Official Election 2020 Doomsday Thread

[Buster O'Keefe]

Just want to say James is a tard and not welcome at our house for Christmas anymore.

 

[GherkinRealness]

No. You fucking retard. If the kid ate the cookie while you weren't looking you don't have proof they ate it despite it being fucking obvious. You could point out the crumbs around their fingers and lips but since you didn't catch them in the act, they'll just say you can't prove squat.

But Trump is saying that the Dems stole a cookie, yet all the cookies are on the plate. So Trump is now desperately throwing crumbs all over the place in a desperate attempt to not lose. Cos he's a loser. A stupid, fat, sore loser.

 

[Zeke Von Genbu]

Okay, I keep hearing the "zero evidence of voter fraud" mantra from the Biden bros. How is an apparent violation of Benford's law zero evidence? Could you at least tell me how it's been deboonked in your mind?

Autism approaches...

So Benford's Law by itself does not prove fraud. It is a red flag of sorts that may detect fraud. You can say it can be the beginning of step 1 in your fraud investigation. Why this works is because humans suck at showing true randomness on purpose. You'll generally fall back to some arbitrary or seemingly logical choice which flies in the face of being truly random.

As an example I have created a Benford's Law analysis similar to what I remember seeing going around when it first came up. I used Michigan for this example because it was the first state I thought of. My basic process is I took the votes per county from here, took the fight digit of that number for each candidate and compared it to Benford's Law, and as an extra test I decided to test the official (to my knowledge) population numbers for each county to see if I can find "fraud" there. If you find my choice of sources questionable, shoot me another one and I'll swap the numbers around and show the changes if they're notable. I already made the excel model so it isn't that difficult. All the blah blah analysis and graphs are in the spoilers.

Summary, too long to be a true tl;dr without a lot of skimming, is at the bottom to sum it up.

Spoiler: Excel Graphs

Blue = Whatever I'm comparing and Orange = Benford's Law

Spoiler: Comments about these results + a hypothetical to examine sensitivity.

First I was curious which graph had the highest amount of radical deviations from their respective digits. Here is that summary:
Biden: 1, 3 (tied), 5
Trump: 6, 8, 9
Population: 2, 3 (tied), 4, 7

Now the reverse, which one had the highest amount of low deviations?
Biden: 4, 6 (tied), 7, 8
Trump: 2, 3, 5
Population: 1, 6 (tied), 9

So by these values and comparing them to Benford's Law's percentages, Biden has the least amount of the largest radical deviations from Benford's law's percentages and has the most amount of the smallest deviations. The population and Trump tie for the most of the high radical deviations. The population also has the least amount of low deviations. The main thing that fucks Biden's whole thing up is that curve, so I had a thought, what if the only reason their are fewer ones then 2s is because some counties just barely push him to say the 2,000-2,999 or 20,000-29,999 range which by Benford's law's rules means he has more 2s then 1s even if the difference between the two is nothing?

Now for a hypothetical: If I change 4 counties that have votes for Biden between 2,000 and 2,499 to any number between 1,000-1,999 what would happen? If we swing a few hundred votes around in those 4 counties backwards we get this:


Now Biden's curve is more normal until we get to 5. This I hope shows how sensitive this analysis is, because just 4 counties flipping backwards cause's Biden's curve to go from abnormal to fairly normal compared to the other charts as 1-4 descend fine-ish into some radical hike or drop at 5 or 6 to somewhat normal thereafter.

Speaking of curves lets briefly see where each curve goes off the rails because all 4 of these charts deviate somewhere.

Biden's real curve: Biden's curve obviously fails Benford's Law from the get go due to 1 being lower then 2, 2 through 4 is fairly normal, it hikes up at 5, then it curves back down normally from there until it reaches a small spike at 9. But pretty much any small change can flip that entire script as we can see in the hypothetical curve for Biden.

Biden's hypothetical curve: This hypothetical gives Biden a better curve until 5.

Trump's curve: This is a normal curve until it flat lines at 3 and 4, then it plummets at 6, and it just climbs at 7 then it flat lines at 8 and 9

Population curve: This has the most natural curve from 1-5, it hikes up at 6, plummets at 7, and then curves normally from 8 to 9.

Now finally what about the total average of deviations? If we sum the total deviation percentages and divide by 9 to get the mean/average we get the following:

Real Biden: 3.1%
Hypothetical Biden: 2.5%
Trump: 2.7%
Population: 3.2%

So Population has the worst average deviation, Real Biden has .4% difference from Trump, and Hypothetical Biden has the best out of these 4 just because we flipped 4 counties around.

This series of autistic tangents is to show a few things. one is Biden doesn't radically deviate that much from Benford's law if we look at his total digits in MI his main issue is his curve is fucked which is somewhat related to how close some of his 2's are and a small deviation from that flips the entire script. Two, Trump has some notable deviations himself his curve is just more normal except for a couple of flat lines.

Finally despite the population being arguably the most legitimate series of numbers here, depending on how you want to argue it has the least credibility of having no fraud here due to having the highest average deviations, the fewest low deviations, and is tied with Trump for having the most high deviations in across the 9 digits.

Due being only 83 total numbers this data sensitive to any changes as demonstrated with giving Biden a hypothetical scenario that only changes around a thousand votes.

Summary (Edit: lines through incorrect statements based on an error):

Biden's main problem is his Benford's Law curve is fucked from the start, but if you change it by the 4 counties who are close-ish to under 2,000 votes (thus flipping 4 2s to 4 1s) for Biden then his curve actually fixes itself decently (compared to the other two curves) although he still deviates from 1 percentage wise the most. Despite this he actually has the least amount of high deviations across all 9 digits if we count them directly digit by digit. He has a higher average deviation compared to Trump by .4% due to his huge deviation from 1, yet the MI population is higher then him by .1%. Biden also has the most low deviations too from the percentages so his curve is the closest to being a normal Benford curve beyond his radically large 1's digit.

This is not me trying to simp for Biden, this is me stating that the amount of total 1st digits counted are low enough that even small changes can change how you see the graph notably. This is due to how small the sample size is where small changes can arrive to a different conclusion with Benford's Law. It also shows that depending on what aspect you want to argue about, be it the curve as a whole or the amount of large deviations from Benford's percentages, then which one of these 3 data sets is the most likely to be considered to have fraud changes or all of them have probable fraud to varying degrees.

Trump and the population of Michigan share the most amount of the largest deviations from Benford's percentages with some ties. Depending on how you want to argue it the population stats can be considered the most likely to be fraudulent because they have the highest average deviations, the fewest lowest deviations, and ties for the most highest deviations with Trump. Benford's Law is a tool to find red flags for probable fraud, it doesn't automatically prove anything especially if the sample size isn't very large to begin with which can create scenarios where seemingly small circumstances flips how you view the graph entirely.

This small sample size can create false red flags with just a couple of circumstances, which may be what this is for Biden's votes in Michigan or it can be actual fraud. The difference is obviously more people care about a reasonably fair election for the US President compared to Michigan's population numbers.

Thank you for coming to my Ted talk, I'd like my puzzle pieces mailed to me please because I spent way too long making this unfiltered autism. Back to shitposting hopefully.

Edit: Due to my rushed spreadsheet organization I misread the highest and lowest deviations for each digit a few times, everything else from what I checked is still correct it was just me reading my shoddy organized sheet incorrectly. Here is the corrected list (also in the spoiler). Consider these changes accordingly:

Who has the most highest radical deviations from Benford's Law for each digit? (Answer: Population of MI, while Biden and Trump tie.)
Biden: 1, 3 (tied), 5
Trump: 6, 8, 9
Population: 2, 3 (tied), 4, 7

Who has the most lowest deviations from Benford's Law for each digit? (Answer: Biden, while Trump and Michigan tie.)
Biden: 4, 6 (tied), 7, 8
Trump: 2, 3, 5
Population: 1, 6 (tied), 9

 

[Flip: Draw 2]

But Trump is saying that the Dems stole a cookie, yet all the cookies are on the plate. So Trump is now desperately throwing crumbs all over the place in a desperate attempt to not lose. Cos he's a loser. A stupid, fat, sore loser.

Let's start with my favorite; election night, refusing to call Florida. A reported 300,000 missing ballots, largely aggregated in Florida, were suddenly brought up out of nowhere. However, this story was immediately forgotten about the moment Trump's lead became high enough to make them inconsequential and Florida was called for Trump immediately after. You may also remember the unprecedented hours-long pause that lasted until 6AM (I was up watching it) in close swing states, notably Michigan and Winsconsin, followed by a massive surge in Biden votes. The typical argument to make here is that "mail-in ballots lean left". While the validity of the "100% Biden" claim is in question, what isn't in question is a dubious line graph present in this article, which shows an "even" distribution that does not violate Benford's Law. However, if the arbitrary points are removed and the graph made a true line, the statistical impossibility of there being a vertical line increase of Biden votes becomes apparent. I won't mention Winsconsin because, while it's very well possible that many blue counties had over 100% turnout, the claim that the state as a whole had a more than 100% turnout is untrue. I don't feel a need to link any article about this because it's not wrongthink to you and you'll believe it. Lastly, I'd like to mention the historical voter turnout Biden had. Largest ever. Even among the black population. For every Democrat's last choice. Absolutely unbelievable given every democratic voter enthusiasm poll held. I simply refuse to believe that, even with "vote blue no matter who", the old white man with a billion racist remarks on his belt netted more black votes than the younger, black, and far more charismatic Obama. It's also an easily observable phenomenon that Biden's nomination as opposed to Sanders discouraged many moderate to hard leftists from voting at all. Given all this, I adamantly believe that the probability of Biden winning this election is so astronomically small that it just can't be. In conclusion you're a nigger

"Hey fat kid, care to explain all this?"
"But you didn't see me eat the cookie, did you?"

 

[PaleTay]

I'm convinced

As time progresses, it's looking more like the Cope™ is over at Team Biden.

It might be Team Justice, who think the courts care. I think the idea that Biden can be proven to have committed massive voter fraud but the courts won't really do anything is a realistic option.

 

[imperial]

I'm honestly starting to think this is all a big scam. Trump probably knows he lost, the lawsuits are garbage, he's just trying to fire up his base and milk them for donations before starting Trump TV.

 

[Bunny Tracks]

I think those millions of votes for Biden have more to do with disgust for Trump than enthusiasm for Biden.

Late, but people really are overlooking this. I wouldn't really call it disgust, though. More just weariness if anything.

I brought this up in the other election thread, but a good chunk of Americans were probably just sick of all the drama Trump's entire existence causes. That's not his fault, but it is what it is.

They don't care if Biden is a dementia-addled, bumbling, crying old man that's being used as little more than a Trojan horse for Kamala. Hell, I don't even think they're even aware of that last obvious part. They were just sick of Trump, and all the noise that comes with him.

Combine all of that with his poor handling of Covid, and the riots, and it becomes a bit more understandable why he lost so many voters.

 

[King's Gambit Accepted]

When I hear screeching about "no proof" I can only think of some asshole kid eating a cookie and when you question them about you have no proof because the cookie isn't there anymore.
You could give a mountain of reasoning the makes it obvious they ate the cookie but since you didn't catch the fucker with the cookie in their mouth "lmao no proof!"

"but how can you know I ate the cookie if the cookie isn't there anymore?"

This is retarded.

When I hear screeching about "no proof" I can only think of some asshole kid eating a cookie and when you question them about you have no proof because the cookie isn't there anymore.
You could give a mountain of reasoning the makes it obvious they ate the cookie but since you didn't catch the fucker with the cookie in their mouth "lmao no proof!"

This is retarded. The burden of proof always falls on whoever is making the allegation.

Logically, you can not prove a negative. If accuse you of a crime, I can’t say “well you seem like the kind of guy that would do it but I don’t have any evidence. Must be g

No. You fucking retard. If the kid ate the cookie while you weren't looking you don't have proof they ate it despite it being fucking obvious. You could point out the crumbs around their fingers and lips but since you didn't catch them in the act, they'll just say you can't prove squat.

Your analogy does not remotely resemble what’s going on, you dolt. There is no evidence of any widespread voter fraud — the only instance that’s been charged was a Trump supporter in Nevada who tried to vote twice.

My point is an allegation doesn’t mean anything and there just isn’t evidence at this point of widespread fraud — if there was, we would see it.

In a decentralized election system like we have here, with observers at each precinct, it’s just not feasible to carry out widespread fraud across multiple states without getting caught. It’d be a conspiracy involving tens of thousands of people.

Go ahead and put tin foil hat on, if it helps you cope.

I’m honestly still waiting for the results of the 2016 Iowa caucus to be overturned. DJT assured us that Ted Cruz only won through massive fraud. Any day now, I’m sure the evidence will be here and DJT will be declared the rightful winner.

 

[Übertroon]

This is retarded.

This is retarded. The burden of proof always falls on whoever is making the allegation.

Logically, you can not prove a negative. If accuse you of a crime, I can’t say “well you seem like the kind of guy that would do it but I don’t have any evidence. Must be g

Your analogy does not remotely resemble what’s going on, you dolt. There is no evidence of any widespread voter fraud — the only instance that’s been charged was a Trump supporter in Nevada who tried to vote twice.

My point is an allegation doesn’t mean anything and there just isn’t evidence at this point of widespread fraud — if there was, we would see it.

In a decentralized election system like we have here, with observers at each precinct, it’s just not feasible to carry out widespread fraud across multiple states without getting caught. It’d be a conspiracy involving tens of thousands of people.

Go ahead and put tin foil hat on, if it helps you cope.

I’m honestly still waiting for the results of the 2016 Iowa caucus to be overturned. DJT assured us that Ted Cruz only won through massive fraud. Any day now, I’m sure the evidence will be here and DJT will be declared the rightful winner.

The fact that districts are reporting 200% voter participation alone tells us there's something wrong happening. Be it out of malice or incompetence.

I'm sure a lot of these "glitches" and overreporting districts happens because people are just terrible at their job, but you got to be a naive numbskull if you think people aren't exploiting such a cumbersome and opaque system to shift results

At the very least one shouldn't fear a recount process as long as you got nothing to hide.

Also interesting that you bring up the case of the Trump supporter attempting to vote twice, implying of course that the allegations of voter fraud somehow relates to people voting more than once rather than the fraud happening once the votes are tallied. It would be obtuse to actually believe that the current accusations relates to individual voters committing fraud rather than the system being rotten.

 

[TherapyMan]

The fact that districts are reporting 200% voter participation alone tells us there's something wrong happening. Be it out of malice or incompetence.

Which districts reported 200% voter participation?

 

[Rupin]

New Trump Tweet
View attachment 1722038

If only that were real

 

[Weed_Prostitute]

trump is just trying to delay long enough so he can nut in all the rooms in the white house

 

[Scarlett Johansson]

Why you guys think I'm overweight or fat?

Are Trump fanatics so delusional they think Pokemon, gasp, exist in real life?

It's my profile picture, of a really handsome Cinderace.

Like it or leave it.

Famous last words

 

[King's Gambit Accepted]

The fact that districts are reporting 200% voter participation alone tells us there's something wrong happening. Be it out of malice or incompetence.

I'm sure a lot of these "glitches" and overreporting districts happens because people are just terrible at their job, but you got to be a naive numbskull if you think people aren't exploiting such a cumbersome and opaque system to shift results

At the very least one shouldn't fear a recount process as long as you got nothing to hide.

Also interesting that you bring up the case of the Trump supporter attempting to vote twice, implying of course that the allegations of voter fraud somehow relates to people voting more than once rather than the fraud happening once the votes are tallied. It would be obtuse to actually believe that the current accusations relates to individual voters committing fraud rather than the system being rotten.

Which district is reporting 200% voter participation? Source on that?

The only thing I’ve seen resembling that was a social media post saying Georgia had more votes than its population... unfortunately, they had used the population for the country Georgia instead of the state...

 

[Invoke-Mimikatz]

I was wrong, Trump does have a path to 270.... If he loses 30 pounds

 

[Pope of Degeneracy]

Can Giant Meteor just come and claim the election already

 

[TheSimpShow]

I'm convinced

It might be Team Justice, who think the courts care. I think the idea that Biden can be proven to have committed massive voter fraud but the courts won't really do anything is a realistic option.

They don't need to prove Biden did anything, they need to prove that votes were cast incorrectly, counted incorrectly, were tampered with, prove that voter turn out in some cases reached statistical impossibilities (>100% which has happened).

The supreme court aren't going to declare Trump the God Emperor of the American Imperium, but they can invalidate votes. If anything Team Biden should be absolutely seething that people on their side have likely pulled the dumbest move possible by actually giving Trump's people every reason to ass-fuck them in courts. Ya know they could have just treated him like any other president, they could have just remained calm, but they didn't want to do that, so hopefully the gloves come right off.

 

[Übertroon]

Which districts reported 200% voter participation?

We have this image

Now this reportedly came from this web address

https://county.milwaukee.gov/EN/County-Clerk/Off-Nav/Election-Results/Election-Results-Fall-2020

which as of now is offline, being taken down once the heat was on

Since then the media who stands behind Biden has "debunked" these numbers, saying the city of milwaukee disputes the numbers taken from their own website, and also the same media simultaneously trying to handwave it away by saying that the state of Wisconsin has same day voter registration, and it just so happened that double the amount of normal voters showed up that day to cast their vote

 

[theshep]

https://www.democracydocket.com/cases/montgomery-county-board-of-elections-vote-count/

Well, that case is going well....

 

[EyelessMC]

Autism approaches...

So Benford's Law by itself does not prove fraud.
[SNIP]
Thank you for coming to my Ted talk, I'd like my puzzle pieces mailed to me please because I spent way too long making this unfiltered autism. Back to shitposting hopefully.

That is some exquisite autism, mate. All of that--all of the graphs, the explanations, the further exposition by numbers, just to essentially explain that
"Basically, just because groups of digits don't start with a low number doesn't always necessitate fraud or faulty data."

I'm not mocking you, either. I hope your post gets tons of attention. We genuinely need this "examining the hair on a gnat's ass" level of acute investigation and detail. We're the only ones actually bothering to discern the truth here and any faulty arguments will always be used against us to obfuscate the truth.
It's obvious this election was rigged to hell and there's more than enough evidence to see that--including the perpetual snowballing behavior of the mainstream media and tech moguls on this issue, all speaking and behaving as if reading off the same script (now where have we seen this before?)
Which is what Null found funny since he never trusted the system to begin with.

However, just shouting "Benford's Law! Benford's Law!" as if that proves anything in itself will only make us look like we did when we were shouting "FBI spirals! FBI spirals!" in pizzagate. We need a multilayered approach with hard evidences, plural, not just one thing chiming through the air like chanting lemmings.

I share the autism. I am making this post right now just to tell you thanks. Thank you for your probably potentially very real autism which likely earned you a legitimate Master's in mathematics.
You are a gem of this funposting thread. I screen capped your post just to share your radiating autism. Top Tier, mathman