because usa today consulted people with election auditing expertise, such as professor Philip Stark. He explained how their 61% response rate makes extrapolation meaningless.
Interesting. California just called the recall election with less than 25% of the responses counted.
Or professor Brian Schaffner, who explains how Liz Harris's report just shows how people tell white-lies when answering surveys.
So another attempt to discredit someone using some sort of guilt by association tactic? tsk tsk tsk.
Another take it here
Nestled against the foothills of Estrella Mountain Regional Park, a nearly 3,000-square-foot house sits on an allegedly vacant lot.
www.azmirror.com
While the fact that your source is a VERY NEW WEBSITE (only registered with IANA since 2018, after a suspected socialist took over as the Maricopa County recorder in 2016), it does seem to have a history of stories since late 2018, so I can't discredit the site entirely without doing a lot more research. Like, were ALL the THOUSANDS of stories really from the same two or three authors over the course of a couple years? seems dubious...very likely copied from AP news or other sources. Also noted is the fact that the site has no ads and their only apparent means of support is through a "subscription" link. Not possible. Somebody with deep pockets is funding them. I, myself, with very little funding, could reproduce a web site similar to that one, fill it up with a bunch of copied news articles, then start blabbing about whatever make-believe my sponsor wanted.
But lets dig into that story:
The first 4 paragraphs detail a specific incident where the reporter claims they located a house that they thought might go with an address that was reported as a vacant lot. The reporter did not use any specific lot identification numbers. From the picture shown, there does in fact appear to be a vacant lot in the middle of the development. I don't believe the reporters have anything. They did not report the details.
The story goes on to provide the authors opinion about the canvasing effort, interspersed with a few facts. The story claims that the report did not provide any names and addresses of problematic votes, so therefore the report can't be trusted (Notice I use the same qualifications above regarding the news reporters' claims in the first few paragraphs). Most likely, the sponsor of the effort is withholding the specifics out of confidentiality so that those who filed reports don't have greedy reporters crawling over their property.
The next paragraph: "Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer said Harris hasn’t provided any affidavits or other corroborating evidence to his office, either. " It neglects to state that Stephen Richer is a Democrat, and who's election in 2016 was surrounded by controversy. It also neglects to state that the canvas was a purely citizen sponsored effort, not bound by political expectations: Harris is under NO obligation to provide the democrat Richer any information whatsoever.
Not surprisingly, in the middle of the article is an advertisement for another story, something about the separate and unrelated Arizona Senate Audit. This is totally unlike any other article on the website. It makes you begin to wonder if the site has an agenda.
Then there is a section that details another specific incident concerning a mobile home park. The author claims that the park was sold in February 2020 and that there were in fact people living there at the time, but miraculously by 2021 all homes had been moved and the lot was in fact vacant. I don't know about y'all, but it seems fantastically unlikely dozens of families could have been uprooted in such a short time period. Especially with the pandemic going on, during which time it was almost impossible to move, let alone move entire households. The authors narrative is simply gobldy-gook and has no substance to refute the claim. On the contrary, the article states "Elections Department spokeswoman Megan Gilbertson told the
Mirror that 15 people were previously registered to vote at that address."
The story goes on to talk about other allegations and conclusions of the Harris report. The only quote that denounces the result is from Richer (A DEMOCRAT ELECTED UNDER DUBIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES IN 2016). Furthermore, Harris has a long list of requests for public information filed with Richer's office which had not been fulfilled, according to the article itself.
I CALL BULL SHIT ON THAT ARTICLE.
This is really off topic anyway. The results are non-binding private citizen due diligence. They are damaging to Maricopa County, though. The canvasing that was done by the private citizens is separate from the real investigation that was done by the senate.
www.maricopa.gov
www.thegatewaypundit.com
