This chart shows “clone” registrations in one of New York’s counties. It is a small county, with about 85,000 total registrations. Of them, about 5,200 are “clones.” A “clone” is an excess registration assigned to an individual. For instance, one person with 25 state voter registration numbers. More often, there is only one clone per person, for a total of about 1.4 million statewide.
At this point it would seem better to disregard the voter database altogether and instead require that people who come to vote in person on election day prove that they are citizens who have the legal ability to vote. Proper and sufficient identification should be able to be procured early in the year (like now). In fact, producing a legitimate voter ID should give the person a benefit, like 3% off his/her taxes for (only) the first year that individual shows his/her voter ID to the town clerk when paying taxes (which is probably the same place that person will later vote).
It does bring up the biggest point. Now that you know all this, what can be done about it? The counties don't seem to want to remove them. They'll probably be added back faster then you can remove. They also probably vote and then purge super fast, making their vote status questionable.
I like the resultant chart because it shows the problem getting worse not better. We need a way to get this in the public's mind, so that we start getting solutions. In this particular county, there could be a 6% error rate if all clones voted. That is far above the legal limit of errors.
To keep "all the balls in the air" where does all this juggle start? I am still looking at statewide voter registration database downloads. I have to gloss over 10 columns of "districting" to get to a "posted" election within the database. What I recently worked on was "surgically" removing misc. bedroom communities from 17 precincts (70% of addresses were from a town and the remaining addresses were sliced and diced from 4 other surrounding communities). The counties are using decimal places for precincts to achieve Further "districting". So, I had to ask the Commissioners, "Which is it?" Did Precinct #572 have 121 people participate as the voter roll is posted or did race #8893 for Soil & Water Supervisor (Landowner) accumulate 201 votes in #572 as the Secretary of State reports on her website for "Election Results". This just occurred in November 2023. Interesting that this happens when there are 3 or more candidates running. If people would start looking closely at the records, take out the "political party" pollution you start to see a possibility of 2 sets of books being run. Look closely at the "Bond Questions" orchestration. Over 17 precincts "total votes" for one is 1,621 and the other is 1,625. 6 precincts are 1 off from each other on each bond question with 4 other precincts having "Bingo"s, the same number of votes. And, it is as plain as all the noses on our faces. Ask for the number of different ballot designs. The main "design" is to cheat.
Thank you! I really do see what you are saying. You are a great communicator...although I swoon if you try to take me past "binary" with voter ID numbers. NC had me upside down.
IMO, if USA stipulates authenticated voter-id, same-day voting with paper, hand-marked ballots, human-counted ballots completed by end of Election day, and mail-in ballots individually requested in advance and awarded only according to limited criteria (as in our recent past), most avenues for cheating +/or inaccuracy would be eliminated. Election administration would be cheaper (no expensive machines whose technology requires time-and-money-costly updating and nonetheless too quickly becomes obsolete requiring expensive replacement), and is vastly more transparent. Paper records provide the most accessible, fool-proof evidence for verifying numbers, and validity of registrants. The physical records should be kept for more years than two, to allow more reasonable time to conduct careful audits of certified results in case of contestation. Furthermore, citizen participants in Election day processes should be open to any volunteer, trained, legal-voter registered US citizen regardless of political party registration status; i.e., registered voters who choose not to self-designate as either democrat or republican should also be welcomed to participate in election day processes as long as they have received requisite training. Using paper ballots and no electronic machines, training would be greatly simplified and comprehensible . Lastly, but in reality FIRSTLY, states must create & use ACCURATE voter roll databases, compliant with state and federal law.
Dr. Zark- many thanks as always for your vigilance and fortitude for the cause of freedom and liberty.
In no small part because of the work that's being done by you and NY Citizens Audit we are finally seeing some challenges to the election / voting status quo.
I am reading articles from all over on the topic of election integrity, including the one linked to below, wherein Federal standards are being proposed for elections. I would love to have your take on this and whether you agree with any of the ideas presented.
Here is an excerpt and the link:
"I’m well aware that states have the primary authority regarding election matters, but there are certain apolitical, across-the-board regulations that the Federal Government should — MUST — enact.
The gist of what I’m proposing for a new Federal law is that when reporting Federal election results, all states must fully adhere to standard accounting practices."
"The new law can adopt something like the 10 Principles of GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Practices), after tweaking them to be more election-specific.
n other words, such a Federal law would: “make the federal election reporting process transparent and standardize assumptions, terminology, definitions, and methods. External parties can easily compare election reports issued by different states, and safely assume consistency, which allows for quick and accurate state-to-state comparisons.”
That we have fifty sets of election reporting rules, and zero consistency regarding such profoundly significant matters like transparency, is mind-boggling."
"One might ask: why is this needed? The short answer is that two reports from my team indicate that in 2020, over SEVEN MILLION suspect ballots fell into the category of having little or no transparency (3± million positives and 4± million negatives)! Further, since there is currently no prohibition against state reports combining positive and negative numbers, the actual amounts are likely much higher."
I agree withis in principle but am wary of giiving the federal governmet more conttrol than they already have. I prefer to do something like this at the county and state levels. It's more work to implement but also harder to destroy.
Technology has been sold to us as making voting simpler. It has made elections complicated, centralized, expensive, more distant from we the people, and finally more vulnerable to cheating.
All such machinery is vulnerable to corrupt penetration. It has opened our sacred provenance—a free Republic—to the subterfuge of domestic manipulation and foreign intrusion.
The moment computerized voting machinery was introduced into our provincial haunts was the moment we began losing control of our elections—and in the end—our country.
Sophisticated computers have taken the election process from the hands of we the people at root level and put our elections into the grasp of a centralized National Security State.
There are roughly 175,000 voting precincts in the United States. Each accommodates an average of 800 citizens, more or less.
Put another way, the United States is divided into 175,000 ‘small towns,’ when it comes to voting. By casting our ballots in our home town, amongst friends and neighbors, we choose to whom we give our consent to be governed.
Our elections should be precinct-centric with voting in person (few exceptions) ID signature required, paper ballots, hand counted by bipartisan citizens (volunteers) when possible with videoed tabulation on up to County validation. Osage County Missouri has proven this to be accurate, faster and cheaper…vote Amish.
At this point it would seem better to disregard the voter database altogether and instead require that people who come to vote in person on election day prove that they are citizens who have the legal ability to vote. Proper and sufficient identification should be able to be procured early in the year (like now). In fact, producing a legitimate voter ID should give the person a benefit, like 3% off his/her taxes for (only) the first year that individual shows his/her voter ID to the town clerk when paying taxes (which is probably the same place that person will later vote).
It does bring up the biggest point. Now that you know all this, what can be done about it? The counties don't seem to want to remove them. They'll probably be added back faster then you can remove. They also probably vote and then purge super fast, making their vote status questionable.
-Mo
Mo, I accidentally deleted your comment while deleting something else. I don't see a way to restore it, my apologies.
These "cloned" voters are also used as smurfs in the ActBlue money laundering campaign finance RICO Operation.
I like the resultant chart because it shows the problem getting worse not better. We need a way to get this in the public's mind, so that we start getting solutions. In this particular county, there could be a 6% error rate if all clones voted. That is far above the legal limit of errors.
Take a look at my new post on this.
To keep "all the balls in the air" where does all this juggle start? I am still looking at statewide voter registration database downloads. I have to gloss over 10 columns of "districting" to get to a "posted" election within the database. What I recently worked on was "surgically" removing misc. bedroom communities from 17 precincts (70% of addresses were from a town and the remaining addresses were sliced and diced from 4 other surrounding communities). The counties are using decimal places for precincts to achieve Further "districting". So, I had to ask the Commissioners, "Which is it?" Did Precinct #572 have 121 people participate as the voter roll is posted or did race #8893 for Soil & Water Supervisor (Landowner) accumulate 201 votes in #572 as the Secretary of State reports on her website for "Election Results". This just occurred in November 2023. Interesting that this happens when there are 3 or more candidates running. If people would start looking closely at the records, take out the "political party" pollution you start to see a possibility of 2 sets of books being run. Look closely at the "Bond Questions" orchestration. Over 17 precincts "total votes" for one is 1,621 and the other is 1,625. 6 precincts are 1 off from each other on each bond question with 4 other precincts having "Bingo"s, the same number of votes. And, it is as plain as all the noses on our faces. Ask for the number of different ballot designs. The main "design" is to cheat.
Thank you! I really do see what you are saying. You are a great communicator...although I swoon if you try to take me past "binary" with voter ID numbers. NC had me upside down.
IMO, if USA stipulates authenticated voter-id, same-day voting with paper, hand-marked ballots, human-counted ballots completed by end of Election day, and mail-in ballots individually requested in advance and awarded only according to limited criteria (as in our recent past), most avenues for cheating +/or inaccuracy would be eliminated. Election administration would be cheaper (no expensive machines whose technology requires time-and-money-costly updating and nonetheless too quickly becomes obsolete requiring expensive replacement), and is vastly more transparent. Paper records provide the most accessible, fool-proof evidence for verifying numbers, and validity of registrants. The physical records should be kept for more years than two, to allow more reasonable time to conduct careful audits of certified results in case of contestation. Furthermore, citizen participants in Election day processes should be open to any volunteer, trained, legal-voter registered US citizen regardless of political party registration status; i.e., registered voters who choose not to self-designate as either democrat or republican should also be welcomed to participate in election day processes as long as they have received requisite training. Using paper ballots and no electronic machines, training would be greatly simplified and comprehensible . Lastly, but in reality FIRSTLY, states must create & use ACCURATE voter roll databases, compliant with state and federal law.
Dr. Zark- many thanks as always for your vigilance and fortitude for the cause of freedom and liberty.
In no small part because of the work that's being done by you and NY Citizens Audit we are finally seeing some challenges to the election / voting status quo.
I am reading articles from all over on the topic of election integrity, including the one linked to below, wherein Federal standards are being proposed for elections. I would love to have your take on this and whether you agree with any of the ideas presented.
Here is an excerpt and the link:
"I’m well aware that states have the primary authority regarding election matters, but there are certain apolitical, across-the-board regulations that the Federal Government should — MUST — enact.
The gist of what I’m proposing for a new Federal law is that when reporting Federal election results, all states must fully adhere to standard accounting practices."
"The new law can adopt something like the 10 Principles of GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Practices), after tweaking them to be more election-specific.
n other words, such a Federal law would: “make the federal election reporting process transparent and standardize assumptions, terminology, definitions, and methods. External parties can easily compare election reports issued by different states, and safely assume consistency, which allows for quick and accurate state-to-state comparisons.”
That we have fifty sets of election reporting rules, and zero consistency regarding such profoundly significant matters like transparency, is mind-boggling."
"One might ask: why is this needed? The short answer is that two reports from my team indicate that in 2020, over SEVEN MILLION suspect ballots fell into the category of having little or no transparency (3± million positives and 4± million negatives)! Further, since there is currently no prohibition against state reports combining positive and negative numbers, the actual amounts are likely much higher."
https://open.substack.com/pub/criticallythinking/p/a-proposed-federal-election-integrity?r=e49v3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Readers have sent me emails through the substack before. I don't know how they do it, but there must be a way.
I agree withis in principle but am wary of giiving the federal governmet more conttrol than they already have. I prefer to do something like this at the county and state levels. It's more work to implement but also harder to destroy.
Technology has been sold to us as making voting simpler. It has made elections complicated, centralized, expensive, more distant from we the people, and finally more vulnerable to cheating.
All such machinery is vulnerable to corrupt penetration. It has opened our sacred provenance—a free Republic—to the subterfuge of domestic manipulation and foreign intrusion.
The moment computerized voting machinery was introduced into our provincial haunts was the moment we began losing control of our elections—and in the end—our country.
Sophisticated computers have taken the election process from the hands of we the people at root level and put our elections into the grasp of a centralized National Security State.
There are roughly 175,000 voting precincts in the United States. Each accommodates an average of 800 citizens, more or less.
Put another way, the United States is divided into 175,000 ‘small towns,’ when it comes to voting. By casting our ballots in our home town, amongst friends and neighbors, we choose to whom we give our consent to be governed.
Our elections should be precinct-centric with voting in person (few exceptions) ID signature required, paper ballots, hand counted by bipartisan citizens (volunteers) when possible with videoed tabulation on up to County validation. Osage County Missouri has proven this to be accurate, faster and cheaper…vote Amish.
https://frankspeech.com/Video/linda-rantz-on-how-hand-counts-work-at-tpusa-action-las-vegas
Excellent commentary. Agree!