“While the ‘No’ vote was entered correctly at 11:19ET, the ‘Yes’ vote that appeared for 2 minutes on CNN was actually the ‘total’ vote of the combined ballots for Yes/No/ Santa Clara,” Farbman said in an email. “This error was entered at 11:19pm ET and corrected 2 minutes later at 11:21pm ET when we deleted the “total vote” in for ‘Yes’ and entered the correct ‘Yes’ vote.”
So yeah, it appears that the numbers were overinflated accidentally, and the drop in the numbers was the correction. Should have been x for no, and y for yes, but for two minutes, they accidentally showed x+y for yes, instead of just y.
Show me one time a "mistake" like this has ever been favorable to a Republican and maybe I'll give this the time of day. Every single time I've seen this happen it's favorable to Democrats. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
Perhaps you're too young to remember George Bush winning a Presidency in a hotly-contested election that likely had some significant irregularities. That definitely went the GOP's way.
It's the null hypothesis. In order to advance another, you would need to demonstrate why their explanation is likely impossible or being mischaracterized.
It's not my excuse. It's theirs. But in a sense, yes, I do accept that humans are human and sometimes make simple mistakes. I've caught enough typos in your own posts to believe that you are human. I am human. They are human. We all make mistakes. Nothing to be ashamed of.
I understand why the world would be considerably more suspicious if you assume that your enemies and allies alike are machines whose behavior is compelled via a perfectly-tuned algorithm toward their objectives. I do not believe the world to work that way.
Unless the number added was what was incorrect. In which case, removing it was the correction.
Well then, it would not have been "an error that was solved within 2 minutes."
Why not? Fat-finger a number, then remove the number.
Here's the actual source of the story from the above screenshot:
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-537000968712
So yeah, it appears that the numbers were overinflated accidentally, and the drop in the numbers was the correction. Should have been x for no, and y for yes, but for two minutes, they accidentally showed x+y for yes, instead of just y.
Show me one time a "mistake" like this has ever been favorable to a Republican and maybe I'll give this the time of day. Every single time I've seen this happen it's favorable to Democrats. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.
Perhaps you're too young to remember George Bush winning a Presidency in a hotly-contested election that likely had some significant irregularities. That definitely went the GOP's way.
It's the null hypothesis. In order to advance another, you would need to demonstrate why their explanation is likely impossible or being mischaracterized.
It's not my excuse. It's theirs. But in a sense, yes, I do accept that humans are human and sometimes make simple mistakes. I've caught enough typos in your own posts to believe that you are human. I am human. They are human. We all make mistakes. Nothing to be ashamed of.
I understand why the world would be considerably more suspicious if you assume that your enemies and allies alike are machines whose behavior is compelled via a perfectly-tuned algorithm toward their objectives. I do not believe the world to work that way.
Audit Santa Clara, and validate the data feed.
There is no such thing as fat fingering an API data stream.