View Single Post
  #9  
Old 12-05-2020, 10:32 AM
Lune Lune is offline
Banned


Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Since Lune did call me out, I thought I would post that I think there is pretty good statistical evidence for election fraud. The simplest argument is that Biden's election data totally fail the Benford's Law test. The discrepancy is so bad that Google now has Reuters 'fact check' as the first result for searches!

The fact check is itself a gigantic rhetorical fallacy. First they quote "experts" assuring everyone that Benford's Law doesn't always work without any sort of logical reasoning, a classic appeal to authority. Then they spend half their time laughing at some random guy that got it wrong - a classic strawman argument. Finally, they claim that 'because all Milwaukee wards have about 800 people, that Biden should get around half and thus have lots of numbers that begin with 4/5". A cursory glance at actual results shows that this is false. The only superficially serious objection that I could find is from 2017, and while I only skimmed it I believe it to be deliberately deceptive as their 'proof' is based on simulations and they only test the 2nd digit, which is much weaker, on actual cases.

If you don't like that, you can try this ZeroHedge article about the mail in ballots. The short version is that in contrast to the sharp differences in vote share between counties, all mail in dumps should have the same percentage of Biden/Trump because the Post Office effectively shuffles the mail in ballots. Instead, in key battleground states that percentage snuck up overnight.

Any election fraud was almost certainly accomplished via Dominion's electronic voting machines. Sidney Powell's lawsuit includes an affidavit by a well respected cyber security expert with an annoying compound name that I can't remember right now where he basically says that a) these machines were designed to commit fraud, and do not even have an audit log b) the entire company has substantial ties to China in multiple ways.

Finally, I consider election fraud to be the default rather than exception, so this is hardly surprising (Remember Stalin? "It's not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes!") It's ridiculous that the Fake news spent multiple years frothing at the mouth about Russian interference in 2016 but now that we have actual video of people in Georgia counting after hours we are supposed to assume that a guy who never left his basement or had a rally with more than 10 people won by 10 million votes.

Regardless, I don't really consider election fraud all that important. The real issue is whether the American people will allow themselves to live in an Agenda 2030 totalitarian dictatorship because they are afraid of a virus with a 99.5% survival rate for people under age 70. Corona Circus has the best election analysis IMO and I think Trump will likely repeat as president, simply because the Right has the guns and needs to think they are in control.

This post was fact checked as TRUE by independent researchers
Having read through all this I'm relieved that this is the best the election deniers could come up with. I'm not going to go through and refute it point by point because I'm never going to convince you, but just a few key points: Saying a positive hit on the Benford's Law Test is proof of fraud is like saying Hillary's 2016 polling numbers were proof of fraud, or a ding on an airport scanner is proof of a gun. These tests are sensitive, they are not specific. Appealing to experts is not necessarily the same as appealing to authority, when the expert explains their reasoning, especially when the expert in question is someone who studies said law in depth. The problem is people trying to have a substantive, academic discussion on twitter. Not going to happen. Also, both Biden and Trump had a supposed Benford's law aberration in the data you showed. Could mean it was Trump who cheated and still lost.

Why does a 99.5% survival rate for those under 70 matter? Are those over 70 not worth being protected? The more widespread the virus, the more these people are going to die. Nobody is asking for a totalitarian dictatorship (except Trump supporters) just simple, effective precautions like properly wearing a mask and not huddling together in bars so granny gets to enjoy her retirement instead of being in the ground.

PS: 330,000,000 x .005% is 1,650,000 deaths. Even if only 60% of us are ever infected, a conservative estimate given the sheer amount of MAGA, that's still 990,000... assuming a 99.5% survival rate, which is higher for children and lower for people with underlying conditions.
Last edited by Lune; 12-05-2020 at 10:38 AM..