Election 2020

#41
In the 2019 UK general election, 48.02% of the total population voted and the percent age 0-18 appears likely in the region of 22%. It doesn't look like there was massive Postal Voting fraud in Texas?
I challenge you to show that correlation proves causation … between
a) the UK total-population voting percentage in 2019, factoring in the age 0-18 demographic, and​
b) the extent of the (non)massiveness of Postal Voting fraud in Texas.​

But thanks for providing the above data table, which could facilitate some insight into our 2020 Electoral mysteries (see charts). Our esteemed statistical-analysis expert at NLZS Enterprises -- Doctor Anna Nahmally -- provides commentary below.

1605204756775.png
Dr Anna Nahmally expounds on the study:​
“In our analysis of Electoral ‘battleground states’, we discarded the suggestion that UK 2019 voter turnout is relevant, as we did that Nebraska, of all places, belonged in this subset. To normalize the data from the post above, we determined the ratio of the relative voter turnout in each state and that state’s population under 18, below the legal age (interestingly, there were votes recorded after the expiration date of both ballots and voters, which are incorporated with this data).​
This ‘TO/U18 ratio’ was plotted against the ratio of Biden and Trump votes recorded in each state. With that data set, we did find a mild correlation between the relative ratio of the percentages within the population voting over those Under 18, plotted against the relative ratio of votes for Biden and Trump by state. Higher turnout/U18 ratio clearly favors Team Biden.​
Additionally, we did notice that Team Biden was significantly better at managing the vote, as to not 'waste votes' above the winner-take-all threshold, as is the rule in the Electoral College. The margin in battleground states (also known as 'swing states') won by Team Biden was less than 2% in 80% of those states, with 40% of states being well less than 1% margin. The average winning margin in battleground states for Team Biden was a tad under 2% (that average being less than the lowest Team Trump state), while the average Team Trump winning margin was nearly a whopping 9% … this constitutes a 4.5X advantage in vote efficiency for Team Biden in these critical states.​
We hope that this type of Election 2020 statistical analysis, with corresponding observations and even conclusions, will be conveyed to the American public by major US news outlets ... like CNN, NY Times, Twitter maybe STAT News...​

NOTE: Anna Nahmally normally ‘swings both ways’, but in this case -- as with many other incidences during Election 2020 -- she’s been uncharacteristically faithful. And, for some reason, she's recently been using a shampoo that leaves her hair smelling incredible ... wonder what that's about.
[More insights below]
 
Last edited:
#42
From Dr Anna Nahmally's files...

A veteran pollster notes that in Election 2020, “Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton [in 2016] in every major metro area around the country, save for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia [see previous post] ... Robert Barnes, the foremost election analyst, observes in these 'big cities in swing states run by Democrats…the vote even exceeded the number of registered voters.'” Surprisingly, Biden also garnered more popular votes than Obama did during his historic 2008 election, against a weak GOP candidate (11/8).

Do you believe in ‘magic’..?
....

A rational sleuth looks at the odd vote-count patterns in Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia, using metrics of 1) the difference in absolute vote counts for Biden and Trump (X-Y), and 2) the log-ratio of vote counts -- X/Y -- for Biden and Trump (11/24):

Ratios allow us to spot a potential sign of fraud ... because those who watch and participate in elections tend not to think in these terms, if there is fraud, they’re much less likely to have covered their tracks in this respect.
This election represents an extraordinary and unique opportunity for election integrity analysts and the application of statistical fraud detection research, as it is likely the first national election in American history, at the very least, where the general public has had access to time-series election data.
1606843970160.png
[Chart annotated for clarity]

BOTTOM LINE: The four most-anomalous 'data dumps' in the wee hours after Election 2020 provided the margin of Electoral victory.
....

Statistical analysis of Michigan absentee votes seem to suggest computer manipulation (11/27). In addition to the unlikely high Biden/Trump ratio of absentee votes in certain areas, the striking differences in D-vs-R support in comparing the 2016 and 2020 elections, the inclusion of 227K ballots sent and received on the same day, ballots from 117 year-olds, etc etc … in counties bordering Detroit, the ratios of absentee ballots for Biden and Trump -- which should be somewhat independent metrics -- were strangely consistent across voting precinct in 2020:

1606843628008.png
[Chart annotated for clarity]
Meanwhile in Pennsylvania...
Having trailed Trump almost 1-to-2 during in-person Election Day voting, Biden garnered an over 3-to-1 advantage in absentee ballots, or about a 6X turnaround in relative support (11/30). Across political affiliations, Biden’s tally vs Trump in absentee ballots was reportedly 19-to-1 among Democrats and 4-to-1 among Independents … Joe even garnered an unlikely 21% of Republican mail-in ballots, despite PA exit polls of GOP voters favoring Biden at only 8%. (Apparently, the mail-it-in strategy of Biden's subterranean 'referendum' campaign paid off.) Additionally, in 2016, mail-in ballots in PA had a rejection rate of around 1% ... while in 2020, almost 10X as many mail-in ballots were submitted, but had a rejection rate of only 0.04%, or 1/27th that of 2016. This is despite the FiveThirtyEight estimate that first-time absentee-voter ballots generally have a rejection rate 3X those of experienced mail-in voters ... 'tis all such a mystery.

Meanwhile in Nothing-to-See-Here non-news...
Hey, this wacky connection is amazingly coincidental, but hasn’t been picked up by the American mainstream media: A month before Election 2020, the Chinese government may have bought for $400 million a controlling interest in Dominion Voting Systems, the manufacturers of the controversial voting machines, with suspect proprietary software, used in battleground states (12/1; more here from another fringe source). Of course, our prestige MSM had better things to do in October than uncover this unimportant minutiae.

In more totally coincidental N2SH non-news, Kamala Harris’s official photographer is conveniently also a Dominion technician and vote-counter in Georgia (11/29), which “creates a massive conflict of interest that violates state election law”. Well, duh, but certainly not in a newsworthy way.

Well, what do you know … media bias and censorship really work! (11/24) From a survey of Biden voters in Election 2020 battleground states...

1606946753503.png
Both Pfizer and Moderna delayed their reporting of very promising COVID-vaccine progress until after Election Day (12/6). Pfizer actually shut down its lab work to avoid the required reporting protocol, while Moderna of France was told that they needed more test data on minority subjects.

-----------[ WAIT ... THERE'S MORE!!! ]------------

Knowing that future historians and statisticians will look back at the awesome incredibility of Election 2020, Dr Anna Nahmally savors insightful perspectives from earlier times ... such as from 1814, when Pierre-Simon Laplace argued that

The more extraordinary the event, the greater the need of its being supported by strong proofs, and
The probability of the falsehood increases in the measure that the deed becomes more extraordinary, and
The probability of the error or of the falsehood of the witness becomes as much greater as the fact attested is more extraordinary, and finally
There are things so extraordinary that nothing can balance their improbability.
Leaving aside contentious granular aspects of Election 2020 (see all, above), give LaPlace’s intellectual exercise a spin on this could-happen-to-anyone home-safety anecdote (12/3): "President-elect Joe Biden on Thursday revealed that he broke his foot tripping on a rug after a shower as he chased one of his dogs and grabbed its tail". Meanwhile, Kamala sees an opportunity to puppy-up.

-----------[ WAIT ... THERE'S MORE!!! ]------------

Although Election 2020 was incredibly squeaky clean -- ask anyone in the media -- and any suggestions otherwise are conspiratorial crazytalk, worthy of social-media ban ... here’s what you need to do to rig an election (12/1), totally hypothetically, of course.
x
 
Last edited:
#43
Election 2024: Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water...

Biden and Harris have a combined probability of 17.5% in Election 2024, while Trump, his kids, and Pence combine to 12.7% (from Betfair).

1607363645654.png

Only those potential candidates breaking 1.0% probability are listed. The 'ALL OTHER', with nearly half the summed probability, consist of 115 potential candidates from various walks of life, but strangely doesn't include Rachel Maddow nor Tucker Carlson.
 
Last edited:

noetsi

Fortran must die
#50
Americans have limited historical knowledge which leads them astray often. Nothing that is happening now is new in US history. If you look at southern, and to some extent plains states governments, in the US from 1880 to 1950 you will find other examples of Trump like behavior on the left and right. It will accelerate in the US on the right and left in future decades. Significant economic problems, major class differences, and very different values are driving it. Americans like to say individuals are responsible for something driven by systematic forces.
 
#51
I don't get you. Oh well.
Perhaps the mystery has been accepted.

Americans have limited historical knowledge which leads them astray often. Nothing that is happening now is new in US history. If you look at southern, and to some extent plains states governments, in the US from 1880 to 1950 you will find other examples of Trump like behavior on the left and right. It will accelerate in the US on the right and left in future decades. Significant economic problems, major class differences, and very different values are driving it. Americans like to say individuals are responsible for something driven by systematic forces.
Thanks for the thoughtful commentary. Historical precedents in the US have limited applicability nowadays since the fundamental dynamics have changed so much over the years. Government spending -- and hence control over the US economy -- is now much higher than in the past (excluding WWII), and it continues to grow (see chart).

1607524594175.png

Throughout history, the primary task of government has been the protection of its people and their property. Now, our government is much more concerned with enforcing ‘social justice’ – equal outcomes among the populace … which is really Marxism, and we know how well those experiments have worked out. In addition, our government teams up with private interests – especially media and Big Tech – in their social-justice crusade, while also ensuring that the right politicos get into office. When the wrong people get into office, like with the Election 2016 surprise, you can see how they react, pulling out all stops.
 
Last edited:

noetsi

Fortran must die
#52
I don't think many historians or political scientist [I was one long ago] would agree that "Historical precedents in the US have limited applicability nowadays since the fundamental dynamics have changed so much over the years. " In fact the US increasingly resembles the political realities of pre-World War II America. After 1940 significant differences were papered over as the US had general prosperity (until 1973 when income gains slowed significantly for most) and faced first a world war then the Cold War.

With no perceived enemy any longer and huge increases in income disparity (combined with income stagnation for much of the population) we are returning to pre-1940 values. The declining legitimacy of the United States government greatly reinforces this. A famous writer once said that after the Civil War we went from the United States (plural) to the United States (once country). I think we are going back that way.

But the issues are far far too complex to discus here. Its a vast literature and I am trying to be a geek not a political scientist these days. :p