Posted on 11/10/2020 7:04:29 PM PST by Lockbox
More than that - they need to explain it in a way everyone understands.
Use DNA.
DNA is not 100% mathematical certainty but it’s accepted as such. There is a one in a billion chance to get a duplicate match. The statistical improbability of all these events is probably similar. Whoever brings these things forward should compare the odds of these things happening to the odds of a DNA duplication. This way people will get it.
Watched the whole thing. See, this is why engineers should be in charge. Of everything!
If we can use the eqaual protection clause of the 14th amendment to equalize traffic codes from state to state then we can use the same clause to equalize voting laws to make every state’s vote as safe as the safest states.
Problem is that the Constitution specifically gives the right to the states to conduct their elections.
But the founding fathers forgot to give the states the right
to regulate travel by automobile.
Have you ever wondered why?
Sidney Powell put this link in parler (maybe twitter too?)
Yeah - that kind of stuff KILLs a witness or analyst like this. I actually think what his data shows is suburban women (speculation) DID NOT vote straight Republican - they voted ‘Someone Else’ and then down ballot, Republicans - that’s how the GOP did so good with house seat pick ups, but trailed at the top of the ticket.
That’s a hypothesis — show me the data to prove it. See my post #25 to Possibly explain the divergence in data.
you have to wonder about Sidney Powell linking to this guy as providing “evidence of fraud”...
doesn’t inspire confidence about the substance of any provable evidence.
To know results defy logic and common sense is not the same as being able to prove it.
Yes! It’s great how he calls out Mittens to explain his milktoast argument that “Republicans were tired of Trump” as he shows the devastating statistical graph which clearly shows manipulation.
The theory is this is when the transfer votes to Biden came from.
He addressed that as the same argument Mitt Romney uses. But that situation would still be represented by a flat horizontal line across the graph, not a flat line segment that downturns sharply and linearly as a precinct leans more Republican.
How much of the video did you watch?
I know this is going to sound weird, but do you know of, or have you heard of even anecdotally, a person who goes in to vote in a general election (after having been subject to a big “GO VOTE” campaign at their place of employment for example), and this person is not a thoughtful or deliberate voter, he (or she) generally avoids the primary and midterm elections, and does not study the downballot races or the state propositions or local measures, but votes for one thing only and that is for the office of president? Just that one office? And then he can grab his “I voted” sticker to show his neighbors or boss. Does that even sound reasonable?
I just want to be sure I understand the stance you appear to be taking-and I will say up front I may be misinterpreting your posts...if I am, please set me straight.
Are all of you saying that you think that it is more likely that people were voting for Republicans down ballot and rejecting Trump because they dislike him, than it was for an algorithm to uniformly transfer votes from Trump to Biden?
It seemed pretty obvious to me that in viewing all the counties that the precinct data was plotted for, that there was an algorithm that was transferring votes.
As he said, when you look at the slope of the line, across counties, it is almost exactly identical in ALL of them. And as the KNOWN Republican percentage of a precinct increased (that is a known value) that the amount of Trump votes that ended up with Biden increased, in a very uniform way.
Do all of you really think it is more likely and just simply an odd coincidence that the precincts with higher percentages of Republicans decided not to vote for Trump in that mathematically uniform way?
Because that sure is what the data is showing.
I am no mathematician, just to be clear. But I took enough advanced math courses to pass Physical Chemistry in college, and have spent about 25 years pulling and analyzing data for people, and while I am somewhat of an ignoramus in the finer points of statistics, I know enough to recognize that a uniform pattern like that, interspersed and supposedly representing the results of human behavior from random people is completely bogus. Completely. It won’t happen like that in “real life”.
I don’t post this to be confrontational, I may misunderstand the points you are making, but...his data is open and obtainable from records. How they chose those data points to plot is a mystery to me, but given that they did, seeing that made me hopping mad.
As for this Dr. Shiva guy, I don’t know who he is. I only know from the signs I saw on the side of the road leading up to the election.
But I do know two things: The scumbag Massachusetts Secretary of State James Galvin didn’t like it that Dr. Shiva was shining a light on the fact that Massachusetts, contrary to FEDERAL law, is deleting ballot images immediately after the election instead of storing them for 22 months as mandated by law.
He didn’t like that, so he got him banned from Twitter.
Secondly, this is the Wikipedia entry for this Dr. Shiva:
V. A. Shiva Ayyadurai (born Vellayappa Ayyadurai Shiva,[2] December 2, 1963)[3] is an Indian-American scientist, engineer, politician, entrepreneur, and promoter of conspiracy theories and unfounded medical claims. He is notable for his widely discredited claim to be the “inventor of email”,[4] based on the electronic mail software called “EMAIL” he wrote as a New Jersey high school student in the late 1970s.[5][6] Initial reports that repeated Ayyadurai’s assertion—from organizations such as The Washington Post and the Smithsonian Institution—were followed by public retractions.[5][7] These corrections were triggered by objections from historians and ARPANET pioneers who pointed out that email was already actively used in the early 1970s.[3]
Ayyadurai also attracted attention for two reports: the first questioning the working conditions of India’s largest scientific agency; the second questioning the safety of genetically modified soybeans. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ayyadurai became known for a social media disinformation campaign about the coronavirus: spreading conspiracy theories about the cause of coronavirus; promoting unfounded COVID-19 treatments; and campaigning to fire Anthony Fauci for allegedly being a so-called “deep state” actor.
His email claims I know little about. Never heard of him. But I know this: if Wikipedia puts out a page like this on a person, you can nearly guarantee the person is an enemy of the Left. Wikipedia is a partisan hack website good for finding birth dates or dates of well known events, but when they venture into any other area, they go off the rails and are NOT to be trusted.
I am curious as well. I understand the video is a little hard to follow, but the presence of a pattern like that, a simple plot of verifiable data points taken from the public domain, is hard for me to discount.
“Dr Shiva..a huge D-bag” on air
confrontation with talk host Howie Carr.
Shiva was supposedly arrested for
domestic violence in 2005.
9-1-2020 GOP MA Senate Primary
Shiva Ayyadurai: 39.9%, 101,279 votes
Kevin J. O’Connor: 60.1%, 152,598 votes
Incumbent Markey beat O’connor last week.
Shiva encouraged voters to write him in
Shiva ran against Warren in ‘18 as an
independent and got 3 per cent of the vote
(Claimed he could defeat her)
Was email invented in the 60s? If so his age was in single digits at the time.
He said he developed a program in the 80s
for a dental school, called EMAIL
So the greater % of Republicans the greater % number of SWITCHED Trump votes? All at the exact same escalation among multiple Counties?
No way that is a natural happenstance.
It would be extremely difficult to perform even by manual fraudulent means. It’s essentially proven that it was performed by a purposefully fraudulent computer algorithm designed to switch over votes on an escalating scale of Republican strength ratio.
Ideally, I’d like to see the data from other districts that are DIFFERENT from his example - that’s an anomaly suggesting fraud.
escalating scale of Republican strength ratio? Please explain what this means.
This is what I understand from the video. Regarding the person’s previous personal actions, I do not know. First I had hear of these people. Thanks for posting information.
I do not think a large number of voters just go to vote for one race only. But if you say a large number of fake ballots needed to be generated in a very short timeframe, then it makes sense to have the vote generators just mark the ballot for one race. Guess the DNC did not figure others would micro analyze the vote so quickly and discover such a pattern. There must be voting studies from other elections such as 2016 to review to determine if single candidate voting was popular.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.