One of the most striking lines of evidence is the exit poll discrepancies. There were discrepancies in regions with electronic voting, but not in hand-counted regions, and the discrepancies were almost always biased against Sanders.
One of the most striking lines of evidence is the exit poll discrepancies. There were discrepancies in regions with electronic voting, but not in hand-counted regions, and the discrepancies were almost always biased against Sanders.
One reason that electronic with voter verified paper backups is important. Electronic only can't be trusted. I'm not saying I believe there was definitely chicanery, but the fact that we can't verify there was no chicanery is extremely problematic.
Two reasons to believe it:
The evidence is strong. These patterns would be extremely unlikely in an untampered election
The Democrats would do this. This is the part that strains belief for some people, but it shouldn’t. If you look at their policies, rather than their rhetoric, you find a near 1:1 match to the class interests of their corporate donors.
https://pnhp.org/news/gilens-and-page-average-citizens-have-little-impact-on-public-policy/
Sanders was a milquetoast socdem by hexbear standards but he still presented a real threat to the donor class. A president can be contained, but a president who also promises to be the “organizer-in-chief,” leading grassroots working class campaigns from the Oval Office? That’s a loaded gun.
If they have the means and motive to ensure that doesn’t happen, they’re going to do it.