An important difference between this and the 2020 fraud claims is that here, you don't see the supposedly "defrauded" candidate amplifying the BS. Harris wants no part of this.

Also, you don't get a discount on an overpriced pillow for donating.

@mattblaze what do you think about the post facto research on the Florida recount in the 2000 election? Some work by the New Yorker, for instance, suggests that if the recount had continued, Gore would have had more votes.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/12/24/recounted-out

@mattblaze @evan

Sort of like, it's fine to seek the truth, but the truth now isn't going to deliver the promise being made when asking you to donate money to assist in uncovering the truth.

I understand that finding the truth now won't overturn the certified election. But, *IF* there did end up being proof of actual vote manipulation, the individuals that did so could still be held accountable at least right?

@finner @evan Go for it. But understand a few things:

- the supposed "smoking guns" indicating fraud in 2024, like those put forward in 2020, aren't really anything.

- elections are ultimately human endeavors, run by fallible people, and small but inconsequential "irregularities" are normal and expected. But it's often very easy to make them seem much more sinister and significant than they are.

- versions of almost everything claimed about 2024 were claimed by the MAGA people in 2020.

@finner @evan Does any of this this *disprove* that there was fraud in 2024 (or 2020, or 2016, or ...)?

No. It's *possible*. But saying that an election was "rigged" is an *extraordinary* claim, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, which no one has produced.