Hey Punatic:
"Yeah? Why don't you lay out the Occam's Razor case for us. Please be specific and detailed. Thanks."
No evidence, no proof, just ranting about wishes and fantasies of fraud, all court cases failing. More lies and disinformation from Mr Trump and Giuliani. Its pretty dang obvious the simplest explanation applies, that the election outcome is clear and legit.
Even Fox news and Rush Limbaugh agree.
Are you ignorant or a liar? Are you claiming that the hundreds of affidavits, sworn under penalty of perjury, by various eye-witness observers of various vote tabulation processes, and the mathematical and statistical "anomalies" attested to by various PhD mathematicians and statisticians simply don't exist? Or that they are all fraudulent? Or they are all false or erroneous? Prove it with Occam's Razor. Or by any other means. I mean real proof, not just covering your eyes and ears and shouting LALALALALALA.
You can say, over and over, "no evidence, no proof, blah blah blah", but that does not make it so. Not even a little bit. To truly apply Occam's Razor you need to consider
all the evidence, whether you like the evidence or not, or you have to prove that what is submitted as evidence is false. Neither you nor anyone else has even remotely done so. You just blather on and on "no evidence".
Are you claiming that people such as former Naval commanding officer Gregory Stenstrom is incompetent or a liar in his testimony before the Pennsylvania Senate hearing? [video below... and he was just one of many who testified, who were only a few of the many many more having signed sworn affidavits.] Prove it. Otherwise, you have to include what all parties deem to be their evidence and
account for all phenomena using the simplest explanation. When looked at properly Occam's Razor comes down on the side of all the "irregularities" being most comprehensively explained as a result of incompetence, malfeasance, mismanagement, misapplication of law, "errors" and fraud.
Let's see you explain this set of facts using Occam's Razor. It's the Wisconsin "Indefinitely Confined" voter registrations for the past 11 years. The law was intended to allow people who are full-time confined (i.e. "indefinitely"), and will likely remain in that condition, such as in nursing homes or long term care facilities the opportunity to vote without leaving the premises of their residence.
As is very simple to see, the average number of people granted "Indefinitely Confined" voter registration status, meaning they could file a mail-in ballot with no ID requirement, for the prior 10 years was 4,071. For this year's election the number was 169,282, which is a mere 41.6
TIMES the average of each of the prior 10 years. That alone should be subject to Occam's Razor. Add on top of that the a relatively small sample tracing of the names and addresses of those "Indefinitely Confined" voters discovered that many of them had social media accounts that included photos of them involved in various activities such as skiing and hiking. Put your Occam's Razor on that.
P.S. The statistician and his group that assembled that data and ran the follow-ups tentatively (pending further tracing, etc.) hypothesize that of those 169,282 "Indefinitely Confined" voters registered in 2020, that likely approximately 155,000 are fraudulent.
More testimony from the Pennsylvania Senate hearing. 14 minutes.
Data scientist testified that he observed a "forensically destructive" process on election night.Gregory Stenstrom, a Navy veteran commanding officer, data scientist, computer forensic scientist, and expert in security and fraud from #Delaware County, testified that he observed a "forensically destructive" process on election night that should call into question anywhere from 100,000 to 120,000 votes.