Full forensic audit or Canvassing?
Full forensic audit or Canvassing?
This is a good question. There should be an open and robust discussion around this topic to help people make up their own minds.
From where we stand, we see things slightly differently and are recording our thoughts here for others to ponder, criticize and improve upon.
The question for us is not deciding which method will be the most effective at initiating change. That questions has already been answered a long time ago, but is easy to forget, (and politicians would prefer to keep it that way)... It is "We The People".
"We The People" have, and always will be, the one and only solution.
The question should be... what methodology will be the most effective at "waking people up" and energizing them to unite and re-establish the proper dynamics of power. Elected official are elected to SERVE the people. Not the other way around.
It is only when enough people unite and demand full transparency (and really mean it) that things will start to change.
Why do politicians despise "full transparency"?
We need to think of ways of building momentum. Canvassing is part of the solution. Full forensic audits (of smaller counties) is too. Helping people grasp the many election data anomalies is another.
Different types of information convinces people differently. We need all types to get people to lawfully and peacefully demand for full transparency. We believe only full forensic audit reports will have standing in a court of law. (If an honest court of law can still be found...)
(Side note: We believe the data provides irrefutable, conclusive evidence of fraud, and that canvassing and audits are technically unnecessary. However, we also believe they are critical to establish the "consciousness" of the sophistication, extent and magnitude of fraud. This needs to mentally scar people enough that it will never be allowed to happen ever again!)