Donald Trump running for president
- Thread starter LiftWithDonuts
- Start date
ax1
Legend
I liked her better as well, I voted for her. She is a smart woman.
She was a bit controversial within a divisive party since she was more pragmatic and open to the left than the hardliner libertarians.
I actually joined the Libertarian Party last year so I can vote in the primaries and supported Judge Grey and Larry Sharpe, but they cancelled NY's first ever Libertarian primary election because of the CCP-Virus.
ax1
Legend
That and based on your fitness photo there, thats something I can be proud about
muscleupcrohn
Legend
ax1
Legend
I was invited to the annual Libertarian Convention next month, I might go if Im in town. They got my address from the registration somehow but Im glad they are reaching out to me. Hope there is something I can do to help with some local battles.
The year before we had a Libertarian District Attorney win a very close election, wins do happen.
Think about this....................imagine if we can win 10 Senate Seats, just a measly 10. Imagine how much power and leverage we would have as we would be the very dominant swing vote....it can be done.
I love Ron, he does a daily 20-25 minute show on youtube on his official channel.
ax1
Legend
It looked too slo me and inaccurate, but maybe it was supposed to be slow? How did you mute a public video?
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Wait, so you mean to tell me that my tip to investigate Santa Clause in the WTC bombing might not have been investigated, merely because they didn't find it credible?
All along I thought it was because they didn't want the truth to get out.
I don't know here to be honest. My gut is always going to look real close at the spouse of any pre-maturely deceased corpse. Lol.
Agree that I believe the stolen election stuff more than the WTC conspiracies.
Sorry, I gotta side with Ax on this. The evidence of potential election fraud is compelling enough to warrant further investigation for anyone with a reasonable understanding of basic math. No need for the eyewitnesses, etc.
I mean, you really think that Trump won almost every county in a state, with voter turnout consistently around 66% and then the single most heavily populated County in the state had voter turnout of 90%, with enough votes for Joe Biden to require 100% registered democrat turnout....and that this pattern repeated itself at least 4 times?
You don't think that is at all suspicious?
So, just to take one angle on this, which party do you think was least likely to show up at the polls in the midst of Covid? My guess is the democrats.
Which party do you think benefitted by being able to mail in their ballot from home in the middle of Covid?
I got a mail-in ballot I never requested. First year that ever happened that I can remember.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Dude, don't be condescending saying that I don't have a "basic understanding of math" because I don't agree with you here. I did admit I don't have the knowledge to do advanced structural forensics regarding 9-11 (LITERALLY NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN THIS THREAD DOES I'd wager a good sum on), but I have literally taken at least four calculus courses and multiple statistics courses at university, so I think I know "basic math." But I guess I don't...
Trump literally encouraged his voters to vote in person, not to trust the mail in ballots, and the Democrats encouraged mail in voting. So it is entirely logical that when the votes in person were counted first, it was a big lead for Trump, and then when the mail in ballots were counted later, since some states prohibit the early counting of the mail in votes received early. And to suggest that ONLY democrats would vote against Trump is asinine. Plenty of people were so put off by Trump that they voted for Biden. What keeps voter turnout low typically? Some people are busy and unable to get to the polls. And some people are just too lazy to go and wait in line. Mail in ballots allow them to vote easier. It's not illegal voting, it's just making it easier for people. So you got a mail in ballot. Big deal. You're a legally registered voter, are you not? So if they mailed you a ballot without you asking, how is that "fraud?" Unless making it easier for LEGALLY REGISTERED VOTERS to vote is fraud? It sounds like people just don't want to admit that if every legal registered voter votes, the Republicans are in trouble. But in reality, without mail in ballots, people are often too lazy to be bothered to go out and vote. And if you think the POTUS election was rigged, why didn't they rig the other races on the SAME BALLOT? Why did the control come down to runoff elections? Surely if you're rigging one race on a ticket, you can also rig other one on the same ballot. Or are these masterminds just too dumb or lazy to do that too? All the election conspiracy theories have been thoroughly debunked by people smarter than both of us, and you're explicit insults here are enough for me to say I'm done arguing THIS topic. At least the 9-11 debate has interesting conspiracy theories. There's been DOZENS of lawsuit's by Trump and his lawyers on the topic and they've ALL been dismissed, even by TRUMP/REPUBLICAN APPOINTED JUDGES. But I guess you'll say that those judges are also in the pockets of "Biden's handlers?" I don't get how making it easier for LEGALLY REGISTERED VOTERS to vote by any means necessary is CORRUPTION or a RIGGED ELECTION. You'd have to argue that people who SHOULDN'T have been allowed to vote voted. So you, a legal voter, getting a mail in ballot in no way shows any rigged election. Unless you're not a registered voter. In which case, I'd say go register to vote instead of wasting your time here.
Last edited:
muscleupcrohn
Legend
ax1
Legend
Dude, don't be condescending saying that I don't have a "basic understanding of math" because I don't agree with you here. I did admit I don't have the knowledge to do advanced structural forensics regarding 9-11 (LITERALLY NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN THIS THREAD DOES I'd wager a good sum on), but I have literally taken at least four calculus courses and multiple statistics courses at university, so I think I know "basic math." But I guess I don't...
Trump literally encouraged his voters to vote in person, not to trust the mail in ballots, and the Democrats encouraged mail in voting. So it is entirely logical that when the votes in person were counted first, it was a big lead for Trump, and then when the mail in ballots were counted later, since some states prohibit the early counting of the mail in votes received early. And to suggest that ONLY democrats would vote against Trump is asinine. Plenty of people were so put off by Trump that they voted for Biden. What keeps voter turnout low typically? Some people are busy and unable to get to the polls. And some people are just too lazy to go and wait in line. Mail in ballots allow them to vote easier. It's not illegal voting, it's just making it easier for people. So you got a mail in ballot. Big deal. You're a legally registered voter, are you not? So if they mailed you a ballot without you asking, how is that "fraud?" Unless making it easier for LEGALLY REGISTERED VOTERS to vote is fraud? It sounds like people just don't want to admit that if every legal registered voter votes, the Republicans are in trouble. But in reality, without mail in ballots, people are often too lazy to be bothered to go out and vote. And if you think the POTUS election was rigged, why didn't they rig the other races on the SAME BALLOT? Why did the control come down to runoff elections? Surely if you're rigging one race on a ticket, you can also rig other one on the same ballot. Or are these masterminds just too dumb or lazy to do that too? All the election conspiracy theories have been thoroughly debunked by people smarter than both of us, and you're explicit insults here are enough for me to say I'm done arguing THIS topic. At least the 9-11 debate has interesting conspiracy theories. There's been DOZENS of lawsuit's by Trump and his lawyers on the topic and they've ALL been dismissed, even by TRUMP/REPUBLICAN APPOINTED JUDGES. But I guess you'll say that those judges are also in the pockets of "Biden's handlers?" I don't get how making it easier for LEGALLY REGISTERED VOTERS to vote by any means necessary is CORRUPTION or a RIGGED ELECTION. You'd have to argue that people who SHOULDN'T have been allowed to vote voted. So you, a legal voter, getting a mail in ballot in no way shows any rigged election. Unless you're not a registered voter. In which case, I'd say go register to vote instead of wasting your time here.
Just a minor detail, he did at one point change it to "just go ahead and vote twice!"
muscleupcrohn
Legend
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Dude, don't be condescending saying that I don't have a "basic understanding of math" because I don't agree with you here. I did admit I don't have the knowledge to do advanced structural forensics regarding 9-11 (LITERALLY NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN THIS THREAD DOES I'd wager a good sum on), but I have literally taken at least four calculus courses and multiple statistics courses at university, so I think I know "basic math." But I guess I don't...
Trump literally encouraged his voters to vote in person, not to trust the mail in ballots, and the Democrats encouraged mail in voting. So it is entirely logical that when the votes in person were counted first, it was a big lead for Trump, and then when the mail in ballots were counted later, since some states prohibit the early counting of the mail in votes received early. And to suggest that ONLY democrats would vote against Trump is asinine. Plenty of people were so put off by Trump that they voted for Biden. What keeps voter turnout low typically? Some people are busy and unable to get to the polls. And some people are just too lazy to go and wait in line. Mail in ballots allow them to vote easier. It's not illegal voting, it's just making it easier for people. So you got a mail in ballot. Big deal. You're a legally registered voter, are you not? So if they mailed you a ballot without you asking, how is that "fraud?" Unless making it easier for LEGALLY REGISTERED VOTERS to vote is fraud? It sounds like people just don't want to admit that if every legal registered voter votes, the Republicans are in trouble. But in reality, without mail in ballots, people are often too lazy to be bothered to go out and vote. And if you think the POTUS election was rigged, why didn't they rig the other races on the SAME BALLOT? Why did the control come down to runoff elections? Surely if you're rigging one race on a ticket, you can also rig other one on the same ballot. Or are these masterminds just too dumb or lazy to do that too? All the election conspiracy theories have been thoroughly debunked by people smarter than both of us, and you're explicit insults here are enough for me to say I'm done arguing THIS topic. At least the 9-11 debate has interesting conspiracy theories. There's been DOZENS of lawsuit's by Trump and his lawyers on the topic and they've ALL been dismissed, even by TRUMP/REPUBLICAN APPOINTED JUDGES. But I guess you'll say that those judges are also in the pockets of "Biden's handlers?" I don't get how making it easier for LEGALLY REGISTERED VOTERS to vote by any means necessary is CORRUPTION or a RIGGED ELECTION. You'd have to argue that people who SHOULDN'T have been allowed to vote voted. So you, a legal voter, getting a mail in ballot in no way shows any rigged election. Unless you're not a registered voter. In which case, I'd say go register to vote instead of wasting your time here.
You clearly haven't even come close to using your normal levels of reasoning in this response.
First off, I wasn't even a little condescending. Fact, you can CLEARLY see the high probability of fraud with basic math skills. But, I know you have the math skills, so I guess I should have been more specific - you also have to see the data.
Amazingly you avoided answering a single question asked as well and instead focused on a perceived slight, which I have been clear how highly I view your intellect on this board numerous times so you should know better.
Do you REALLY think that it is more likely that 100% of voters turn out in a town with 100 people, or in a town with 100,000 people?
Do you REALLY think that in a state where Trump wins almost every county, with voter turnouts in the range of approx. 66% consistently (which is about what the country as a whole averaged), a single heavily populated area has 90+% voter turnout and goes to Biden by a landslide?
Also, the "smarter people than you and I" - I have had this convo with a highly skeptical, highly awarded economist who also resisted at first but softened as it was all laid out and he thought about it more.
I can also tell you that states like MA and CA don't show these patterns of high voter turnout in a single county - or ANY county. Why not? Because only an IDIOT would try to cheat for the liberal party in those states. Why bother? If even half the liberals turn out to vote the Republicans couldn't win in those states. Why risk getting caught where there is no benefit.
TX also does not show this pattern...in order to sway the election to the liberals in that state you would have to have voter turnouts far in excess of 100% and risk being caught.
Yet in a number of swing states you have ONE county that overcomes an entire state for Biden, with the smallest voter turnout in any of the 5 states I found being 86% in that county.
I am not implying that only a liberal will vote against Trump. But you are missing the point here - those counties that I am describing have 90% or more voter turnout at times. Lets take it a step farther. Lets say there are 440,000 registered voters in a county with 250,000 registered democrats in a county and 280,000 votes go to the democrats plus 120,000 go to the republicans - do you think that is MORE likely if Republicans are voting for Biden? Only if Republicans showed up at a greater than 90% clip...unless you think there are a good number of dems that were also voting for Trump, which I also doubt.
Also, if a county TRULY has an animus voter turnout, why doesn't this spill over to a neighboring county? Do people who live two streets away have a totally different mindset just because they are over a county line? And why does this repeat at least 5 times in 50 states?
On the mail in ballots- not against a legal voter voting. I was stating that they were mailing out ballots even to people who didn't request them. If I didn't get it (I very often don't get my mail) I would have not known it was even mailed out...someone else could have stolen my vote or worse. And what about dead people not requesting? You can't possibly believe no one mailed in their dead parents' ballot.
My dad had a stroke two years ago and they took his license. He went to vote, not realizing his registration was also revoked when they took his license. They told him he wasn't registered and gave him a ballot.
But that isn't really part of my argument per se. I am focused on the data and the math being highly improbable.
I am not saying 100% there was massive fraud, just that there IS evidence, it is suspicious and should be investigated. Maybe Biden is just super popular and didn't have to leave his basement to outdo Obama in voter turnout.
Also, your "why not steal other elections on the ballot" argument isn't up to your standards. First off, other elections aren't as important. This is the big show. Second, who says they didn't? Look at how you and others react to the suggestion of the presidential election requiring investogation...no one is looking at the data.
Third and most important, I started this by thinking about how I would throw an election if I was to try. I would view cheating as a risk, and avoid it anywhere it would be obvious, or anywhere it would be unnecessary. I would realize that I cannot just flood polls with ballots. Doing so could lead to obvious data anomalies (such as more votes than people). I would realize that the more people involved, the more risk I take. I would hit places that counted the most and only those places, heavily populated cities with high numbers of registered voters that will likely have enough "overhead" to cover up my illegal votes (meaning, enough registered voters who won't vote) without going over the registration numbers. I would avoid all other chances of getting caught.
The data for 5 states at least matches all of these rules. (I had to pull it all by hand and once I found that, I was at a point where Biden could have won fraudulently and stopped my effoets.)
But hey, maybe I am wrong and 90% voter turnout in 4-5 counties that turned entire states when it was below 70% everywhere else is just normal.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Then YOU provide me with the data. Every county you are talking about. Saying “4-5 counties” is nothing verifiable or concrete. It’s frankly useless to me. I shouldn’t have to dig to know where you are talking about. Show me the registered voter count for each one. Then show me the vote count for each candidate. If you are so adamant the data reflects this, you must inherently have the data, or at least have had it at one time, so it shouldn’t be too hard for you to find again.
The burden of proof is on the party making the claim, which is you in this instance. You have to show likelihood of foul play, which means SPECIFIC AND VERIFIABLE numbers and data that I CAN check myself. You make the claims that it’s obvious if I have the data, then GIVE ME THE DATA. It’s your responsibility to provide the data to support your claims. And you are indeed the one making the claim that there was likely fraud, so please provide me with this data from reputable and verifiable sources and I will do the math.
I will then verify what you claim, and IF it is true, THEN we can go from there. If not, it will be dismissed. But you seem to want me to just accept your claim that it’s “obvious to anyone who knows basic math.” But I will not accept this without evidence. Since you claim to already have seen the data to arrive at the conclusion, please provide it to me.
Are you willing to do this?
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Hell, until you at least tell me which counties you’re talking about, I could hypothetically pull all the data from 5 of them I think you are talking about, and if I find the data disagrees with your assertions, you could easily say those just weren’t the ones you were talking about and I’d have the Sisyphean task of aiming at moving goalposts until I’ve exhausted EVERY possible urban county in every single contested state. So if you can’t/won’t provide me all the data that you claim makes it obvious, the very least you can do is tell me what counties you are referring to so I can try to find and check the data and your claims myself.
Thank you in advance.
Thank you in advance.
ax1
Legend
Plus, and I dont think you mentioned this I did try to read your post once, lol but if you want to throw an election, the people that count the vote matters too where there may be biases towards just letting things pass. So if you strategize mail voter fraud in select areas of high bias that can only be an advantage.
ax1
Legend
As much as you claim there is no burden of proof of election fraud, there is no burden of proof that the election is even legitimate. First off, you dont need an ID card to vote (in most states I think,) second there should be clear transparency which can be easily achieved if you set the voting system to open public blockchain technology. That way you have full transparency to the public, along with strict voter ID laws we can make things much better. Even with alot of these voting machines, the systems are proprietary and secret, there is no real way to audit them and hacking them has also been proved in the past.
Mail in voting is just horrible, there arent enough checks and balances from the parties that exchange (the post office can dump votes in targeted areas, and I mean like individual mail carriers who are politically active, its too easy.)
I had nothing to lose with Groper winning, Dump wasnt my guy but I was hoping for a movement for election reform but I doubt that is happening, its only gonna get worse.
In all honesty I think it would be naive to have confidence in last years election, and I mean especially last years.
Last edited:
Jiigzz
Legend
Did you know that the voter registry wasn't updated until November 4th, and that a lot of people are comparing data from pre- November 3rd, which hadn't updated its data since August?
The highest turn out was 90% of total voters, not 100%.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
What do you mean “there is no burden of proof that the election is even legitimate?” That’s not what burden of proof means. You mean there is no proof? The burden of proof is the obligation or requirement to prove a claim being made. It’s not the body of evidence or proof like you seem to think it is. The default is that an election wasn’t fraudulent in the US, so the burden of proof rests with the party claiming it was fraudulent. You’re using the term wrong man...
BamBam54
Well-known member
Looks like we have a split decision on the voting conspiracy, because in this case I do 'BELIEVE' the 2020 election was stolen by fraud. Primarily through mail in ballots, and ballot harvesting. Would be difficult to prove though, and no one seems to be taking the steps necessary to prove it.
But for all the talk about losses in court, those were primarily procedural rulings. What court has ruled on the specific claims of fraud, interviewed witnesses, investigated claims, and ruled on the sum total of evidence presented?
Separately, I don't put much faith in those Dominion voting machine claims. Some things looked suspicious, at least one machine in Georgia was erased/wiped against court orders, some machines were [illegally?] connected to the internet... but I never saw a Kraken. Hopefully, the Dominion lawsuit against Powell/Wood will be a chance to settle at least that part of the conspiracy claims in a court with full evidence presented.
Invalid Link Removed
But for all the talk about losses in court, those were primarily procedural rulings. What court has ruled on the specific claims of fraud, interviewed witnesses, investigated claims, and ruled on the sum total of evidence presented?
Separately, I don't put much faith in those Dominion voting machine claims. Some things looked suspicious, at least one machine in Georgia was erased/wiped against court orders, some machines were [illegally?] connected to the internet... but I never saw a Kraken. Hopefully, the Dominion lawsuit against Powell/Wood will be a chance to settle at least that part of the conspiracy claims in a court with full evidence presented.
Invalid Link Removed
HIT4ME
Well-known member
OK, fair response! I will try, again, to gather all the data that I had. I've presented some of it here but finding it in these threads is going to be a nightmare. I have stopped talking about it because nobody pays attention to it or even has any discussion about it, so I'd kind of given up after posting it in detail and then getting, "Well, there's no evidence." If you want to say no "proof" I am on board with that, but there is evidence.
I would like to also herald and applaud your request for data - too often on this board, we hear, "We should trust experts" - which in this case would be me, since I came up with the idea, pulled the data myself and did the research. But no one should just "trust the expert" as you are demonstrating - the experts should be able to provide validity and support for their argument. This is not tongue-in-cheek either as I fear it may come out. It just struck me as a prime example of not trusting a source just because they have done the research, and I truly applaud that. It is what I should expect from you.
Now bare with me, as I've got a busy day/week here and my main weakness is organization - so finding this all again will take some time. To add to that, some of the available data will likely be much harder to find - maps that illustrated election results are no longer news and less relevant so they are not as easy to obtain as they were in November.
I will start with, I believe it was Dane County, in WI - which is where I first saw the pattern. I believe, Dane is a very liberal area, which appears to be a possible explanation for them going to Biden at first glance - but in order to achieve the number of Biden votes required they literally would need 100% voter turn out for the democrats, or as you pointed out - even higher than 90% voter turnout for the republicans if there were a significant anti-trump republicans in the mix.
I will try to re-pull some data in a while as I have time.
Also - I'm not saying it is a fact. I am saying it is very suspicious and warrants investigation. It is evidence, not proof. I just want to be clear there because the standards are much different and I don't think this "proves" fraud because, there is a chance that it just naturally happened like this, lightning struck and I hit the lottery. They all just seem unlikely
I agree - I was trying to stay high level because the research does take time, I no longer work with it and I am not organized so I wasn't going to pull it up for another round if nobody was going to discuss it.
Hell, maybe you'll show me that it may be unlikely but is more plausible than I realize and that will be good news - fair election. It isn't unheard of that, given all the dumb people in this country, Biden won. I would actually kind of expect it from that angle.
This is a valid point and I am aware - I tried to pull the most up-to-date data I could find when I had that. I'm not using the "More than 100% of voters voted" type argument because of this. I realize that these percentages may be elevated in areas that allowed for voter registration at the polls, etc.
But if you ignore that for a moment, and realize that that issue should hold true for other polls in the country as well - not just a couple of specific polls - then you can compare what happened in a single county to the national average. The national average turns out to be around 66% voter turnout when I looked. It was almost always below 75% in every county I was able to pull - with a few exceptions for counties that Biden took in areas with high population and a large number of registered liberals. Biden took a number of counties with the "around" 66% voting turnout as well, so it's not like voters just showed up more in the areas Biden won. Voters showed up equally in most of the Biden won areas, as they did in the Trump won areas - with some standout exceptions.
So, sure you could say, of course he wins in an area with a high level of registered liberal voters - but in an area like Dane County the margin would, as above, require 100% of those liberals to have voted - and we can compare that with other liberal states like MA, CA, etc. and we see that doesn't happen. The next thought is, "Well, of course fewer liberals voted in MA - they KNEW they would win." - but that very thought would also apply to Dane County if that was the case. It doesn't.
And we can rest assured no one with any intelligence would cheat an election in MA. The republicans would never get away with it because the fraud involved would have to be so mathematically obvious that it is far to risky and you will likely be caught. A liberal would never try, because, why do they need to cheat? 75% of the registered voters in MA are registered liberal. If a third of them show up they would still possibly beat a 100% republican turnout. In this way, it becomes a good test case for what a non-fraudulent election looks like. And, yup, around 66% of the voters showed up in MA - just like almost everywhere else.
I am going to need some time to pull some data...will work on it, sorry I don't have it readily available at the moment.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
At the risk of invalidating myself, I'm going to put on my Ax1 Tinfoil hat hear and throw this out as a conspiracy (this is just for fun, not really what I believe). Trump planned to lose the election, in a fraudulent way. He realized he was not going to get anything done with Pelosi in office, so he let Biden steal the election so that he can come back in the middle of the term with the fraud proof, take back the office he was elected to, and serve 2 years that don't count toward his term limit - likely making him a 10-year president. And during his last term, it will be (hopefully) unlikely Pelosi will have the control she does now, maybe won't even be around any longer.
This would explain why he filed all these court cases and then showed up and acted like, "Well, we aren't going to prove anything." He realized afterwards it would be better to let it play out for a bit and then drop the bomb.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Take all the time you need. Life is busy, and more important than internet debates haha. Guardian has. GREAT interactive map that is still up where you can check the counts for every county. So if you cross reference that with the most recent registered voter count for the same county, you’re set. Also, remember that there are many independent voters. Saying that they needed “100% Democrat turnout” seems a bit off-base, as it seems entirely possible that many independent voters could have sided with Biden more than Trump, but I have yet to look that up myself to verify it.OK, fair response! I will try, again, to gather all the data that I had. I've presented some of it here but finding it in these threads is going to be a nightmare. I have stopped talking about it because nobody pays attention to it or even has any discussion about it, so I'd kind of given up after posting it in detail and then getting, "Well, there's no evidence." If you want to say no "proof" I am on board with that, but there is evidence.
I would like to also herald and applaud your request for data - too often on this board, we hear, "We should trust experts" - which in this case would be me, since I came up with the idea, pulled the data myself and did the research. But no one should just "trust the expert" as you are demonstrating - the experts should be able to provide validity and support for their argument. This is not tongue-in-cheek either as I fear it may come out. It just struck me as a prime example of not trusting a source just because they have done the research, and I truly applaud that. It is what I should expect from you.
Now bare with me, as I've got a busy day/week here and my main weakness is organization - so finding this all again will take some time. To add to that, some of the available data will likely be much harder to find - maps that illustrated election results are no longer news and less relevant so they are not as easy to obtain as they were in November.
I will start with, I believe it was Dane County, in WI - which is where I first saw the pattern. I believe, Dane is a very liberal area, which appears to be a possible explanation for them going to Biden at first glance - but in order to achieve the number of Biden votes required they literally would need 100% voter turn out for the democrats, or as you pointed out - even higher than 90% voter turnout for the republicans if there were a significant anti-trump republicans in the mix.
I will try to re-pull some data in a while as I have time.
Also - I'm not saying it is a fact. I am saying it is very suspicious and warrants investigation. It is evidence, not proof. I just want to be clear there because the standards are much different and I don't think this "proves" fraud because, there is a chance that it just naturally happened like this, lightning struck and I hit the lottery. They all just seem unlikely
I agree - I was trying to stay high level because the research does take time, I no longer work with it and I am not organized so I wasn't going to pull it up for another round if nobody was going to discuss it.
Hell, maybe you'll show me that it may be unlikely but is more plausible than I realize and that will be good news - fair election. It isn't unheard of that, given all the dumb people in this country, Biden won. I would actually kind of expect it from that angle.
This is a valid point and I am aware - I tried to pull the most up-to-date data I could find when I had that. I'm not using the "More than 100% of voters voted" type argument because of this. I realize that these percentages may be elevated in areas that allowed for voter registration at the polls, etc.
But if you ignore that for a moment, and realize that that issue should hold true for other polls in the country as well - not just a couple of specific polls - then you can compare what happened in a single county to the national average. The national average turns out to be around 66% voter turnout when I looked. It was almost always below 75% in every county I was able to pull - with a few exceptions for counties that Biden took in areas with high population and a large number of registered liberals. Biden took a number of counties with the "around" 66% voting turnout as well, so it's not like voters just showed up more in the areas Biden won. Voters showed up equally in most of the Biden won areas, as they did in the Trump won areas - with some standout exceptions.
So, sure you could say, of course he wins in an area with a high level of registered liberal voters - but in an area like Dane County the margin would, as above, require 100% of those liberals to have voted - and we can compare that with other liberal states like MA, CA, etc. and we see that doesn't happen. The next thought is, "Well, of course fewer liberals voted in MA - they KNEW they would win." - but that very thought would also apply to Dane County if that was the case. It doesn't.
And we can rest assured no one with any intelligence would cheat an election in MA. The republicans would never get away with it because the fraud involved would have to be so mathematically obvious that it is far to risky and you will likely be caught. A liberal would never try, because, why do they need to cheat? 75% of the registered voters in MA are registered liberal. If a third of them show up they would still possibly beat a 100% republican turnout. In this way, it becomes a good test case for what a non-fraudulent election looks like. And, yup, around 66% of the voters showed up in MA - just like almost everywhere else.
I am going to need some time to pull some data...will work on it, sorry I don't have it readily available at the moment.
Even if you can only give me the county names, that’s a good start. I can then check the poll results, as well as the current number of registered voters, and even the turnout in the last election. Etc.
But it is also possible that a few key counties in closely contested battleground states WOULD have higher than normal voter turnout, as many people will only take the time to vote if they think it’s going to be close and their vote may matter. If you’re a Republican in Cali, you may not even “waste your time” voting for Trump. But if you’re for anyone in a state that is super close, you may think that your vote matters, leading to a much higher turnout from motivated voters. You’d have to look at multiple urban counties in battleground states and compare them all to the few that you think are suspect, and also recent trends for the same counties in past elections.
This stuff is verifiable for us normal people, unlike 9/11 structural forensics, which, regardless of what ax says, he has no ability to independently verify the calculations and analysis of beyond “that’s not what a building collapse looks like.”
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Guardian report for Dane County:
Biden: 260,121
Trump: 78,794
JoJo: 3,655
TOTAL: 342,581
Invalid Link Removed
December 1st 2020 voter registration lists 398,580 registered voters.
Invalid Link Removed
That’s 86% voter turnout. I can try to see what percent of voters are registered as what party in the county to see more nuance, because independent voters exist too, and may have skewed toward Biden in that area.
Biden: 260,121
Trump: 78,794
JoJo: 3,655
TOTAL: 342,581
Invalid Link Removed
December 1st 2020 voter registration lists 398,580 registered voters.
Invalid Link Removed
That’s 86% voter turnout. I can try to see what percent of voters are registered as what party in the county to see more nuance, because independent voters exist too, and may have skewed toward Biden in that area.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Guardian report for Dane County:
Biden: 260,121
Trump: 78,794
JoJo: 3,655
TOTAL: 342,581
Invalid Link Removed
December 1st 2020 voter registration lists 398,580 registered voters.
Invalid Link Removed
That’s 86% voter turnout. I can try to see what percent of voters are registered as what party in the county to see more nuance, because independent voters exist too, and may have skewed toward Biden in that area.
Edit: “Wisconsin does not register voters by party preference or affiliation, nor does it collect information about voters' gender or race.”
So that may complicate things.
75.9% of votes there were for Biden, and 23% for Trump.
In 2016, Dane County had 71.4% of votes for Clinton, and 23.4% for Trump. So pretty damn spot-on, but with the third party voters for Johnson (3.5%) and Stein (1.4%) seeming to switch to voting for Biden, considering JoJo only got 1.1%.
(3.5+1.4)-1.1=3.8
71.4+3.8=75.2
So we’re literally within 1% of 2016 results, if we assume some independent/third-party voters switched to support Biden.
Invalid Link Removed
Edit: ~303,634 votes in 2016 Dane County. A 12.8% increase in turnout it looks like.
Wisconsin had ~2.937 million voters in 2016, and ~3.288 million voters in 2020, an increase of 12%, or within 1% of the increase noted for the county.
So unless you think the whole stats of WI is suspect, nothing about Dane County strikes me as at all suspicious.
Biden: 260,121
Trump: 78,794
JoJo: 3,655
TOTAL: 342,581
Invalid Link Removed
December 1st 2020 voter registration lists 398,580 registered voters.
Invalid Link Removed
That’s 86% voter turnout. I can try to see what percent of voters are registered as what party in the county to see more nuance, because independent voters exist too, and may have skewed toward Biden in that area.
Edit: “Wisconsin does not register voters by party preference or affiliation, nor does it collect information about voters' gender or race.”
So that may complicate things.
75.9% of votes there were for Biden, and 23% for Trump.
In 2016, Dane County had 71.4% of votes for Clinton, and 23.4% for Trump. So pretty damn spot-on, but with the third party voters for Johnson (3.5%) and Stein (1.4%) seeming to switch to voting for Biden, considering JoJo only got 1.1%.
(3.5+1.4)-1.1=3.8
71.4+3.8=75.2
So we’re literally within 1% of 2016 results, if we assume some independent/third-party voters switched to support Biden.
Invalid Link Removed
Edit: ~303,634 votes in 2016 Dane County. A 12.8% increase in turnout it looks like.
Wisconsin had ~2.937 million voters in 2016, and ~3.288 million voters in 2020, an increase of 12%, or within 1% of the increase noted for the county.
So unless you think the whole stats of WI is suspect, nothing about Dane County strikes me as at all suspicious.
Last edited:
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Dane County/Madison always stood out to me. Michigan, GA and NV had similar patterns where Biden had a handful of small counties, Trump took the bulk, had a huge lead and then one heavily populated county had a huge turnout and Biden overcame the state-wide lead.
In Wisconsin, if my memory is correct, Biden took Dane County by 260,000ish votes to about 80,000 votes for Trump. Compare this with your reasoning that you would see higher voter turnout in an area with a heavily contested race. It was a blood bath in that county, hardly contested. Biden won WI by something like 17,000 votes overall.
Contrast that to other areas in the state where there were closer races, and they were still less than 75% voter turnout.
And consider that, it seems logical that getting a higher % turnout in a less populated county is more likely than getting it in a high population area. I mean, if I have an area with 10 voters I wouldn't be shocked if 9 of them showed up or 1 of them showed up. But in an area with 400,000 voters I would be shocked if 9 out of 10 of them showed up or equally as shocked if only 1 out of 10 showed up. I would think the larger the sampling, the more it would bend toward the average as well.
Also, I get that we have the further confusion that population votes, not land mass. That's a great observation that has to be accounted for, but I'm not sure either side can really do that here because, again, the pattern doesn't fit with the rest of the nation.
The point on the independents is valid as well. I'm sure I have some issues here - pulling this stuff by hand is harder than you'd think (some of it, like how many voters there are in a county isn't always readily available) - and I did it on my own which was a temporary obsession that took me many many nights. Because of this, I readily admit my data is incomplete and could be flawed, but I still think on the base level, it is highly suspicious and deserves investigation. This is why I brought it to the economist I mentioned - I was hoping he may have some resources to put toward it, but I think he burned the candle after Trump got elected and wasn't interested in doing it again and finding out it was a waste.
As far as the structural forensics - like this, we could verify it as well. We just need the information and it would take a long time to acquire. We would need to learn the math, gather a bunch of data that is difficult for us to access, etc. and it would become a full time job. This isn't to say experts have no value - they have immense value, they are doing the hard work! - just that taking them at their word can be hazardous as well. Most experts who have done the work, just like you pointed out, will be able to provide the data in a way that is convincing so that you don't have to work at it as much, because they already did the work.
Kind of like if I asked a physicist how gravity works - he could say, "Because it is accepted by all of us" or he could say, "Well, here's something for you to try. And try this. And what do you observe from those experiments? And here's a couple more experiments I have done that are a bit harder to conduct but more controlled. So there's the data, what do you think?" and you'd probably say, "Oh, yeah. I get it."
BamBam54
Well-known member
It would be one thing if votes moved from Trump to Biden (due to his polarizing nature) but strangely that is NOT WHAT happened. In 2020 Trump got the same if not more votes than in 2016.
And Biden somehow gained millions more new votes that appeared by mail. A 120 year record in voter turnout. Making little effort at all.
Hard to believe in a record landslide turnout for Biden, when those same people would not show up for his rallies.
It "looks" like fraud, old fashioned ballot stuffing. But again, difficult to prove without checking signatures on every ballot (and many lost forever when envelopes we're discarded after counting... though varies state by state)
And Biden somehow gained millions more new votes that appeared by mail. A 120 year record in voter turnout. Making little effort at all.
Hard to believe in a record landslide turnout for Biden, when those same people would not show up for his rallies.
It "looks" like fraud, old fashioned ballot stuffing. But again, difficult to prove without checking signatures on every ballot (and many lost forever when envelopes we're discarded after counting... though varies state by state)
muscleupcrohn
Legend
You can’t say Trump got more votes as evidence when the overall turnout was higher my man. Please read the analysis I’m continually updating in my other comment here. Also, of course more people will show up to Trump rallies in a pandemic. He downplayed it and told people to show up, while Biden told his supporters to stay inside and distance lol.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
I have updated my analysis of Dane County. The percent of votes for the Republican candidate has stayed remarkably consistent from 2016, and the increase in voter turnout is also remarkably consistent with the overall increase in turnout in Wisconsin as a whole (within 1% of the statewide increase in the county). Hardly a crimson red flag IMO.
What county next?
What county next?
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Let me pull the data I had, again, going to take some time. I've got to fight with a town today....gathering evidence for that haha.
ax1
Legend
I understand what you are saying, I think I came in with ranting a different issue at the wrong time.
ax1
Legend
Holy crap, imagine waking up to that after a late night drunken stupor?
ax1
Legend
Last edited:
muscleupcrohn
Legend
I literally just gave you all the data and cited my sources my friend... read my other comment. I gave you the vote counts from 2016 and 2020 for the county, the registered voter count, and also compared the increase in turnout in the county to the overall statewide increase in turnout. It’s remarkably consistent actually.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Thank you! I will look into them soon!
ax1
Legend
That thought probably wouldnt apply to Dane County since its a national election the County's vote isnt really accounted for at the end of the day in a National election, its the overall State vote so there would be more incentive in Dane County than a place like NY. If it was an election for County executive the we have a different situation.
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Fulton 2020:
Biden: 380,212 (72.6%)
Trump: 137,247 (26.2%)
JoJo: 6,320 (1.2%)
TOTAL: 523,779
Fulton 2016:
Clinton: 281,875 (69.2%)
Trump: 110,372 (27.1%)
Gary: 14,296 (3.7%)
TOTAL: 406,543
So again, the percent for Trump remained largely the same, but more independents or third party voters seemed to instead vote for Biden this time.
However, it is a 28.9% increase in voter turnout from 2016, but the state of Georgia overall had a 23.9% increase in turnout from 2016 to 2020.
This isn’t quite as mundane and innocent as the first example, but still not a smoking gun by any stretch of the imagination. Let’s see the voter registration.
Fulton lists 819,937 registered voters. 523,779 of that is only a 63.9% turnout, so hardly shockingly high 90%.
Invalid Link Removed
Biden: 380,212 (72.6%)
Trump: 137,247 (26.2%)
JoJo: 6,320 (1.2%)
TOTAL: 523,779
Fulton 2016:
Clinton: 281,875 (69.2%)
Trump: 110,372 (27.1%)
Gary: 14,296 (3.7%)
TOTAL: 406,543
So again, the percent for Trump remained largely the same, but more independents or third party voters seemed to instead vote for Biden this time.
However, it is a 28.9% increase in voter turnout from 2016, but the state of Georgia overall had a 23.9% increase in turnout from 2016 to 2020.
This isn’t quite as mundane and innocent as the first example, but still not a smoking gun by any stretch of the imagination. Let’s see the voter registration.
Fulton lists 819,937 registered voters. 523,779 of that is only a 63.9% turnout, so hardly shockingly high 90%.
Invalid Link Removed
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Cobb 2020:
Biden: 221,847 (56.3%)
Trump: 165,436 (42%)
JoJo: 6,445 (1.6%)
TOTAL: 393,728
Cobb 2016:
Clinton: 159,426 (48.8%)
Trump: 152,602 (46.7%)
Gary: 14,406 (4.4%)
TOTAL: 325,434
A 21% increase, which isn’t out of the state norm, but this is a much large swing in favor of Biden. As third party swinging in favor of Biden as described in other two examples would lessen the change, but nullify it. This is the ONLY county so far that has ANYTHING out of the expected status quo from 2016.
And they report 545,146 voters, so they had a 72.2% voter turnout, which isn’t crazy.
It’s only the slight shift for Biden that is a bit unexpected. Although we’d have to look into if anything in that county in particular has changed.
Keeping the same ideology as the other counties where Trump keeps the same PERCENT of votes and Biden only picks up the difference in third party votes from 2016 to 2020, Trump would “gain” ~18,400 votes.
But again, that’s assuming that the ONLY thing that happened is instead of 4.4% of people voting for Gary, 1.6% stayed voting for JoJo and 2.8% switched from voting Gary to voting Biden instead of JoJo.
This is not a smoking gun, but it is a much more interesting case than the other two, which were incredibly predictable and mundane.
Biden: 221,847 (56.3%)
Trump: 165,436 (42%)
JoJo: 6,445 (1.6%)
TOTAL: 393,728
Cobb 2016:
Clinton: 159,426 (48.8%)
Trump: 152,602 (46.7%)
Gary: 14,406 (4.4%)
TOTAL: 325,434
A 21% increase, which isn’t out of the state norm, but this is a much large swing in favor of Biden. As third party swinging in favor of Biden as described in other two examples would lessen the change, but nullify it. This is the ONLY county so far that has ANYTHING out of the expected status quo from 2016.
And they report 545,146 voters, so they had a 72.2% voter turnout, which isn’t crazy.
It’s only the slight shift for Biden that is a bit unexpected. Although we’d have to look into if anything in that county in particular has changed.
Keeping the same ideology as the other counties where Trump keeps the same PERCENT of votes and Biden only picks up the difference in third party votes from 2016 to 2020, Trump would “gain” ~18,400 votes.
But again, that’s assuming that the ONLY thing that happened is instead of 4.4% of people voting for Gary, 1.6% stayed voting for JoJo and 2.8% switched from voting Gary to voting Biden instead of JoJo.
This is not a smoking gun, but it is a much more interesting case than the other two, which were incredibly predictable and mundane.
BamBam54
Well-known member
It doesn't appear that voters left Trump to go to Biden. It's that more voters overall appeared, and mail in voting is responsible.
The real question is - are all mail in votes secure and legitimate? State by state they use different methods. In Georgia, they only verified the signature of the request against the signature on ballot, and did NOT check the ballot signature against that on file for voters registration of drivers license. My biggest complaint about potential Georgia fraud....
The real question is - are all mail in votes secure and legitimate? State by state they use different methods. In Georgia, they only verified the signature of the request against the signature on ballot, and did NOT check the ballot signature against that on file for voters registration of drivers license. My biggest complaint about potential Georgia fraud....
muscleupcrohn
Legend
Dude, are you even reading the analysis I’m doing. I’ve analyzed 3 counties so far. Two of them had more votes appear but NOT at a greater rate than the rest of the states they were in (WI and GA). If more votes appeared, but they kept the same overall percent distribution for each candidate, what leads you to conclude it is fraud?
One of the three counties I analyzed (so 1 of 2 in Georgia) DID have a percent swing in favor of Biden. That is something to look into further perhaps, but the other two counties are boringly mundane and predictable based on statewide data and increases and the 2016 results.
And It DOES seem that third party voters in all 3 counties did swing for Biden to a degree.
Why am I doing this analysis if no one is go into pay attention to it?
muscleupcrohn
Legend
And if the percent distribution per candidate stayed the same, you then I suppose think that they made fake ballots for BOTH candidates, at an equal distribution to the results of 2016 election, to fluff up the total count and advantage for one candidate in that area? That’s literally the ONLY potential “foul play” explanation for the data I am getting.
