• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
Republicans are results based, Democrats are standards based.

With Republicans if the Ref didn't see it, then it's a valid gameplay tactic. If you can pay off the Refs, hey you're just being smart. As long as you win the game it's all good.
 
No Other said:
5. There will be occurrences where Benford's Law will not be the proper tool but election results is not one of them.
6. Using Benford's Law as a tool to observe the distribution of votes counted is valid as long as the proper criteria is present. (defined universe,at least one magnitude of numbers, numbers are naturally established, sufficient sample size).
Click to expand...

Since you claim expertise in this, let's construct a hypothetical. Suppose there is an election in which all counting districts are chosen so that the expected vote total from each is 1000 votes, and the votes counted fall within 10% of this figure. Suppose also that the two candidates each poll close to 50% overall, and the variance between counting districts turns out to be within 20% of this figure (i.e. all districts report between 30/70 and 70/30 votes for all candidates). Based only on the above information, would it be possible to use Benford's Law on the first digits of the numbers of votes cast to determine whether the results were, or were not, suspect?

I'll supply the answer later, if anyone hasn't got it immediately.

Dave
 
JoeMorgue said:
Can we put this nonsense to rest; this stupid idea that wanting fairness is the same thing as being biased for the people who don't cheat?

"Democrats want things to be run fairly, Republicans don't" doesn't make this a "Political difference" that you are just "Biased for the Democrats" in wanting.
Click to expand...
Of course each side claim, and perhaps believe, that they are the honest ones. That is why in practice all these questions of whether elections are fair are actually political questions.
 
shuttlt said:
Of course each side claim, and perhaps believe, that they are the honest ones. That is why in practice all these questions of whether elections are fair are actually political questions.
Click to expand...

In a post-fact world sure.
 
shuttlt said:
Right, so one "error" can throw the vote off in a county by 6000 votes and the total votes in some states are only different by 15000 votes or less.
.
Click to expand...

There was an error of 6000 votes, it was detected immediately, and immediately corrected.

How does that support a claim that there is potentially an error of 15000 votes somewhere else that has not been found?

"The system worked to detect serious anomalies" somehow turns into "there are bigger problems that have not found"?
 
It's Conspiracy Thinking.

"Well if this got discovered, just think of what kind of evil is still uncovered!"
 
Dave Rogers said:
Trump has made it clear that he fervently believes that he has already won the election,
Click to expand...
Trump says a lot of attention seeking, bombastic stuff. How much of it he believes, and whether he believes it "fervently", isn't clear.

Dave Rogers said:
and the only purpose of an investigation would be to find out how it was fraudulently stolen from him. Do half the country believe him? You don't know that.
Click to expand...
Now we are getting back into the realms of political calculations. If you believe that it's only an insignificant minority that believe his claims, then it is certainly safe not to investigate.
 
pgwenthold said:
There was an error of 6000 votes, it was detected immediately, and immediately corrected.

How does that support a claim that there is potentially an error of 15000 votes somewhere else that has not been found?

"The system worked to detect serious anomalies" somehow turns into "there are bigger problems that have not found"?
Click to expand...
If a similar error occurred in another country and wasn't detected. The amount of error and fraud is almost always going to be greater than the amount detected for any given level of investigation.
 
I Am The Scum said:
There are zero cases in which party representatives have been prevented from observing the count.
Click to expand...

Okay but what about all the cases where the Illuminati prevented us from knowing about representatives being prevented from observing the count?
 
shuttlt said:
If a similar error occurred in another country and wasn't detected.
Click to expand...

On what basis do you assert that a similar error occurring in another county would not be detected?

The evidence we have indicates that a 6000 vote error gets immediately detected and fixed.
 
johnny karate said:
What’s the minimum number of people who need to believe without evidence that you are a pedophile before you are comfortable with the police investigating you for it?
Click to expand...

Bumped for shuttit, as it appears you missed this post.

You have argued that if enough people believe something without evidence then we should proceed is if that thing might be true, regardless of the lack of evidence.

The upper threshold you’ve placed on this seems to be “half the country”.

I’m trying to determine the lower threshold.

How many people would need to believe that you are a pedophile without evidence before it would be appropriate to launch a criminal investigation into your alleged pedophilia?
 
Looks like I'm going to have to go check and see which party the Invisible Dragon in My Garage is registered with...
 
shuttlt said:
If a similar error occurred in another country and wasn't detected. The amount of error and fraud is almost always going to be greater than the amount detected for any given level of investigation.
Click to expand...

What could have happened doesn't matter. Did it happen?
 
Dave Rogers said:
That position is a moral vacuum.

Dave
Click to expand...
It's how the system is designed. We heard all about this with impeachment that congress could impeach the president for any reason that congress thought justified impeaching him... a political process. The same with elections, that's why you can have faithless electors... or congress deciding who the winner is.

You can't decide who are the good guys based on your sides conviction that you are the good guys. Pretty much everybody thinks they are the good guys. Trump voters certainly think they are the good guys.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom