• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

2020 United States presidential election - Conspiracy theories, alleged fraud, etc

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've reached "Do not feed the troll" stage. It's clear that Bubba has no interest in detailed follow up of the claims posted. I recommend, "Come back when you're actually willing to talk about what you post." and that's it.
 
Another smack down for the Trumpists, this time in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
More legalese than in the rebukes from other Courts, but worth a read nonetheless. Judges are clearly not happy with these vile attempts to steal an election.

The introduction:
The right to vote is among the most sacred rights of our democracy and, in turn, uniquely defines us as Americans. The struggle to achieve the right to vote is one that has been both hard fought and cherished throughout our country’s history.

Local, state, and federal elections give voice to this right through the ballot. And elections that count each vote celebrate and secure this cherished right.

These principles are the bedrock of American democracy and are widely revered as being woven into the fabric of this country. In Michigan, more than 5.5 million citizens exercised the franchise either in person or by absentee ballot during the 2020 General Election. Those votes were counted and, as of November 23, 2020, certified by the Michigan Board of State Canvassers (also “State Board”). The Governor has sent the slate of Presidential Electors to the Archivist of the United States to confirm the votes for the successful candidate.

Against this backdrop, Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit, bringing forth claims of widespread voter irregularities and fraud in the processing and tabulation of votes and absentee ballots. They seek relief that is stunning in its scope and breathtaking in its reach. If granted, the relief would disenfranchise the votes of the more than 5.5 million Michigan citizens who, with dignity, hope, and a promise of a voice, participated in the 2020 General Election. The Court declines to grant Plaintiffs this relief.
Click to expand...

The conclusion:
For these reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiffs are far from likely to succeed in this matter. In fact, this lawsuit seems to be less about achieving the relief Plaintiffs seek—as much of that relief is beyond the power of this Court— and more about the impact of their allegations on People’s faith in the democratic process and their trust in our government. Plaintiffs ask this Court to ignore the orderly statutory scheme established to challenge elections and to ignore the will of millions of voters. This, the Court cannot, and will not, do.

The People have spoken.

The Court, therefore, DENIES Plaintiffs’ “Emergency Motion for Declaratory, Emergency, and Permanent Injunctive Relief”
Click to expand...
(bolding mine)

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-...view_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
For example, if you have only potential values of 100 to 900 with an expected average of 500, you get a bell curve in a Benford analysis. But, if you expand that range to include double digit numbers, and single digit numbers and maybe four digit numbers...then the Benford curve starts taking affect.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. That's the point. If a random variable has a Gaussian distribution (bell curve) then the measured values of that random variable will not follow Benford's Law, no matter how many orders of magnitude are spanned by those values.




The issue is that you have to determine the of the influence of Benford. If you have a system that has a bell curve within a magnitude, then Benford has no effect.
Click to expand...

"Influence of Bedford"? That's a meaningless term. If the data follows a logarithmic scale, Benford's law works, and a lot of data does indeed follow a logarithmic scale. If I take five dice, roll them, and multiply the values together, the result will follow Benford's Law, with or without any "influence". If I take five dice, or five thousand dice, and add them, I will get bell curves, and the data won't follow Benford's Law, because bell curve values don't follow Benford's Law. Logarithmic values follow Benford's Law.

If you have that same bell curve and expand possibilities beyond that magnitude, then Benford starts having an effect. The degree of that effect is determined by the possibilities of expansion beyond that magnitude.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. Beford's Law will be apparent only in data that follows multiple orders of magnitude, but that is a necessary, not a sufficient, condition.

(Actually, it isn't even necessary. If I generate uniform random numbers between 1 and 10, and take their logarithms, the result will follow Benford's Law, but in naturally occurring data sets, it's unlikely such a thing would ever occur that it is logarithmically distributed without varying over several orders of magnitude. If you have such a data set, you can change the units so that the data does vary among several orders of magnitude, and we're back to Benford.)



And the dominance can change for each number. That is why in my calculation, Trump mostly followed a Benford curve, except bent higher on lower numbers and had a weird bump at three. And Biden had mostly a bell curve but was bent higher at lower numbers and was way up on one.
Click to expand...

I would love to see that analysis, because I'll bet it was a lot like the analyses that were published in the blogs shortly after the election. Every data set with lots of 1s, and fewer 2s, and not many of anything else was declared to be Benford's Law, but those analyses were simply wrong. If you have more 9s than 8s, that isn't Benford's Law, even if you have lots more 1s than either, and it isn't anything overlaid with Benford Data.
 
Disgusting behavior by idiots who can't accept reality.

Michigan Secretary Of State Says Armed Protesters Descended On Her Home Saturday [npr.org]
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson says "dozens" of armed protesters descended on her home Saturday night, using megaphones to disrupt what had been a quiet evening with her young son. It was meant to intimidate her, Benson said — adding that it didn't work.

The crowd was made up of people angry over President Trump's election loss. They shouted and chanted slogans outside Benson's house in a Detroit neighborhood, echoing conspiracy theories about the Nov. 3 voting process.
Click to expand...
 
Georgia certifies the election results, again, and Trump loses, again.
 
Don't know where to post this (Humor subforum perhaps):

If the Kelly case from Pennsylvania is granted cert by SCOTUS, the oral arguments will be presented by ... Ted Cruz.

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1336049002949857284?s=19


But, but, but ...

Democratic lawyer Marc E. Elias has this to say: "It's not before the Court on a cert petition. The petitioners are seeing an emergency injunction, for which there will not be any oral argument."

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1336077413948776452?s=19
 
Last edited:
Bubba said:
time will tell
Click to expand...

Game Over Bubba / 8th December is here.

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 ends all recounts and legal challenges six days before the electoral college casts its vote on the 14th of December. That is the 8th of December.

As Giuliani is sick with Covid and Sidney Powell has fully lost the plot and her last court actions, that's the end of Bubba's excuse for trolling. :D
 
It sucks about the security people, hotel staff and caterers at the Trump's election stealing events. I don't care if the Trump supporters die. They aren't valuable. I would hate it if any real Americans died or became ill because of the treason of Trump and his landscaping team or their supporters. In fact, in Georgia, the more Trump supporters who get incapacitated or die, the better.
 
Matthew Ellard said:
Game Over Bubba / 8th December is here.

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 ends all recounts and legal challenges six days before the electoral college casts its vote on the 14th of December. That is the 8th of December.

As Giuliani is sick with Covid and Sidney Powell has fully lost the plot and her last court actions, that's the end of Bubba's excuse for trolling. :D
Click to expand...

For Bubba, in case he has not seen this

The other thing that should be mentioned is the determinations of the states cannot be challenged in the courts or in Congress after this "safe harbor" date. While the states are not required to finalize their electoral votes by the safe harbor date, 45 of the 50 states have. Two of those states (Idaho and Missouri) have already been won by Trump, and the other three (Hawaii, Colorado and New Jersey) hold a total of 27 EC votes between them, so even in the extremely unlikely event that Trump successfully challenged and overturned Biden's favoured percentages of 29.5%, 13.5% and 15.9% in those three states, it still would not be enough to prevent Biden becoming president.

Its over Bubba....

FatLadySings.gif
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
This kraken couldn't sink a dinghy.
Click to expand...

Indeed. As usual, it was defective in more ways that the court cared to count. Before even getting to the matter of evidence, the court found piles upon piles of procedural and technical errors.

I think the GOP doesn't really understand what's happening here. In a whole bunch of states likely to remain contestable, and in several federal circuits, they're racking up a bunch of precedents that will make it exceptionally difficult for them in the future to challenge election results via the judiciary. None of them has a prayer of making it to the Supreme Court.
 
Resume said:
Covered elsewhere. Doomed to fail.
Click to expand...

Indeed, facially idiotic. It claims that alleged election irregularities in other states "disenfranchised" the voters of Texas. It did no such thing. As long as the electors that Texas certified for next week's ballot in the Electoral College were lawfully elected by Texas voters, no Texas voter can have been disenfranchised by anything that occurs in another state.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom