Interesting statistical breakdown
- Thread starter fatman76
- Start date
What’s amazing to me is the magnitude of the anomalies...usually when you cheat you sort of mix it up so it’s hard to find
Wow, as I have been saying the Dem turnout based on unsolicited and unverifiable mail in ballots is statistically impossible, yet we are the bullshitters. I had an engineering professor tell us once, the best way to keep people from lying is to use numbers. People lie but numbers don’t.
Maybe not, but the "Red Elephant" does. Why are you guys so inclined to believe only things from Pub propaganda sites. That is the worst use of statistics I've ever seen.
PS. They didn't have 98% turnout in Wisconsin.
PSS. The ballots aren't unverifiable.
Here you go again, I never said I didn't want true cheating looked into. Look into anything you want, it's over and I just want to get my board back so I don't have to see any more of this crap, unless I choose to. Thank you.
They are citing a statistical law that's used to verify election fraud.
Dems got caught breaking it. It's over.
First, you still don't know what board you are on LMAO! This is not a football board and never was.
Second, thanks for giving us permission to see if dems cheated. We'll happily take you up on that.
Third, what is 'scorecard and hammer'?
There us no statistical "law." Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Have you ever even taken a statistics class?
Welp what if a huge batch of mail-in balloting is found to be unconstitutional because the courts stepped in and made up the rule overriding state legislatures. TO then count them is to cheat. As Levin said the cheating was the mail-in itself.
That's what will be before SCOTUS. I guess we will see if we have 5 constitutionalist or not. They must ignore that there will be riots and looting of biblical proportions if they rule the correct way.
That's what will be before SCOTUS. I guess we will see if we have 5 constitutionalist or not. They must ignore that there will be riots and looting of biblical proportions if they rule the correct way.
They had an 89% turnout which is 20 percentage points higher than the average. That’s a statistical anomaly. Those are numbers and that’s the facts. There was a county in Michigan that Trump beat Hillary in 2016 but Biden beat him by 29 points. That is an anomaly. We have ballots that are not even postmarked being counted in PA, that means they are unverifiable that they can’t be determined if they were received before the cut off. That would be the same as seeing an election result and allowing people to start voting again.
Again, i was not makin aspecfic statement about what board I was on. I justed wanted anything regarding politics kept on the Gator Lounge.
They had an 89% turnout which is 20 percentage points higher than the average. That’s a statistical anomaly. Those are numbers and that’s the facts. There was a county in Michigan that Trump beat Hillary in 2016 but Biden beat him by 29 points. That is an anomaly. We have ballots that are not even postmarked being counted in PA, that means they are unverifiable that they were received before the cut off. That would be the same as seeing an election result and allowing people to vote.
Last edited:
Of course there is, it's called Benford's Law. It's used to verify election fraud. Hiden's vote totals were outside the accepted range.
It's over.
I have taken three stat classes including quantitative analysis. It’s an extreme outlier and anomaly, unless you lower the CI to below 50, and that would be the upper limits.
LMAO! This IS the Gator Lounge. As I said, you still have no idea what board you are on.
"
Let’s step back. I’ve been hearing commentators trying to normalize all these changes to voting procedures and court interventions and acting like this has gone on throughout our history or was compelled by the virus. That’s clearly not true. Mail-in voting was pushed hard by the Democrats and they’ve filed scores of lawsuits to change the rules set by state legislatures. Unfortunately, activist courts have been more than happy to accommodate many of them and the Supreme Court failed to put its foot down. No, none of us recall a time like this when so many crucial state counts are delayed. There’s also a legitimate concern about backdoor voter harvesting in some areas. And we know for a fact that cities like Philadelphia have a problematic history. So let’s not pretend that this has been a routine election. Many of the same forces that rejected Trump’s 2016 election have tried to manipulate the system this time as well.
Mail-in voting is the culprit in this election. Democrats used the pandemic to try and make this process of voting legit. The truth is that it opened our voting system up for voter fraud like we’ve never seen." Mark Levin
If he wasn't already in his 60s with heart disease I would want him on SCOTUS.
Let’s step back. I’ve been hearing commentators trying to normalize all these changes to voting procedures and court interventions and acting like this has gone on throughout our history or was compelled by the virus. That’s clearly not true. Mail-in voting was pushed hard by the Democrats and they’ve filed scores of lawsuits to change the rules set by state legislatures. Unfortunately, activist courts have been more than happy to accommodate many of them and the Supreme Court failed to put its foot down. No, none of us recall a time like this when so many crucial state counts are delayed. There’s also a legitimate concern about backdoor voter harvesting in some areas. And we know for a fact that cities like Philadelphia have a problematic history. So let’s not pretend that this has been a routine election. Many of the same forces that rejected Trump’s 2016 election have tried to manipulate the system this time as well.
Mail-in voting is the culprit in this election. Democrats used the pandemic to try and make this process of voting legit. The truth is that it opened our voting system up for voter fraud like we’ve never seen." Mark Levin
If he wasn't already in his 60s with heart disease I would want him on SCOTUS.
Possibly, but would have to see the inputs. Voting doesn't always follow statistical probabilities (not laws) and this site provided no verification for 8ts figures.
That site said 98%. I'd have to see the independence variables they used. Obviously they should have accounted for the increase in mail in votes. So the constants changed.
I was waiting for @BSC911 to ask the educated question, but I guess he is busy googling statistical terms to make it sound like he took Business Statistics 301 at Central Florida CC.
If we have evidence that some mail-in ballots were tampered with to make them invalid, can we safely assume that the remaining ballots in that sample could also be tampered with, if their validity cannot be verified?
If so, does that mean all the ballots in the sample are subject to being declared invalid?
These are questions that honest Americans who want a fair and legal election are asking.
Low probability is fine. There was low probability that the dems would nominate a guy that failed third grade, but here we are.
But when actual voting results violate statistical laws that are used to detect voter fraud, that's a problem.
Dems got busted cheating. It's over, you need to move on.
You are very correct and I can tell you had a stat class or two. The fact remains the same for an 89% turnout, which it was. The outlier is still extreme. Either way all outliers are examined to determine if they can be tossed. Apparently a sitting president has no right to examine outliers, especially when this is not isolated.
You do realize probabilities and anomalies are derived differently? You may want to think about your statement.
Unfortunately the constitution gives power over elections to State Legislators - and they have shown their ass thus far.
There’s low probability and there’s 0.00000189% or 1 in 52,910,052.
If a one party state is good with you that’s your call, but it never ends well.
A spoiled ballot usually dooms the batch. My mom told me a story on how my grandmother spoiled a batch once and got the whole thing thrown out. Small little town of less than 700 people and only the machine she used was affected. I don't remember the specifics.
But I have no idea in this case. I would say most can be culled but the assumes that there was no back dating as alleged. Backdating would spoil anything with the date of that fake stamp.
Then how do we know what came in after 8pm? Was sig verified? etc.
But if mail -in was unsolicited and Pa law is set up for absentee then could be all non-absentee ballots are illegal. Both are types of mail-in so dems will use term mail-in for both to confuse the issue and inflame people.
I haven't seen that case made yet and dont know Pa law beyond what was reported when PASC first decided to make this open ended.
Leftist, millenials,popular vote idiots etc heads would explode if all unsolicited mail-ins were tossed leaving only absentees.
Remeber they want to count every vote not every legal vote
It’s like the ultimate of arrogance. Knowing that you will get caught in believing there’s nothing the other side can do about it.
gator, we will just have to wait to see the final outcome of the legal challenges. I really hate to see all this happen. Right or wrong the USA will suffer world wide over this..........jim
I agree with you 100% here Jimbo. Where are your blue or red the vast majority of Americans are decent people that simply want fair elections. At this point there’s no way either side can trust this election. That’s the real shame.
I’m less worried about what the world thinks am more worried about what our nation thanks. It’s as divided as it was in 1860.
When you were 12
L Jimbo I’m not even a conspiracy theorist. But when I found out that 5500 vote flip in one county in Michigan because of the voting machine computer glitch, how do you trust this anymore?
