didn't ignore it - was responding specifically to text/headline of one of the other articles, which pretty clearly had "28 million" as the click bait, then later says "no evidence of fraud was found".
What does "unaccounted for" mean?
"Would you be happy if 1/5 of the people that showed up at the voting office was unaccounted for?"
huh? how does that compare to ballots mailed out that were not returned? Again - "unaccounted for" is... nebulous. If 100m were mailed out, and 20m were not returned... are they "unaccounted for"?
There's context missing here. What are the historical averages?
If in any given year, 20% of mailed out ballots are not returned, and that's pretty average for 10-15-20 years... 20% "unaccounted for" is a non-issue. If the average is 4%, and in one election it's 20% or more... yeah, that's an issue that needs investigation. That information was not provided in the articles I saw, instead they just appear to rely on "big" numbers.
> didn't ignore it - was responding specifically to text/headline of one of the other articles
Why did you move on from the comment most relevant to the topic of the fact check? Fact check disputed evidence of absentee voter fraud, and firs link shows evidence.
I put the first link first to establish a common frame that the fact checkers were wrong, and the second-to-third are more advanced topics.
First link demonstrates the question we should ask: Who deserve the power of determining what is true or not? Does a committee at twitter deserve that power?
> What does "unaccounted for" mean?
That is the crux of the problem with the mail in ballot chain of trust, isn't it?
You wouldn't have to ask this question at a physical voting spot, where this would be irregular and systems are in place to document the chain-of-trust to the degree necessary for voting.
What does "unaccounted for" mean?
"Would you be happy if 1/5 of the people that showed up at the voting office was unaccounted for?"
huh? how does that compare to ballots mailed out that were not returned? Again - "unaccounted for" is... nebulous. If 100m were mailed out, and 20m were not returned... are they "unaccounted for"?
There's context missing here. What are the historical averages?
If in any given year, 20% of mailed out ballots are not returned, and that's pretty average for 10-15-20 years... 20% "unaccounted for" is a non-issue. If the average is 4%, and in one election it's 20% or more... yeah, that's an issue that needs investigation. That information was not provided in the articles I saw, instead they just appear to rely on "big" numbers.