Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

[Skeptic Tank]

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

That does seem odd. Why were so many votes in Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin cast for people who weren't even running? This should be investigated.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

It seems odd to me that giraffes have purple tongues.

[Olmstead]

Originally Posted by Cain

We know Biden cheated. We just need to figure out how.

The fun thing about this sort of investigation is that it makes just as much sense for the other side until actual evidence is found. It's Schrödinger's evidence. Until you find it, you won't know whether it was Trump or Biden who cheated.

[Skeptic Tank]

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

Quote:

What we are seeing in the data is astronomically out of whack with 2016.

In 2016 there was a circa 150k difference in top ticket only voting between Trump and Clinton.

This year shows a circa 500k difference.

It’s just not credible.

Quote:

Look at Virginia. There were 107,000 ballots with a vote for president and not for the congressional race in VA district 1 alone.

There were only 14,000 like this in 2016.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

Is there any comparison (by proportion) to other years besides 2016?

I'm also curious how it correlates with higher turnout.

[dmaker]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

I don't see the function of government is to carry out my preferences.

This sums up Trump supporters perfectly, in my opinion. They elected Trump to act out their grievances.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by xjx388

From what I've seen, it seems the Trump team is making broad claims in public but their lawsuits are much more focused and not likely to succeed. Looks to me like a show to rile up the base and start getting them to protest and demand a new election or something.

I heard Huckabee on the radio this morning saying something about how there were so many tickets that voted Republican -except for Trump. He was incredulous that those were valid votes. Shouldn't that tell you something, Mike, that so many otherwise Republican supporters refused to vote for Trump?

Think that is reality, Trump is throwing a tantrum and to try and calm him down they are saying “we are suing”, whilst of course they can’t sue based on the grievance Trump has, which is “I wanna WIN!!!!!” They have to come up with something they can at least put down on paper.

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

I picked a state in the middle of the map, Missouri.

2020 - 1.24 Million votes for Biden (41.3%)
2016 - 1.07 Million votes for Clinton (37.9%)

ETA: I'm confident that that trend would continue in darned near every state of the union. That's why I picked one without even looking. I knew what I would find.

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Massachusettes had more votes for Biden in 2020 than Hillary in 2016. 2,236,646 to 1,995,196.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

You mean, where likely most of their campaign efforts were concentrated?

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

If someone says "I used to be in the mafia and I had knowledge of mafia hits that were undertaken. This guy who just washed up on the shore has all the telltale signs of a mafia hit, and he was exactly the type of guy they would put a hit out on. He had such and such information and was threatening to expose it..."

It doesn't make sense to say "oh well then why don't you go to the cops and prove it?"

He isn't saying he knows it for a fact, he's saying that as someone who is familiar with the methods of operation, what he's seeing fits the pattern perfectly.

Do you feel you make sense, in the actual context?

Hans

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

"People care about the Presidency more than they care about acknowledging the candidacy of the local Secretary of the Water Commission who's running unopposed. Film at eleven."

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

You might want to critically examine this claim, rather than just accepting it, kinda like Meadmaker and I did with your post about more votes for Hillary and Obama than Biden by state. It took me about 3 minutes to find a defeater for that claim, MeadM found another one. How many more do we need before that claim goes away?

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by gnome

You mean, where likely most of their campaign efforts were concentrated?

Don't fall for the trick of getting into an explanation of why, before finding out whether the assertion is true.

The assertion is false. Biden got more votes than Clinton almost everywhere, and even a higher percentage than Clinton.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

Don't fall for the trick of getting into an explanation of why, before finding out whether the assertion is true.

The assertion is false. Biden got more votes than Clinton almost everywhere, and even a higher percentage than Clinton.

Thanks! That's a nice trick indeed.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

“Only a gullible moron accepts at face-value random things they find on Twitter” pretty much sums up my thoughts.

[Firestone]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

It's a phenomenon that has been studied for decades in the US. Google
"voter roll-off".
From a paper written in 2002:

Quote:

Voter roll-off has been the subject of a variety of studies over the years. Researchers have found several possible explanations for why voters do not complete their ballot.
...
We posit that increasing roll-off as a result of increasing turnout is a result of less informed or less interested voters going to the polls to vote in the “big” races while leaving the lower-level races blank.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https:/...IAt0aC3w30ZiHw

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

1) You post enough things that are wrong that I'm not sure to even trust the data. Beef up your source by posting something to a non-twitter link, and I'll take a look.

2) It's counter-evidence for fraud. A fraudster is highly likely to be partisan, and vote in down-ballot races as well.

3) A lot of people who are not interested in politics in general had very strong feelings for or against Trump, so a lot of those first time voters might only cast a vote for President.

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

This was an election that, for so many people, was more about getting Trump out than anything else. People are allowed to vote only for President if they want to. Absent actual evidence of fraud, there's nothing there.

---
That's the thing. Don't throw numbers around with a phrase like, "statistical analysis," it's absolutely meaningless. You can tell any story you like with a few numbers and "statistical analysis." Allegations of fraud need actual evidence of fraud, full stop.

The Benford's Law stuff is a perfect example of a valid statistical method being used inappropriately to fit an agenda.

[Childlike Empress]

Edited by Agatha:

Edited to remove breach of rule 11. Please do not attempt to moderate threads. If you see what you perceive to be breaches, report them.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this thread:

Twitter link

https://i.imgur.com/Ad3Mf4I.png

Kassam follows up with:

Quote:

TRUMP TOP TICKET ONLY:

Pennsylvania - Negative (-57,795)
Georgia - Negative (-28,955)
Arizona - 20,683
Michigan 31,538
Wisconsin Negative (50,254)

Negative values probably means there was crossover and they prob voted for Trump and a Democrat lower.

No, negative values for "People who voted ONLY for Biden/Trump and didn't vote further down the ticket" means your "continued statistical analysis" makes no sense.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Paul2

You might want to critically examine this claim, rather than just accepting it, kinda like Meadmaker and I did with your post about more votes for Hillary and Obama than Biden by state. It took me about 3 minutes to find a defeater for that claim, MeadM found another one. How many more do we need before that claim goes away?

That is apparently quite common in presidential elections.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Edited by Agatha:

Edited to remove moderated content

Okay.

There has been no meaningful evidence of any fraud/tampering (except from the Republicans) in the 2020 election and anyone who says differently is a either an intentional liar or being intentionally ignorant with an agenda.

Do you have any facts beyond that?

[acbytesla]

I posted this in the other election thread...but it works here too.

It should be noticed by Trump and the GOP that the margins in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are greater for Biden now than they were for Trump in 2016.

[Childlike Empress]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Okay.

You misread my post. I have other things to deal with at the moment but got value out of this thread. Which is not too rare (otherwise I wouldn't be here), but also not very common because of a lot of noise. I just wanted to encourage people to stay on the very important issue we are dealing with here, and I am undecided about as most of the readers will be.

[Venom]

I get the impression that most of the 'election skeptics' would not be going crazy had Trump not conditioned them to believe this for months in advance. He did it in 2016 too.

There are legitimate concerns in almost every election. It's a big process performed independently among the states and there are bound to be issues---why all this noise NOW?

[sackett]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

A country which only gives white men a say, will tend to be a much more pleasant, agreeable, and advantageous place to live FOR white men.

As a white man, I naturally prefer to live in a society that reflects my group's values and best interests and is set up to cater to us and keep us at the top.

It would be insanity to feel otherwise.

Something stincts in here.

[crescent]

Originally Posted by Paul2

You might want to critically examine this claim, rather than just accepting it, kinda like Meadmaker and I did with your post about more votes for Hillary and Obama than Biden by state. It took me about 3 minutes to find a defeater for that claim, MeadM found another one. How many more do we need before that claim goes away?

I opened FB and Quora, both are full of posts repeating ST's false stats. Easily, very easily and quickly debunked. Yet the true believers run with it faster than the reality based community can keep up. Its a never ending Gish Gallop.

[No Other]

Apply Benford's Law to the vote total and activity by precincts. Since Benford's Law is empirical, it is recognized as valid for detecting fraud in accounting ledgers. Math doesn't care if you're Republican, Democrat or Independent...

At least this method does away with hyperbole.

[Cain]

Just to continue playing this game...

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

California has 600,000 more votes for Biden than Clinton, but in fairness, we haven't finished counting. Biden's so stupid for cheating in California. Hillary tried that four years ago and got caught.

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by No Other

Apply Benford's Law to the vote total and activity by precincts. Since Benford's Law is empirical, it is recognized as valid for detecting fraud in accounting ledgers. Math doesn't care if you're Republican, Democrat or Independent...

At least this method does away with hyperbole.

I'm guessing you posted this without reading the contents of the thread.

No problem. We all do that, but I'd encourage you to go back and read the posts related to Benford's law (you can use the "thread tools" for searching to see most of them.)

Short summary: Due to the near uniform size of precincts, Benford's law would not be expected to apply to activity by precincts.

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by Cain

Just to continue playing this game...



California has 600,000 more votes for Biden than Clinton, but in fairness, we haven't finished counting. Biden's so stupid for cheating in California. Hillary tried that four years ago and got caught.

I'm trying to read things very carefully, but Ballotpedia shows for California

Hillary, 2016, 8,753,788
Biden, 2020, 8,180,018

[JoeMorgue]

Benford's Law is like Benford's Love, hard and fast.

*Resigned, annoyed Kip voice* "That's Brannigan's Law, sir."

Ah yes I see. Kip I have made it with a woman, inform the crew.

[Childlike Empress]

Originally Posted by Myriad

No, negative values for "People who voted ONLY for Biden/Trump and didn't vote further down the ticket" means your "continued statistical analysis" makes no sense.

Elaborate. For me it sounds like the person who analysed that data found that a lot of BIDEN voters in Pennsylvania didn't vote for any local politicians (98,000-57,795). Is that what is meant, and backed by data? Or am I misreading something?

[bonzombiekitty]

Originally Posted by Paul2

I'm trying to read things very carefully, but Ballotpedia shows for California

Hillary, 2016, 8,753,788
Biden, 2020, 8,180,018

According to CNN, Biden currently has 9,325,844 votes in CA with approx 85% of the vote counted. So it will only go up. Ballot-o-pedia's count is when CA was at 77% counted.

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty

According to CNN, Biden currently has 9,325,844 votes in CA with approx 85% of the vote counted. So it will only go up.

Well, thank you Ballotpedia. It's a great site, but maybe not updated often enough.

[Armitage72]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

I picked a state in the middle of the map, Missouri.

2020 - 1.24 Million votes for Biden (41.3%)
2016 - 1.07 Million votes for Clinton (37.9%)

ETA: I'm confident that that trend would continue in darned near every state of the union. That's why I picked one without even looking. I knew what I would find.

Arizona.
Obama in 2008 got 1,034,707
Obama in 2012 got 1,025,232
Hillary got 1,161,167
Biden currently has 1,644,260

Of course, Arizona had "them damn Injuns" coming out to vote in droves this year.

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank

It seems odd to me that Biden got fewer votes than Obama or Hillary in every state other than Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Originally Posted by Cain

Just to continue playing this game..

California has 600,000 more votes for Biden than Clinton, but in fairness, we haven't finished counting. Biden's so stupid for cheating in California. Hillary tried that four years ago and got caught.

Just to show how full of crap Tank's claims are.

Washington State,
2016. Hillary 1,742,718 54.3%
2020 Biden 2, 303,430 58.8%
Oregon
2016 Hillary 1,002,106 50.07%
2020 Biden. 1,318,475. 57.00 %
California
2016 Hillary 8,753,788. Percentage 61.73 %
2020 Biden. 9,304,895 * Percentage 64.60 %

*93 percent tallied

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Hey, guys arguing with a Neo Nazi is a exercise in futility....

My goal in starting this thread was not to convince Skeptic Tank. It would be kind of foolish to think that was possible, based on history.

However, these allegations are being tossed around by a lot of people, including, especially, POTUS. I thought that by having a thread where talk of this is concentrated, it would make the counterarguments easier to find. ST and others will serve up whatever's being tossed around the internet for us, so we don't have to go looking.


And if I, or anyone else, did convince Skeptic Tank? Well, that would be an awesome bonus, wouldn't it? I'm just not counting on it.