[Thread]
Why you should be furious about the mail-in vote. Let's echo locate to the *massive* disparity in requested ballots vs. returns ballots, and see just how many ballots in a few states are just laying around somewhere.
Arizona
Ballots requested: 3,448,181
Ballots returned: 2,471,577
Total MIA: 976,604
Michigan
Ballots requested: 3,318,609
Ballots returned: 2,841,696
Total MIA: 476,913W
Wisconsin
Ballots requested: 1,421,908
Ballots returned: 1,275,019
Total MIA: 146,889
Pennsylvania
Ballots requested: 3,098,947
Ballots returned: 2,506,557
Total MIA: 592,390
These are just a *few* examples. There are countless states with hundreds of thousands of unaccounted for mail-in votes just sitting around. This is unacceptable. Also note: these are also the states that arbitrarily pressed paused as things were going for Trump.
This is in *every state.* Going back my first tweet, there're ~29,000,000 of these unaccounted for ballots, all over the country. I repeat: this is unacceptable. It's not just PA, WI, MI, etc. in doubt. It's everywhere. I don't have answers, but I *do* have a lot of questions.
Important note: I'm not proposing any explanation for this, or where these ballots are, or any such thing. That's the problem. We don't know. There's hundreds of thousands of ballots, just sitting around, in every state. Red or Blue, doesn't matter. Just sitting around.
In my mind it throws doubt on literally every state except the obvious ones, i.e. CA, WY, NY, KY, etc. Those state have ballots lying around also, but I don't see any feasible exploitation there. But every close race is immediately questionable by virtue of these things existing.
Apologies for this being riddled with spelling & grammatical errors; I made it during the end of a 16 hr election livestream

Another thought: many of the places that pressed pause (PA, WI, NV, MI) provided sketchy or NO reason for doing so. Echo locate to the deafening silence.
When all eyes were on PA & it was frozen at 64% for like 6 hours, if there's a valid reason for the delay, they hold a presser, let everyone know the valid reason to calm people down & prevent imaginations from going wild. Instead:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Return to Reason

Return to Reason Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @mymundanemind

5 Nov
For a century, 'Chesterton's Fence' has been used as a fine heuristic for rudimentary separation of Conservative thinking from Progressive thinking.

This is often told in such a way that implies the Conservative wouldn't tear down the fence. This is incorrect.
1/ Image
This distinction lies in the reasoning. The Progressive assumes that if they cannot personally think of a reason for the fence's existence, this is good enough reason to tear it down. The reasoning here is internal, and probably arrogant.
2/
The Conservative reasons from both internal *and* external sources, in order to first determine the function of the fence, and then go about deciding if it ought to remain. This reasoning is slower, but it still takes place linearly

Less informed ➡️ more informed
3/
Read 10 tweets
9 Sep
Debates & Lenses (thread)

When @JoeBiden became the presumptive nominee, there was a huge debate about whether or not there would be... debates.

The premise: "@realDonaldTrump may be down in the polls *now* but once they have the debates, everyone will see how feeble Biden is."
The sides of the 'debate debate' were (and still are): "Since Trump will do so well in the debates, will they even have them?" Presented as a binary, 'yes or no' situation. I've seen many smart people weigh in on this premise: @RubinReport, @JeremyDBoreing, @benshapiro, etc.
No disrespect to the individuals bought into this premise, but I find it somewhat naive, especially based on what we've seen over the past several years. The legacy media has not operated in the binary "Don't cover Trump at all" vs. "Cover Trump in an honest and factual manner."
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!