| | | "If you believe it significantly altered the election though you're wrong. "
Do you believe Mark Zuckerberg put $400 Million (more than even Congress allocated) into carefully selected target areas to try to make the election fair?
Why did, after it became publicized that a judge in Houston was preparing to aggressively mail ballots to the last known addresses of 400,000 previous voters in predominately Democratically held Harris County, did Zuckerberg suddenly decide to thrown money Houston? (Only to stop when it was determined in court that it would not be allowed)?
"In Philadelphia, long a Democratic stronghold, [Zuckerberg] money provided by the center [Center for Technology and Civic Life, Zuckerberg private charity] is to be used to establish 800 polling places, an increase of 76% from the number of polling places the city had in the primaries, according to an August email sent to the center by Nick Custodio, a deputy commissioner in the Philadelphia election office."
Think about that. 800 polling places (which, incidentally, under the new law were "branch offices" and hence not required to accept Republican observers) in an area which is known to consistently vote 70% Democrat. This was carefully measured, reconciling the need for votes to win the state with the requirements of the new state law. The numbers worked in PA, and that is why the money went there. Ask David Plouffe.
This played out in Detroit and Atlanta as well.
Is an election that is stolen by intensive data analysis combined with vast injections of private Zuckerberg money any less stolen?
If we change nothing else it MUST be the injection of private money as was done in this election. But these Democrats will fight to a death against that. |
|
