"It Defies Logic": Scientist Finds Telltale Signs Of Election Fraud

[ResponsibleIdiot]

This probably won't do anything for Trump, but it's definitely very peculiar

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...ng-mail-ballot


A most interesting thread popped up on Twitter Sunday from a data scientist who wishes to remain anonymous, regarding mail-in ballot data which strongly suggests fraud occurred in the wee hours of election night, when several swing states inexplicably stopped reporting vote counts while President Trump maintained a healthy lead over Joe Biden.


Using time series data 'scraped' from the New York Times website, the data - comparing several states (swing and non-swing) - clearly illustrates what fraud does and does not look like, and how several anomalies in swing states left 'fingerprints of fraud' as Biden pulled ahead of President Trump.
Presented below via @APhilosophae:

The following information is provided via an anonymous data scientist and another anonymous individual who wrote a script to scrape the national ballot counting time series data of off the @nytimes website.
— CulturalHusbandry (@APhilosophae) November 9, 2020

Continued...
This is based on their proprietary "Edison" data source which would ordinarily be impossible to access for people outside the press. The CSV is available here (updated). And the script to generate it is here. I suggest that everyone back up both of these files, bc this is an extremely important data source, and we cant risk anyone taking it down.
What we are looking at will be time series analysis and you will see that it is extremely difficult to create convincing synthetic times series data. By looking at the times series logs of the ballot counting process for the entire country, we can very easily spot fraud.
One of the first things noticed while exploring the dataset is that there seems to be an obvious pattern in the ratio of new #Biden ballots to new #Trump ballots.

As we can see on this log-log plot, for many of the counting progress updates, we see an almost constant ratio of #Biden to #Trump. It's such a regular pattern that we can actually fit a linear regression model to it with near-perfect accuracy, barring some outliers. How could this be possible? Is this a telltale sign of fraud? Surprisingly, as it will be shown, the answer is no! This is actually expected behavior. Also, we can use this weird pattern in the ballot counting to spot fraud!
Here is the same pattern for Florida. We see this linear pattern again.

And again (Texas)

And again (South Dakota)

And again all over the country. What appears to be happening is that points on the straight line are actually mail in votes. The reason they're so homogeneous across with respect to the ratio of #Biden vs #Trump votes is that they get randomly shuffled in the mail like a deck of cards. Since the ballots are randomly mixed together during transport, spanning areas occupied by multiple voting demographics, we can expect the ratio of mail-in #Biden ballots to mail-in #Trump ballots will remain relatively constant over time and across different reporting updates.

Lets dig a little deeper into this:
Here is a plot of the same Florida voting data, but this time it's the ratio of #Biden to #Trump ballots, versus time. What we see is that the initial ballot reportings are very noisy and "random".

The initial reporting represents in-person voting. These vote reports have such large variation bc in-person voting happens across different geographic areas that have different political alignments. We can see this same pattern of noisy in-person voting, followed by homogeneous mail-in reporting in almost all cases. What we see in almost all examples across the country is that the ratio of mail-in Dem to Rep ballots is very consistent across time, but with the notable drift from Dem to slightly more Rep.

This slight drift from D to R mail-ins occurs again and again, and is likely due to outlying rural areas having more R votes. These outlying areas take longer to ship their ballots to the polling centers.
Now we're getting into the really good stuff. When we see mail-in ballot counting where there isn't relatively stable ratios of D and R ballots that slightly drift R, we have an anomaly! Anomalies themselves are not necessarily fraud, but they can help us spot fraud more easily.
Now let's look at some anomalies:
This is the Wisconsin vote counting history log. Again, on the Y axis we have the ratio of D to R ballots in reporting batch, and on the X axis we have reporting time. Around 4am there, there is a marked shift in the ratio of D to R mail-in ballots. Based on other posts in this thread, this should not happen. This is an anomaly, and while anomalies are not always fraud, often they may point to fraud.

Around 3am Wisconsin time, a fresh batch of 169k new absentee ballots arrived. They were supposed to stop accepting new ballots, but eh, whatever I guess.
— CulturalHusbandry (@APhilosophae) November 9, 2020

By 4am the D to R ratio was all thrown out of whack. That is because these ballots were not sampled from the real Wisconsin voter population, and they were not randomized in the mail sorting system with the other ballots. They inherently have a different D to R signature than the rest of the ballots quite possibly bc additional ballots were added to the batch, either through backdating or ballot manufacturing or software tampering. This of this being kind of analogous to carbon-14 dating, but for ballot batch authenticity.
Lets look at another anomaly (Pennsylvania):
Here is Pennsylvania's vote counting history. For the first part of the vote counting process, we see the same pattern for mail-in ballots that we've seen in every other state in the country, which is relatively stable D to R ratio that gradually drifts R as more ballots. But then as counting continues, the D to R ratio in mail-in ballots inexplicably begin "increasing". Again, this should not happen, and it is observed almost nowhere else in the country, because all of the ballots are randomly shuffled in the mail system and should be homogeneous during counting. The only exceptions to this are other suspect states that also have anomalies.


Again, this is evidence of ballot backdating, manufacturing of software tampering.


Lets look at another anomaly:
In Georgia we see pretty much the same story as Pennsylvania: increasing fractions of mail-in D ballots over time even though it defies logic and we see this pattern no where else in the country.

In Michigan, we see a combination of Wisconsin strangeness, together with the GA/PA weirdness. We see both signs of contaminated ballot dumping, and ballot ratios drifting toward dems when they should not be.

Virginia:

Now in fairness, VA is the only state out of the 50 that has anomalies but has not had accusations of voter fraud, yet. I think this is the exception that proves the rule. Yet to figure out what causes this anomalous shift, but here it is so no one accuses me of holding it back.
Lets wrap this up: It appears Dems shot themselves in the foot bc making everyone do mail-in ballots actually makes it easier to catch mail-in ballot fraud. Bc all of the ballots go through the postal system, they get shuffled like a deck of cards, so we expect reported ballot return to be extremely UNIFORM in terms of D vs R ratio, but to drift slightly towards R over time bc some of those ballots travel farther. This pattern proves fraud and is a verifiable timestamp of when each fraudulent action occurred.

[Brian4Liberty]

Basically a statistical analysis that supports my statement before the election. As time goes on and they are not winning, they have to increase the percentage for their candidate.

...

Cheating takes some finesse. You don't need to cheat if you are winning. That’s the purpose of delayed ballots, whether it is ballot harvesting or mail-in ballots. You do as much cheating as you can without being obvious up till election day. If you are still losing at the end of election day, you probably have a good idea how much more cheating you will have to do in order to win. You just want to do enough to win.

If you are behind by 100 votes, you can find 100 votes for your opponent, and 201 votes for you. Not too obvious.

If you are behind by 10,000 votes, it gets more difficult. You might have to find 200 votes for the opposition, and 10,202 votes for you. The wider the margin on election day, the more obvious the cheating becomes in the following days.

But they are without shame. If every single ballot they find after election day is for Biden, they will do it with a straight face, outrage at any questions, and an army of lawyers to back them up. Lie, cheat and steal. They even say it out loud sometimes.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

There's virtually no way to retrieve envelopes back dated with Nov. 3rd post marks. Those envelopes are in the trash.

On the plus side, registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans ~55% to 45%, but the election wasn't a 10% gap. The communists literally had to just mail it in, and the lazy slobs still struggled.

[Brian4Liberty]

There's virtually no way to retrieve envelopes back dated with Nov. 3rd post marks. Those envelopes are in the trash.

On the plus side, registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans ~55% to 45%, but the election wasn't a 10% gap. The communists literally had to just mail it in, and the lazy slobs still struggled.

There may be a good percentage of Trump Democrats, just like there were Reagan Democrats.

[eleganz]

There are certified fraud examiners who take finalized data and testify in the court as to the data's credibility based on the examiner's own expertise. Of course the otherside will have their own certified examiners. If the math is too obvious, I can't see an examiner going out on a limb unless they're planning to pay him enough to retire comfortably.

What we are all witnessing right now is the largest attempt at exposing the democrats' electoral fraud at a multi-state level.

[CaptainAmerica]

its not over yet , trump is in a winning position with courts. b ut you all better realize whats going to happen, the left will not accept it they will launch attacks

[Brian4Liberty]

its not over yet , trump is in a winning position with courts. b ut you all better realize whats going to happen, the left will not accept it they will launch attacks

Part of the plan. They want everyone to be afraid, to prefer Biden. They want everyone to become adjusted and comfortable with Biden, and to be afraid of changing the new status quo of President-elect Biden.

[parocks]

its not over yet , trump is in a winning position with courts. b ut you all better realize whats going to happen, the left will not accept it they will launch attacks

riots on the streets by Dems who aren't happy that Biden is now losing

Insurrection Act

Martial Law

Military Tribunals

Insurrection Act through Military Tribunals was the core of the Q story. the Q story was "we are going to do military tribunals. I'm an insider, and martial law, military tribunals and guantanamo bay is what is going to happen." Most of the talk was "who are the bad guys that we're going to get" and then you talk about deep state and billionaires and pedos, deep state billionaire pedos eating babies and all that.

One of the first things that Q said was about these military tribunals, he started with this, and he was very detailed and persuasive with this part of his story, 3 years ago. After a while it was Q guessing about politics and soon boom. So, who knows? The President just named a NEW Secretary of Defense. Probably one who is going to be able to do the plan.

[cjm]

And again all over the country. What appears to be happening is that points on the straight line are actually mail in votes. The reason they're so homogeneous across with respect to the ratio of #Biden vs #Trump votes is that they get randomly shuffled in the mail like a deck of cards. Since the ballots are randomly mixed together during transport, spanning areas occupied by multiple voting demographics, we can expect the ratio of mail-in #Biden ballots to mail-in #Trump ballots will remain relatively constant over time and across different reporting updates.
Virginia:

Now in fairness, VA is the only state out of the 50 that has anomalies but has not had accusations of voter fraud, yet. I think this is the exception that proves the rule. Yet to figure out what causes this anomalous shift, but here it is so no one accuses me of holding it back.
Lets wrap this up: It appears Dems shot themselves in the foot bc making everyone do mail-in ballots actually makes it easier to catch mail-in ballot fraud. Bc all of the ballots go through the postal system, they get shuffled like a deck of cards, so we expect reported ballot return to be extremely UNIFORM in terms of D vs R ratio, but to drift slightly towards R over time bc some of those ballots travel farther. This pattern proves fraud and is a verifiable timestamp of when each fraudulent action occurred.

We went through this sort of analysis back in 2012: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...South-Carolina

The 2012 thread wasn't exactly the same claim as this recent analysis but it has the same flaw (lack of randomness) -- for Virginia, at least.

I follow the logic of the "shuffled deck of cards" theory and I don't have a problem with it, per se. In Virginia, however, we never had a shuffled deck of statewide ballots. Each county counts its own mail-in ballots and reports those in batches to the state. Cities in Virginia are the equivalent of counties. We don't have the overlapping jurisdiction that many states have. Roanoke City, for example, is a distinct political jurisdiction from Roanoke County which surrounds it, so even those ballots aren't "shuffled." Cities in Virginia always report later than counties. Since those are heavily Democrat, one would expect the trend line to get more D as those batches are processed.

Was there fraud in Virginia? No doubt, there's some in every election. But you won't detect it with this sort of data analysis because it relies on a randomness in vote tallying that isn't there.

[ResponsibleIdiot]

We went through this sort of analysis back in 2012: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...South-Carolina

The 2012 thread wasn't exactly the same claim as this recent analysis but it has the same flaw (lack of randomness) -- for Virginia, at least.

I follow the logic of the "shuffled deck of cards" theory and I don't have a problem with it, per se. In Virginia, however, we never had a shuffled deck of statewide ballots. Each county counts its own mail-in ballots and reports those in batches to the state. Cities in Virginia are the equivalent of counties. We don't have the overlapping jurisdiction that many states have. Roanoke City, for example, is a distinct political jurisdiction from Roanoke County which surrounds it, so even those ballots aren't "shuffled." Cities in Virginia always report later than counties. Since those are heavily Democrat, one would expect the trend line to get more D as those batches are processed.

Was there fraud in Virginia? No doubt, there's some in every election. But you won't detect it with this sort of data analysis because it relies on a randomness in vote tallying that isn't there.

Thanks. I posted this as something interesting. I did think about the randomness aspect and how true that was. I don't think it's complete randomness, but more random than would be if it were in person. Still interesting though, and certainly not proof of anything.

[cjm]

Thanks. I posted this as something interesting. I did think about the randomness aspect and how true that was. I don't think it's complete randomness, but more random than would be if it were in person. Still interesting though, and certainly not proof of anything.

Oh, I agree, this is very interesting. I think some forms of fraud can be detected through data analysis which is why I'm always reading these types of threads. Thanks for posting it!