vote result isn't determined by individuals but by NGOs who can harvest as many votes as they want using these strategies?
Jeff Blehar is *BOX OFFICE POISON*@EsotericCD
I'll be writing about this for NR, but I will lay the Los Angeles situation out here flatly. Pratt didn't lose because of fraud. Pratt lost because, just like Chicago, it's an 80/20 Democratic city. In fact, he seems to have placed exactly where was in the final polls. The real scandal is what's legal: with a 100% mail-in system, an endless window for ballot counting and legal mechanisms for unions and organizers to harvest (and later "cure") ballots, California's system is a purpose-built black box designed to fuel paranoia. And for no other purpose than that it allows Democratic intra-party battles to become a test of organizing strength for NGOs and unions. People are right to be angry about the system. But even the way the votes are being counted now makes perfect (albeit disgusting) sense without recourse to claims of "fraud."
English
@XavierBecerra Yep. You count every vote whether a citizen, alien, or non-person. As long as they vote Dem.
English
California isn’t the problem. Trump’s hatred of our democracy is.
In California, we count every vote. Not just the ones Donald Trump likes.
Commentary Donald J. Trump Truth Social Posts On X@TrumpTruthOnX
Has anybody been watching the CROOKED Election going on in California. Two great Republican Candidates are being cheated, and so is America, which if the Dumocrats are able to fulfill their mission, great trouble and consternation will follow. Watch this “Election” closely!!! President DJT ( TruthSocial: Jun 7 2026, 11:02 PM ET )
English
@neoavatara And what was your prediction about Trump vs. Hillary????. No one in LA, 4 months ago, would have said Pratt had any chance at double digits in the primary and here he's sitting going on 30%. Counting him out as reason NOT to suspect fraud is idiotic.
English
People act like Pratt wasn't my preferred candidate. He was.
But its exceptionally stupid if you believe that him finishing 2nd (and losing the general) was anything but a long shot.
When you say otherwise, you prove you don't understand anything about California elections.
English
Another case of the media carrying water for the Dems. There is no evidence given of the 'Dem Establishment ' caring one way or the other between Bass and Raman. There is plenty of evidence about the 'Dem Establishment ' caring about Pratt. In the current situation the chance of Pratt winning is exacting 0% with no argument. In the original situation he had a real chance >> 0%. Those saying he didn't have any chance also said Trump couldn't win against Hillary.
Make no mistake, this is huge win for the Dems.
English
NEW: CNN's Harry Enten fumes that people are accusing Democrats of fraud after Nithya Raman surged to 2nd place in the LA mayoral race, ahead of Spencer Pratt.
Raman has surged with late ballots, while Karen Bass has bizarrely remained relatively flat.
"This is the dumbest conspiracy theory I have ever heard...!"
English
@tomselliott @ForecasterEnten How do they know that??? Who’s on the record saying that? Otherwise it’s a meaningless assertion.
English
CNN's @ForecasterEnten on claims the LA mayoral race is rigged: "This is the dumbest conspiracy theory I have ever heard, because the Democratic establishment & Karen Bass wanted Spencer Pratt in the runoff."
English
What choice do they have when faced with huge probable cause for investigation and the state government blocks any and all investigations. There is no evidence because those charged with finding it are blocked from doing so. Of all the screams of fascism this is the clearest example. Right at Newsoms feet.
It is straight out of the authoritarians playbook. Prevent investigation so you can claim there is no crime due to lack of evidence.
English
It's good to want transparency and integrity in elections. But the people who have firmly decided—without any concrete evidence—that Democrats "stole" the LA mayoral election by giving Karen Bass a more competitive opponent look very silly. A lot of people need to log off.
English
Again, just pointing fingers. No reasoning.
It’s not frustrating that Pratt doesn’t get to make his case in November. It’s frustrating that the Dems are playing the same old playbook. 1) Most secure elections ever. Oh that just failed let pivot 2) election processes is flawed but no fraud. Oops found out again (eg multiple ballots mailed to parking lot porta-potties) another pivot 3) election process flawed but no significant fraud ….
If you have a process that is so flawed that fraud is easy to implement, where California is today, and you get highly improbable results, i.e.this election, and you won’t allow investigation, you are destroying trust. Combine this with the monolithic opposition to the Save America Act and you know there’s highly likely fraud, well beyond any threshold to implement a full investigation.
English
Yes - it is frustrating that Spencer Pratt was ahead on election night, and is now behind.
Yes - California’s system gives Democrats a structural advantage by design.
Yes - LA needs serious reform, starting with voter ID.
No - fraud is not the most likely explanation.
Kaizen D. Asiedu@thatsKAIZEN
English
@neoavatara Wow. What a rebuttal. Learned how to debate in kindergarten. No, you’re wrong, No you’re wrong. No you’re wrong…
English
Its not odd at all if you understand how voting works.
Ian Miller@ianmSC
It’s very simple. Spencer Pratt was a big underdog to win in November. Nobody is surprised that mail in ballots favor Democrats. But it’s extremely odd that they have overwhelmingly and disproportionately favored the specific Democrat that would push Pratt out of the race.
English
You have no idea why there has been surge in the count for Raman. That is the point. Your second paragraph negates the conclusion. All you know is that the law is LEGAL you have no idea of the execution of the count was legal. Why is that? Because the California government shield all election processes from investigation. You should be asking why the process is made to be so opaque!!!!
English
Right wing conspiracies every time the GOP loses an election are low IQ & tiresome.
What happened in L.A. is not fraud. The CA election system is highly inefficient & disgusting but it is LEGAL. Codified into state law & affirmed by the courts.
The Raman surge is due to the counting of late arriving mail ballots. In this election those votes were heavily tilted towards young progressives as they were late in deciding between Raman vs an even crazier leftist. Pratt voters made up their minds early & a lot voted in person.
Contrary to popular belief, U.S. elections are very difficult to rig due to the decentralized nature of state election laws & local counting. Yes, Dems ballot harvested in CA. Yes, that benefits heavily Dem urban areas. It stinks but that’s the game. Either change the rules or learn how to navigate within it.
The L.A. mayoral race is deeply disappointing. But let’s not be whiny losers who indulge in conspiracy theories.
English
Yet another misdirect. I audited businesses for years. What is being presented is what the process SHOULD be, not what it is. No one, no one, should believe that this process is being followed. Just look at the independent reports of: 1) 26 ballots sent to an address where there are ONLY sorta-potties, 2) interview with ballot counter that witnessed signatures are never questions, by direction (not policy). This is what was found out by < 1 hr of investigation.
English
Sigh. Why won't anyone do research before posting?
Responding to your six points.
1. Yes. It is legal. States have different laws.
Still has to come from a registered voter, has to be returned in the return envelope assigned to that voter, there is no evidence of mass mail theft, and it has to have the voter's signature, which is checked (part of why it takes a long time).
2. California verifies identity through return envelope barcode and signature verification -- as is done for many financial and legal instruments.
This is the same way it's done in Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, etc.
3. Unattended drop boxes. You do realize that every USPS box is an "unattended drop box," right?
That's why it's nice that all Californians can track their mail ballots. And so too can the election officials.
4. Homeless regularly paid to vote. I'll settle for 5 proven examples in recent elections. Also, homeless are allowed to register and vote.
5. You're just pointing out that California is an "all mail" state and that almost everyone votes by mail as a result. Yes. And that's part of why it takes so long.
California does voter list maintenance. Otherwise it would have a laundry list of lawsuits under the NVRA.
And, for better or worse, you can't remove somebody from voter rolls just because he doesn't vote. So if you, e.g., move out of an apartment, but don't tell the registrar, and don't fill out change of address with USPS, then a mail ballot is still showing up to your address. And if the new resident simply throws it in the trash, then you're not taken off the voter rolls just because you didn't return a ballot.
Now, if you're suggesting that states should share information with each other, such that they know when somebody registers in a different state, then I agree with you.
That's why California should join ERIC. And it's why it's a shame that some states have left ERIC in recent years. That's bad for voter list maintenance.
6. This is just comparing apples to oranges. And you can easily Google the differences in the two systems.
But first, as a factual predicate, you might want to be more careful. I'd suggest you start with this New York Times article: "Why Do Elections in India Take So Long?"
nytimes.com/2024/04/17/wor…
Shabbos Kestenbaum@ShabbosK
Im sorry but President Trump is absolutely correct. The way California conducts their elections is a legitimate, credible threat to democracy: 1. Ballot harvesting is LEGAL, meaning 3rd parties are allowed to deliver thousands of completed ballots themselves with ZERO supervision or timeline. 2. There is ZERO requirement to show ANY type of ID when one comes to vote. 3. There are thousands of UNATTENDED drop boxes for ballots. There are DOZENS of examples of them being lit on fire, stolen, or bombarded with fake ballots. 4. The homeless are regularly paid to vote. The are given illegitimate addresses and coached through the process. 5. About 13 million of the approximately 16 million votes cast in 2024 were cast using vote-by-mail ballots. However, mail-in ballots are sent to every registered voter, whether you request them or not. California almost never updates their voting rolls, so ballots are REGULARLY sent to people who no longer live in the state, wrong address, or different person. My building alone had half a dozen such cases. 6. India had 660 million voters last election and counted the vote in one day. California has about 16 million and counting takes at least 30 days. This is a national embarrassment.
English
@brianeskow It makes it much more likely and the other issue make California result in-auditable.
English
Is an election rigged just because it counts mailed-in ballots after Election Day?
English
@Scott_Wiener Let’s be clear what has been revealed here. California Dems have designed and implemented a fully insecure voting system that is simple to manipulate and impossible , impossible to audit.
English
Let’s be very clear what’s happening: MAGA operatives are working overtime to cast doubt on the LA Mayor’s race to justify passing their atrocious proposals to make it much harder or impossible for people to vote.
They’re laying groundwork for straight up voter suppression.
English
My thoughts on the LA mayoral election are:
1. CA’s election processes are not good
2. The LA mayoral election wasn’t “rigged”
3. The subsets of people who vote in person early, in person on election day, by mail early, by mail in the last couple days, and via harvesting operations are quite different (age, demographics, partisan lean, etc.). Even within Dems (and Reps), there are stark differences.
4. Like previous elections (including LA Mayor), later-arriving mail ballots were always going to be much bluer.
5. Accepting mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received days later creates unnecessary delays and uncertainty.
6. We should be able to know the winner (or top two) on election night, not days or weeks later.
7. Bass would have preferred to run against Pratt. The “machine” knows a Dem is winning, but there are “sub-machines” with varied stakeholders and supporters. A more progressive (and anti-establishment) faction who wants Raman doesn’t sound conspiratorial. It’s expected.
8. Ballot harvesting and drop boxes make it harder to verify voter intent and participation. I honestly wonder if asking 1,000 harvested voters *today* about their mayoral choice just last week would yield more than a couple hundred who could name their selection (or even any of the candidates).
King for a day? I’d love to see something like the following everywhere: mail only for true absentees, 2 weeks early in-person max, huge EDay with sufficient logistical support at all precincts (holiday for general), voter ID (free to get, with safeguards for the rare occasion of a lost ID late game, which should go to provisional with cure by new ID within a week, and unlikely to change any outcome).
English
@JamesSurowiecki Simple answer. If it’s Pratt - 0%, Bass 51%, Raman 49% the fraud is obvious. They have to keep it plausible and to do that they need to have the data from the initial vote to calibrate the result to be arguably reasonable.
English
What's the actual argument here? If the supposed fraudsters can use mail-in ballots to control election results, why would they not have just rigged it from the start so that Bass and Raman each ended up with 35-37% of the vote, ensuring they'd finish in the top two? Why only rig mail-in ballots that were cast late?
English
@stevemur You already know the answer to question (2). There have been several reports on X of interviews with poll workers who say procedure is to NOT question witnessed signatures.
English
If the Secretary of State of CA is truly interested in diminishing speculation about fraud, there are a couple pieces of information they could release, right now, to reduce it. These data can be shared without compromising personal information in any way.
1) With each ballot drop, what total number of ballots were returned with “witnessed” status?
2) How many “witnesses” have been credibly identified as real people? How many unique people witnessed ballot signatures? Are signatures by witnesses validated in any way?
English
@BrentHBaker @LuluGNavarro @nytimes Wow, a full admission that Pelly is ideologically driven, not fact based.
English
Scott Pelley says Bari Weiss needs to be removed from CBS News because she, not he and CBS News, are biased: “She brings an ideology into CBS News where that is just anathema.” And he equates running CBS News to flying a 747.
@LuluGNavarro, @NYTimes The Interview podcast host: “Do you think Barry Weiss needs to be removed?”
Pelley: “Oh, gosh, yes. She’s a lovely person. And her Free Press organization that she founded has been very successful. She’s proven that, great for her. But television’s not her thing. She brings an ideology into CBS News where that is just anathema. And so it’s a terrible fit. It’s probably not her fault. But it’s just a terrible fit. She doesn’t know television. She doesn’t understand how it works. She doesn’t have management experience for a large organization like CBS News. So yes, I do think that we would be far better off without her. Maybe she goes back to the Free Press and has a sterling career. But this is like somebody walking up to me and saying, there’s a 747. There are 400 people on it. We need you to fly it to Paris. I’m going to decline because I don’t have a clue.”
English