There is Undeniable Mathematical Evidence the Election is Being Stolen

https://theredelephants.com/there-is-undeniable-mathematical-evidence-the-election-is-being-stolen/

Biden’s Vote Tallies Violate Benford’s Law:

Here is the data: https://github.com/cjph8914/2020_benfords

The article goes into greater detail, but the point is that Benford's Law has been used to prove election fraud, and it appears to prove it here.

 

Please send your 'proofs' to Giuliani.

Hurry, January 20th is approaching.

In the meantime, the Americans who have decided to kick Trump out are savoring the fact that he's discovering himself as a fascist.

 

People pretending like this is not evidence of fraud are being wilfully ignorant.

 

LOL. You don't have to convince us. You need to convince a judge or jury.

 

Nervous laughter?
The SCOTUS will be hearing the case.

 

Any and all proof of voter fraud is being ignored by lefties. We all know Biden didn't win. Their strategy was to cheat then immediately claim victory.

 

I don't know what will come out of this, but I am hopeful that in the future we will have more controlled elections.

 

They don't care. Biden could admit it was rigged and they still wouldn't care.

 

Democrats like magic. it's how they cure impossible. In this case, it wasn't actually magic, it was fraud, but you get the point...

 

The next US president 'will be decided by the rulings of the Supreme Court'

 

You can't use Benford's law here. What a joke.

Why are numbers so hard for conservatives?

 

So the leading digit frequencies represent the number of ballots that incrementally added to their sum?

In other words, in Milwaukee, Biden received the greatest frequencies of 1/10/100/1,000 or 5/50/500/5,000 "drops" of lump increases?

This seems like an intuitive indicator but I'm not sure that it proves the "drops" were not accurately tabulated. Also, I think there is some misunderstanding about the definition of "statistical significance" and probability values but I want to hold off on considering that until I understand what exactly these charts mean.

EDIT - What is to say the reporting organization did not simply update counts at these increments instead of updating sporadically? Isn't it plausible for counts to get updated in some systematic fashion (ie: every time a candidate's total increases by 1,000 or 5,000?)

 

Shocking.

It’s great that this is out in the open. Now trump’s lawyers can bring this evidence to the courts.

Of course if they don’t rely on it, I guess not even they believe it’s real. Or maybe his own lawyers are dirty never trumpers, out to undermine him.

Maybe they will present this evidence to the court.

Anyway, we now all know what it means if the courts rule against dirty donny. If they don’t find there has been any election fraud, that can only mean one thing:

TOTAL EXONERATION!

 

You can't say I can't without explaining yourself in detail because my article goes into great detail showing why I can use Benford's Law.

 

The patterns are obvious on every other candidate, but Biden's does not follow it.

 

Benford's Law requires large data sets with random first digits, not a few hundred voting districts in a city where the size of the districts are legally mandated to be uniform.

 

Okay but first - what does conformity to B even mean in the context of vote tabulation? I want to know if it's implausible to suggest that the counts were simply updated every time a candidate's total increased by a thousand or five thousand.

 

If this sham election stands voting is dead in America and we have become a banana republic.

 

Also, are we looking at tabulation as performed by the same reporting organization or did Biden's vote get tabulated systematically by the total by someone else whereas the other's had their totals updated systematically by time?

If candidate A has their vote total updated every nth increase and candidate B has their vote total updated every 2hrs, then would there not exist a discrepancy in conformity to Benford's law? Is Benford's law even durable? Fore example mean descriptives can be misleading if we take 100 random people and find their average income, but one of them is Jeff Bezos. Medians provide better insight there. So this stuff is really fun for me and I enjoy arithmetic analysis but I need to learn more

Just trying to be logical because I study public opinion and it is true that statistics are merely the digital representation of something. If the theory beneath, or the assumptions used during hypothesis testing are flawed, the math might provide some nice confidence intervals and low probability values yet still only be showing a perfect representation of a flawed research design.

 

You know what OP, I will speak to some talented colleagues today and post back tomorrow (given we can have just one day of no breaking news)

 

Because the bulk of Biden's votes were mail in votes (Biden voters take Covid more seriously) so Biden's votes will have either been counted in outsized numbers
either before - or after - Election Day depending on each state's laws on counting absentee and mail-in votes.

Ain't rocket science as to why this election, with it's much higher than normal mail in voter count, would not conform
to the usual pattern of past elections.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

 

So why do the graphs for Carrol, Blackenship and write-ins also not follow?

 

Did you have a chance to look at the Sidney Powell 6+ minute video that was posted ? (Which U-Tube has now shaved down to 2:30 minutes.)

You will see that she mentioned Doug Collins in her discussion with Maria B.

Both the internal and external polling showed that Doug Collins had a HUGE lead over Kelly Loeffler in Georgia.

Erick Erickson even stated bluntly on the airwaves in Georgia that Loeffler was toast.

There is no way in H that Loeffler won over Collins by almost 300,000 votes.

Bottom Line: Loeffler is a GLOBALIST who has her WNBA team straddled into China. Also has a NYSE tie in. She is a RINO in waiting.

The Progressive Elitists simply manipulated the system by controlling computer generated results. By the way, how in the H do you think that Susan Collins won in Maine?

 

Calm down, Trump will be president.

 

Conspiracy theory. Fake news.