1
-1

[–] didntsayeeeee 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Clickbait. Kansas hates her! This mom mathematician proved voter fraud with this one weird trick!

Kansas isn't "trying to silence her". She's just not allowed her hands on the ballots for various legal reasons.

I haven't read her alleged paper so I don't know whether her case is reasonable or not. Judging by the standards of most of the "here, be outraged by this!" shit I read on the Internet, I am guessing it's BS.

0
0

[–] cynoclast [S] ago  (edited ago)

Analyzing election returns at a precinct level, Clarkson found that candidate support was correlated, to a statistically significant degree, with the size of the precinct. In Republican primaries, the bias has been toward the establishment candidates over tea partiers. In general elections, it has favored Republican candidates over Democrats, even when the demographics of the precincts in question suggested that the opposite should have been true.

The irregularities are isolated to precincts that use “Central Tabulator” voting machines — machines that have previously been shown to be vulnerable to hacking. The effects are significant and widespread: According to their analysis, Mitt Romney could have received over a million extra votes in the 2012 Republican primary, mostly coming at the expense of Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.** President Obama also ceded significant votes to John McCain due to this irregularity**, as well.

It's painfully obvious that entrenched republicans are behind this, and that they're committing election fraud.

Based on your reaction to these facts, I'm guessing you're a republican. Maybe you shouldn't be, since your party is obviously corrupt and resorting to things that in other countries we would rightly a dictatorship or authoritative regime in order to stay in power.

I'm not a democrat, because they're almost as bad, but corruption is corruption. There's no reason in a democracy to dispute a recount, or to deny this mathematician access to data that could prove or disprove her hypothesis.

0
1

[–] diafeetus 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The legal reasons appeared to be rubbish: protecting voter identity by refusing to hand over voter records that don't have any names on them? "Losing" formal requests for information? You can't do that. It's blatantly obstructionist.

0
1

[–] cynoclast [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

0
0

[–] Link1299 ago 

Fucking

Kansas

I hate this state