• 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.
Yes America is screwed and full of idiots and the whole world is laughing at us and everyone already knew that and Trump just proved and you all told us so.

We're aware.
 
Dr.Sid said:
Oh it's not that much better elsewhere. But Trump is certainly the best at what he's doing.
Click to expand...

Where else but in a Banana Republic do you see widespread false allegations of election fraud?

Honestly, if this state of affairs keeps up much longer, the USA will have to change its name to "The United States of Absurdia"
 
Last edited:
I have a feeling a lot of right wingers in Europe are going to see how well it worked here and bring it over
 
PhantomWolf said:
You can see the axis he is using.

Here's a good video on why the analysis is wrong, and why you shouldn't subtract percentages.

Click to expand...


I wasn't able to stand that "cheeky" egghead for more than a few minutes, but thanks.

"Cheeky" is in quotation marks because it's a quote from Dr. Shiva who streamed a follow-up video a couple of hours ago. He replies to critics like your ("cheeky") video author specifically and others, who he collectively calls "math guys" and tells them to take a class in pattern recognition if they think one shouldn't subtract percentages - going on to give one:


It's an interesting watch and I now understand why I thought I'd debunked the "math guys" so easily (I retracted that btw in a post you seem to have missed) - they obviously failed to get the point while I intuitively grasped it. And I understand his approach now - he left a HUGE bait for the next round of "math guys" jumping on his work (zero times anything remains zero, nutter, they will say). May he be successful.
 
Childlike Empress said:
I wasn't able to stand that "cheeky" egghead for more than a few minutes, but thanks.

"Cheeky" is in quotation marks because it's a quote from Dr. Shiva who streamed a follow-up video a couple of hours ago. He replies to critics like your ("cheeky") video author specifically and others, who he collectively calls "math guys" and tells them to take a class in pattern recognition if they think one shouldn't subtract percentages - going on to give one:


It's an interesting watch and I now understand why I thought I'd debunked the "math guys" so easily (I retracted that btw in a post you seem to have missed) - they obviously failed to get the point while I intuitively grasped it. And I understand his approach now - he left a HUGE bait for the next round of "math guys" jumping on his work (zero times anything remains zero, nutter, they will say). May he be successful.
Click to expand...

The video is more than an hour long. Can you summarize his argument?
 
Childlike Empress said:
I wasn't able to stand that "cheeky" egghead for more than a few minutes, but thanks.



"Cheeky" is in quotation marks because it's a quote from Dr. Shiva who streamed a follow-up video a couple of hours ago. He replies to critics like your ("cheeky") video author specifically and others, who he collectively calls "math guys" and tells them to take a class in pattern recognition if they think one shouldn't subtract percentages - going on to give one:





It's an interesting watch and I now understand why I thought I'd debunked the "math guys" so easily (I retracted that btw in a post you seem to have missed) - they obviously failed to get the point while I intuitively grasped it. And I understand his approach now - he left a HUGE bait for the next round of "math guys" jumping on his work (zero times anything remains zero, nutter, they will say). May he be successful.
Click to expand...
Ho ,ho, ho. Very funny. He did it on purpose. [emoji3]
 
Childlike Empress said:
It's an interesting watch and I now understand why I thought I'd debunked the "math guys" so easily (I retracted that btw in a post you seem to have missed) - they obviously failed to get the point while I intuitively grasped it.
Click to expand...

Did you 'intuitively grasp' the mathematically inevitable result that, if he's right, there must be instances where the sign of a fair election must be that Trump receives more than 100% of the vote? And did you 'intuitively grasp' that the same analysis of Biden votes produces precisely the same result as for Trump, indicating that if votes were stolen from Trump then they were also stolen from Biden in the, same way?

The whole argument is nonsense, carefully crafted to fool the gullible and mathematically incompetent. It's sufficiently absurd that. 'I don't know either way' isn't an intellectually tenable position; if you haven't rejected it, you don't understand it.

Dave
 
Childlike Empress said:
And I understand his approach now - he left a HUGE bait for the next round of "math guys" jumping on his work (zero times anything remains zero, nutter, they will say). May he be successful.
Click to expand...

CE, since you understand Shiva's work so well, work through an example for me.

Suppose we have a county divided into districts. In district A, 10% of voters choose the full Republican ticket, and another 10% vote off-ticket for Trump. I hope you'll agree that's a reasonable and plausible scenario.
Now, in district B, 70% of voters choose the full Republican ticket.

Assuming the election is fair and the results in district A are correct, what approximate percentage does Shiva predict will vote off-ticket for Trump in district B?

Dave
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Georgia's Secretary of State has said that Lindsay Graham asked him if he could discount legally-cast votes
Click to expand...

What the hell is a Senator from South Carolina doing having any kind of discussion with the electoral officer from Georgia. Its none of Leningrad Lindsay's business what goes on in any state other than his own.

Even worse, this guy is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee - pressuring an electoral official to throw out legally cast ballots is very probably a criminal offence.
 
Dave Rogers said:
You know, I was pretty sure you'd sidestep the question, because you understand perfectly well what Shiva's model predicts and you'd rather not admit it.

Dave
Click to expand...

CE can't/won't answer the question because he knows full well that the only "logical" answer that can be derived from Shiva's crackpot mathematics, results in a mathematical impossibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom