Serious thread about election fraud

So have we come to the conclusion yet that Trump & Biden are one in the same? That he is simply part of the "swamp"? Have we come to the conclusion that there really aren't two parties?

DiscoGary wrote:

It’ll be clear when I get chart online.

Now that I'm viewing you so fully through the troll lens, I have to say pretending you're so old and inept it takes you at least one full day to figure out how to get a chart onto the internet is the closest thing to funny that you've done. People have died dude. Give it up already.

Maybe your grandkids can take a picture of your graph paper on their telephone and upload it to facebooks for you?

Meanwhile in the real world, knowingly truncating information to mislead his followers is alive and well on Team Trump:

Clearly we all know the data is out there and public. Clearly.

But you still see yourself as the savior here, untying the tangled knot of fraud to prove something that NOONE else can prove.

Hey, and while we wait for you to provide your "chart", we'll just sit and ponder where we've heard bombastic claims of proof, evidence and smoking guns but no follow through in court. Hmmmm..

This shoud be it.

https://imgur.com/a/TGxxROL

The positive bars are margin increases in multiples of 4,800 . Notice that on the right half of the chart most update margins are so small that they don't even register a pixel on this chart. In among those are the increases for Biden in multiples of 4,800 that occur until he overcomes a 110,000 vote margin that Trump held.

The "random clusters" concept doesn't work here because this "cluster" consumes at least one third of the whole series. It is not a small sample of millions of data points.

You can see the random nature on the left side of the chart where there is no clear correlation with integer multiples of 4,800, but after that any significant update is only in multiples of 4,800. What are chances that this happened in the natural course of voting and reporting results? Extraordinarily small.

Explain it.

That graph could be better, but it's good enough for now.

There is more analysis to be done. I hope I can finish before this site has to shut me down.

This is not a "timeline" as the heading shows. Every tick on the x-axis represents an update. If you can't see it that's because the margin is too small to see.

What's expected depends entirely on what your priors are. Just putting data out there and saying "look" doesn't do anything unless you have hypothesis to test. I could generate comparisons that show statistical anomalies for both sides or neither from these data. For instance. If the later updates are all from one county (that skews Biden), sampled purely randomly, and submitted in batches of equal, but sufficiently large, size, you would expect the ratio of votes for Biden to hold steady. Then all you have to do is divide by some integer divisor and... you've made this graph. Such a process seems pretty likely. "Let's scan 7000 ballots and then submit the data." If the 7k are drawn from a large, randomized sample of ballots that skew 68% for Biden, you'll get these data. Let's see what others have to say!!

DiscoGary wrote:

This shoud be it.

https://imgur.com/a/TGxxROL

Gary, there's something anomalous with this dataset. Look at entry 371-427 (11/5-11/6). Biden and Trump got exactly the same number of votes over 50 times in a row, despite the vote totals changing. How could that possibly be true if this were just random vote dumps?

For the entire dataset, Trump and Biden percentage shares were almost exactly or exactly multiples of 0.1% (i.e. 43.5999, etc). Again, how could this be true if the data were random?

Between 345 and 363, Trump gained almost exactly 14775 votes over Biden 18 times in a row! How is this possible??

Conclusion: there's something about the way this data is processed or distributed that makes it no longer random. We (LRC users) don't fully understand this dataset. We cannot use this to conclude fraud.

If any of this was legitimate, Trump and his elite strike force of a legal team wouldn't have dropped their GA lawsuits ONE DAY BEFORE STARTING TRIAL. Got their bluff called and folded. It would be funny except now people have died because of this lie.

"On the eve of getting the day in court they supposedly were begging for, President Trump and Chairman David Shafer’s legal team folded Thursday and voluntarily dismissed their election contests against Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger rather than submit their evidence to a court and to cross-examination."

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/trump_legal_team_folds

Without knowing how every precinct reports results and counties tabulate them and the state publishes them, there's nothing anomalous about patterned data.

The first mistake would be to assume that vote reports should NOT be ordered in some way.

Would it be surprising if a bank reported its coin counting audit in multiples of 40 quarters? lol

Maybe all counties have a pattern of reporting? Only when the few late-reporting ones are de-convoluted are they obvious?

There's tons of explanations that aren't OMG FRAUD but you seem to have a prior that vote reports should obey some random distribution.

Explain that.

There are others with more knowledge of this who have dismantled you repeatedly over the days, forcing you to scurry back to find new talking points. They should do a more thorough job than I.

Patriot Dad wrote:

1. Gary, there's something anomalous with this dataset. Look at entry 371-427 (11/5-11/6). Biden and Trump got exactly the same number of votes over 50 times in a row, despite the vote totals changing. How could that possibly be true if this were just random vote dumps?

2. For the entire dataset, Trump and Biden percentage shares were almost exactly or exactly multiples of 0.1% (i.e. 43.5999, etc). Again, how could this be true if the data were random?

3. Between 345 and 363, Trump gained almost exactly 14775 votes over Biden 18 times in a row! How is this possible??

4. Conclusion: there's something about the way this data is processed or distributed that makes it no longer random. We (LRC users) don't fully understand this dataset. We cannot use this to conclude fraud.

1. A agree something is very wrong with the right half of this chart. Lots of tine updates with no margin at all, with big updates with increases of 4,800x for Biden. That's my point. How did this happen?

2. The original dataset comes in the form of [total votes, 0.xxx for Biden, 0.xxx for Trump]. It's the wrong way to report it, but that explains the %0.1 quantization.

3. The positive bars respresent gains for Biden. I see almost nothing happening betwen 345 and 363. Please clarify.

4. This is time series data from the NY Times web site who attained it from API. Let me know what else you don't understand about this data set . Charts and graphs of this kind are hard to present, but this is the best I could do for now.

Harambe wrote:

...

Without knowing how every precinct reports results and counties tabulate them and the state publishes them, there's nothing anomalous about patterned data.

The first mistake would be to assume that vote reports should NOT be ordered in some way.

Would it be surprising if a bank reported its coin counting audit in multiples of 40 quarters? lol

Maybe all counties have a pattern of reporting? Only when the few late-reporting ones are de-convoluted are they obvious?

There's tons of explanations that aren't OMG FRAUD but you seem to have a prior that vote reports should obey some random distribution.

Explain that.

There are others with more knowledge of this who have dismantled you repeatedly over the days, forcing you to scurry back to find new talking points. They should do a more thorough job than I.

That logic that says it might be possible that vote dumps happened in discrete predetermined numbers because of some procedural method is sound. The problem is that these are not predetermined vote "totals". They appear to be predetermined vote "margins" for Biden.

Are you saying someone gave out the order to count the ballots until Biden had a margin of ~4,800 or a multiple and then report it? Why would they do that if all the other updates in between had margins close to zero?

I am going to do the same for PA and we'll have to see what that looks like. Also, there is deeper analysis that will hopefully reveal more about what's going on. Correlations with other data, etc. Stay tuned.

If there's a reasonable explanation for this, I'm listening. But I don't see it yet.

DiscoGary wrote:

That logic that says it might be possible that vote dumps happened in discrete predetermined numbers because of some procedural method is sound. The problem is that these are not predetermined vote "totals". They appear to be predetermined vote "margins" for Biden.

Are you saying someone gave out the order to count the ballots until Biden had a margin of ~4,800 or a multiple and then report it? Why would they do that if all the other updates in between had margins close to zero?

A large county that swings heavily Biden reporting batches?

Oh, and for those criticizing me for taking so long. Here's the source data. Let's see how fast you can reproduce what I did.

https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/national-map-page/national/president.json

... and every batch has a Biden margin of 4,800 * N? How does that happen?

DiscoGary wrote:

... and every batch has a Biden margin of 4,800 * N? How does that happen?

Sure? If they report roughly every X votes and the county is 4800/X Biden-leaning?

DiscoGary wrote:

Oh, and for those criticizing me for taking so long. Here's the source data. Let's see how fast you can reproduce what I did.

https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/national-map-page/national/president.json

Time me!