Image 01 Image 03

#NY22: Republican Challenger Now Leads by 122 Votes Over Dem Incumbent

#NY22: Republican Challenger Now Leads by 122 Votes Over Dem Incumbent

It looks like Tenney will win the seat. Hopefully, this will all end next Tuesday.

Republican challenger Claudia Tenney leads Democrat incumbent Rep. Anthony Brindisi by 122 votes after a recent canvass of Oneida County ballots.

New York State Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte ordered a canvass of ballots from people who registered at the DMV:

Recently, the judge learned of a mistake by Oneida County staff in which more than 2,400 people applied to register to vote in Oneida County on time via the Department of Motor Vehicles. However, elections staff failed to process their applications, so those voters would have been told they weren’t registered on Election Day.

As a result of the error, DelConte ordered a review of about 1,100 affidavit ballots that might have been from voters who applied on time via the DMV.

Elections staff and campaign representatives spent the last few days reviewing the ballots. Of them, they determined that 393 belonged to voters who registered on time.

Tenney received 232 and Brindisi got 139. Two ballots went to third-party candidate Keith Price.

DelConte said that the court cannot restore a voter’s status after officials purged the voter. That person has to bring the case to the court his or herself.

Therefore, DelConte ruled those 85 “purged” people cannot vote. They cannot cast a ballot and the counties cannot count their ballot.

DelConte also ordered the board of elections from each county to appear in court on Monday and Tuesday to count eligible ballots.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


UnCivilServant | January 29, 2021 at 7:03 pm

How many appeals will the courts give the Dem to overturn this?

Hah. As many as they can illegally orchestrate

There must be a trunk load of ballots forgotten somewhere, maybe over here in Pa, we seem to have had them all over the place show up.

It’s great that she’s coming, but the damage will be too great to be undone. We’re through as a nation: it’s simply impossible to share with the left.

The left saw to it we became neutered from withi. Now the left will soon see we are neutered compeltely:

New grid threat: Russia deploys ‘first-strike weapon,’ and China ready too:

Kevin Clinesmith, the Corrupt FBI Lawyer Who Forged Documents to Frame an Innocent Man, Gets… NO JAIL TIME, HAS TO PAY A HUNDRED DOLLAR FINE


Hey Barr

F-u you fat ba$+ard….

Does she believe in “Jewish space lasers”, too??

    Paddy M in reply to cgray451. | January 29, 2021 at 8:37 pm

    You upset that your blue governors are calling off their “standing armies”, Chuckles?

    Milhouse in reply to cgray451. | January 30, 2021 at 7:42 pm

    1. Why would she? What’s she got to do with Greene?

    2. Greene may be a bit of a nut, but there are at least two dozen Democrats in the House who make her look like a completely rational genius, and I’ll bet you never have a word to say against them, and probably even accuse anyone who calls them out of racism.

    3. Greene may be a bit of a nut, but she didn’t write one word about “Jewish” anything. It is perfectly possible to have a bee in ones bonnet about Rothschild, Inc without being an antisemite.

    Just because antisemites have been targeting the Rothschilds for about 200 years doesn’t mean everyone who targets them is also an antisemite. The most you can say is that it can be an indicator of antisemitism, unlike targeting Soros or Bloomberg (let alone Steyer, who isn’t even Jewish!), which is absolutely not such an indicator.

    Even actual Holocaust denial isn’t a foolproof indicator of antisemtism, though it’s a pretty good one. Not only is it theoretically possible to deny the Holocaust without being an antisemite, SEK3 actually was such a person. Not an antisemitic bone in his body, he was just someone who took skepticism to unreasonable lengths. He also refused to believe that smoking causes cancer, so that puts his Holocaust skepticism in perspective.

People apparently have NO sense of perspective, here. This one seat out of 435 and will make exactly ZERO difference in the control of the Congress. On the other hand, we have two Democrat Senators elected in Georgia, under the same people who are being accused of election law violations and other corruption. And, those THAT election make a profound difference in the control of Congress.

And, WHY is this race important?

    healthguyfsu in reply to Mac45. | January 30, 2021 at 1:22 pm

    I am continually surprised how unceremoniously people just accepted the Senate “wins” in Georgia.

    Without the third party candidate, Loeffler should have been a slam dunk.

      Milhouse in reply to healthguyfsu. | January 30, 2021 at 7:46 pm

      Because it’s clear that they did win. Many Republicans stayed home because those lunatics Wood and Powell told them to, and/or because Trump told them their vote in November was a waste of time so they didn’t bother this time, and/or because they turned against Trump over the phone call to Raffensperger (which he only released because Trump was stupid enough to tweet about it), and over his general conduct in the last two months.

        Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | January 30, 2021 at 8:26 pm

        Actually, it is not only possible, but a fact, that the run-off election was completely honest and above board. But, we do not know that for a fact. Why? Because the Presidential election has never been adequately audited, in Georgia. In fact, it is possible that one, or both, of the run-off elections was not even necessary, the Republican challenger having won in the general election.

        What you are doing is manufacturing excuses why people should ASSUME that the run-off election was honest and valid. The problem is, we will not know that, unless a complete audit is done. And, that will not happen, just as it will not happen for the Presidential election. While every excuse that you put forth is reasonable, so is fraud.

        A well known Republican politician once uttered these famous words: “Trust, but verify.” Wise words. And there is usually a reason why people in positions of authority refuse to conduct verification.

          Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | January 31, 2021 at 1:34 am

          What kind of audit would you like in Georgia, that has not been done?

          Mac45 in reply to Mac45. | January 31, 2021 at 12:16 pm

          Well, any audit at all would be nice.

          Georgia has NOT audited the Presidential election, to any significant degree. What GA did was two things. The first was to verify signatures on 15% of the mail-in ballots, chosen at random, in two counties. Incredibly, they found only two signature mismatches, in Cobb county, and attributed that to a wife signing both her and her husband’s ballot. This is the equivalent of hitting the lottery, probably several times in a row. The second thing that they did was to hand count the paper ballots, to compare them to the machine counts. They did not count the number of votes for each candidate over again, only the number of ballots. Observers were not allowed to challenge any ballot and there were complaints of observers being denies access in a few counties, including Fulton County. The results were as expected, the number of ballots closely corresponded to the machine count.

          What has never been explained is the obvious violation of election laws which occurred in Fulton County alone; the counting of ballots, of an unverified nature, after all observers had been sent home for the night. That is a legal slam dunk. And, it has been ignored. Then we have a forensic examination of the ballots themselves. We had no trouble doing this in 2000, in Palm Beach, Broward, Dade and Orange counties in Florida. In fact, the state did it twice. But, no such examination was done in GA, even in Fulton County where ballots were counted with observers being present. And, then we have the statistical anomalies in the posted machine counts. We have actual computer records of votes be SUBTRACTED from vote totals, in the middle of the tally. How does this happen, when the machines are merely recording the number of votes for a given candidate? The vote tally should never go down, only up. Not to mention the fact that hourly late night counting produced exactly the same percentage of Biden v Trump votes [about 55% for Biden, 45% for Trump]. None of this has even been investigated, let alone explained.

          What you have here is a classic example of reasonable suspicion. Now, reasonable suspicion of criminal activity not only justifies a criminal investigation, but usually demands it, in the real world. The investigation may well disclose that no criminal activity occurred. Then again, it might produce probable cause to certainty that such activity occurred. The problem is that the question will never be answered without a comprehensive investigation.

          This is not the case of a missing case of beer from a Georgia Stop and Rob. It is the Election of the President of the United States of America. One would think that a little bit of effort would go into investigating abnormalities in the process.

We now have election season now. Election days are for pikers.

Now awaiting the mysterious 4 AM dump of tens of thousands votes for Brindisi.

Tenney “leads?“ not “won?” it’s been almost 2 months since Election Day!

    Milhouse in reply to Sally MJ. | January 30, 2021 at 7:48 pm

    And when you have such a close result, combined with the sort of sheer incompetence that’s been exposed in this case, it can take two months.

Where are all the commenters who confidently predicted that these late-found votes were going to favor Brindisi? That this was an obvious Dem ploy to introduce votes that were manufactured after the election? This proves their prediction to have been complete bunk. The fact that they favored Tenney proves that these were valid votes cast before the election, and had the election staff done their jobs they would have been counted in the first place.

    Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | January 31, 2021 at 12:36 pm

    First of all, not all of the “found” ballots were tabulated, only some of them. There were a number of unverified ballots which were excluded, as they should have been. This is what Brindisi is currently arguing.

    But, what people should take away from this is that even if the results may be vaguely accurate, the system itself is a disaster. All over the country, we have seen the same problems crop up. Containers of ballots found later, which were not counted in the original tally. Ballots not logged in accordance with election law. Ballots counted without observers being present. Incredibly high percentages of mail-in ballot signatures being rejected only to be shipped to another facility, under questionable safeguards, and then “verified” without observers being present. Significant numbers of voter addresses which do not check out. Machine tallies which are subtracting votes from candidates in the middle of the tally. In fact, the only part of the system, which seems to work properly, is the provisional ballot option. Even if a voter does not appear on the rolls, he is allowed to cast a provisional ballot, often without presenting any identification, which can be accepted if the voter should have been present on thee voter rolls.

    If a person’s bank did business in this manner, they would close their accounts and move to another bank in a heartbeat. But, allowing elections, the most sacred institution in our democrat republic, be run like a kid’s lemonade stand is perfectly all right.