From the donald.
Trump’s Missing Votes: -31065
Biden’s Unexplained Votes: 30291
I found irregularities in the Edison Data (which was big news yesterday) but the poster didn’t narrow it down properly.
Here is my analysis which corrects for margins of error (given 3 decimal rounding on ratios) and checks BOTH WAYS to see if votes went to Trump or Biden.
It checks to see if the ratios changed more than the vote counts would allow for MATHMATICALLY. And oh boy do they ever.
PA is showing this:
Trump’s Missing Votes: -31065
Biden’s Unexplained Votes: 30291
PROOF IS HERE:
https://archive.is/lcyqw
There is a chance that the anomalies we found are legitimate. There’s a chance that the anomalies are a fix to an error they found.
The problem is, if the anomalies are a fixed to an error they found, the error has to be gradual, something that they trickled in. The question becomes if an error trickled in, how did it trickle in, and how did they discover that the error trickled in?
If the error is not a fix, but instead a transcription error, then the question is raised where is the reciprocal fix? We should see a fix down the line resolving the error, presumably equal to the error. If there is an argument that the error has been fixed, but the fix has been mixed with future reports so it fits within the margin that works statistically, then you have a solid and unambiguous case of fraud.
Since there is no obvious Spike that they are solving with this Mass swing for Biden, the only option if we are to assume it is legitimate is that the error they are correcting took a long time to accumulate and they were able to detect the long-term error and resolve it during counting, rather than after the fact.
If they cannot point to an error that was being fixed, then a real Stark realization takes place. The anomalies that I discovered are reflected in the final totals that New York times is using right now. Somebody needs to answer for them, but I have just ruled out any legitimate excuse for them whatsoever.
Read more about the analysis here: https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8Skkr1s/corrected-analisys-of-edison-dat/c/
Analisys?