2020 General Election

[kalm]

Are you Qanon too?

Nope. Never got anywhere close to Q.

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Well in that case...

[kalm]

I think there will be two inaugurations. One real, and one a spectacle that’s part legal defense strategy and part launch for the new media empire.

[SeattleGriz]

Nope. Never got anywhere close to Q.

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Well in that case...

Gut feel for sure. Other aspect is how big claims are being made by Trump and his lawyer team. I just can't see all of them saying, "let's go down as the biggest losers ever".

[AZGrizFan]

Well in that case...

Gut feel for sure. Other aspect is how big claims are being made by Trump and his lawyer team. I just can't see all of them saying, "let's go down as the biggest losers ever".

Reallly? You can’t see that?

[SeattleGriz]

Gut feel for sure. Other aspect is how big claims are being made by Trump and his lawyer team. I just can't see all of them saying, "let's go down as the biggest losers ever".

Reallly? You can’t see that?

Without all the statistical anomalies, yes, but with them, no. Not saying they have a winning case, but they have to be able to not get laughed off the stage to at least save face.

[kalm]

Reallly? You can’t see that?

Without all the statistical anomalies, yes, but with them, no. Not saying they have a winning case, but they have to be able to not get laughed off the stage to at least save face.

Those ships have sailed. Rational people will view him as a loser regardless. But he will never look bad to his gullible supporters.

[SeattleGriz]

Without all the statistical anomalies, yes, but with them, no. Not saying they have a winning case, but they have to be able to not get laughed off the stage to at least save face.

Those ships have sailed. Rational people will view him as a loser regardless. But he will never look bad to his gullible supporters.

We'll find out, won't we. That's the beauty of this. Resolution.

[kalm]

Those ships have sailed. Rational people will view him as a loser regardless. But he will never look bad to his gullible supporters.

We'll find out, won't we. That's the beauty of this. Resolution.

What resolution? Do you think the 88% of Trump voters who think he won will accept the outcome? Do you think he will? He isnt going away.

[SeattleGriz]

We'll find out, won't we. That's the beauty of this. Resolution.

What resolution? Do you think the 88% of Trump voters who think he won will accept the outcome? Do you think he will? He isnt going away.

Resolution to if there was voter and election fraud to a level that it is provable in court...and that Trump wins the Presidency via Supreme Court.

[kalm]

What resolution? Do you think the 88% of Trump voters who think he won will accept the outcome? Do you think he will? He isnt going away.

Resolution to if there was voter and election fraud to a level that it is provable in court...and that Trump wins the Presidency via Supreme Court.

That ship is about out of the harbor too.

[UNI88]

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Things don't add up. Too many standard deviations from normal. At first you could accept it was just really high turnout, but now that people are looking deeper, there are just too many anomalies.

So kind of like Kalm's Facebook friend who posts his Coronavirus theories for others to read and critique. Why don't you have faith in him/her?

Wouldn't anomalies be expected during a pandemic?

Gut feel for sure. Other aspect is how big claims are being made by Trump and his lawyer team. I just can't see all of them saying, "let's go down as the bitterest losers ever".

Too late.

[SeattleGriz]

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Things don't add up. Too many standard deviations from normal. At first you could accept it was just really high turnout, but now that people are looking deeper, there are just too many anomalies.

So kind of like Kalm's Facebook friend who posts his Coronavirus theories for others to read and critique. Why don't you have faith in him/her?

Wouldn't anomalies be expected during a pandemic?

Gut feel for sure. Other aspect is how big claims are being made by Trump and his lawyer team. I just can't see all of them saying, "let's go down as the bitterest losers ever".

Too late.

I haven't read Kalm's friends stuff, but my assumption would be that one topic is math based and the other is science based. There's a fair amount of wiggle room with a scientific theory, vs statistical analysis. Not saying Klams buddy is wrong, just my observation.

To answer your second question, about the pandemic. I don't know that answer, and it could be the answer, but it's more than turnout. It's how certain counties voted, history and patterns.

[BDKJMU]

We'll find out, won't we. That's the beauty of this. Resolution.

What resolution? Do you think the 88% of Trump voters who think he won will accept the outcome? Do you think he will? He isnt going away.

Link?

52% Of Republicans Think Trump ‘Rightfully Won’ Election, Poll Finds
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurk ... 7fc4c649e1

[UNI88]

What resolution? Do you think the 88% of Trump voters who think he won will accept the outcome? Do you think he will? He isnt going away.

Link?

52% Of Republicans Think Trump ‘Rightfully Won’ Election, Poll Finds
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurk ... 7fc4c649e1

Republicans don't necessarily equal Trump voters

[kalm]

What resolution? Do you think the 88% of Trump voters who think he won will accept the outcome? Do you think he will? He isnt going away.

Link?

52% Of Republicans Think Trump ‘Rightfully Won’ Election, Poll Finds
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurk ... 7fc4c649e1

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... y-win/amp/

[UNI88]

So kind of like Kalm's Facebook friend who posts his Coronavirus theories for others to read and critique. Why don't you have faith in him/her?

Wouldn't anomalies be expected during a pandemic?

Too late.

I haven't read Kalm's friends stuff, but my assumption would be that one topic is math based and the other is science based. There's a fair amount of wiggle room with a scientific theory, vs statistical analysis. Not saying Klams buddy is wrong, just my observation.

To answer your second question, about the pandemic. I don't know that answer, and it could be the answer, but it's more than turnout. It's how certain counties voted, history and patterns.

Another factor is that Trump is an extremely polarizing figure. The MSM and polls underestimated his support but he and his supporters underestimate the number of people who just don't like him. Those people might explain the differences between votes for Biden and no down-ballot votes or Republican down-ballot votes.

[kalm]

So kind of like Kalm's Facebook friend who posts his Coronavirus theories for others to read and critique. Why don't you have faith in him/her?

Wouldn't anomalies be expected during a pandemic?



Too late.

I haven't read Kalm's friends stuff, but my assumption would be that one topic is math based and the other is science based. There's a fair amount of wiggle room with a scientific theory, vs statistical analysis. Not saying Klams buddy is wrong, just my observation.

To answer your second question, about the pandemic. I don't know that answer, and it could be the answer, but it's more than turnout. It's how certain counties voted, history and patterns.

Correct. The rest is his commentary. It’s a private FB group another member of which has been working on the Moderna vaccine.

I’d expect anyone to be skeptical of the commentary, less regarding the data as it’s verifiable. Regardless, similar to sources like Andy Slavitt, it’s been very predictive since the start.

[houndawg]

Reallly? You can’t see that?

Without all the statistical anomalies, yes, but with them, no. Not saying they have a winning case, but they have to be able to not get laughed off the stage to at least save face.

They don't appear to have any case at all by the number of judges that are summarily dismissing their bullshit

[houndawg]

Are you Qanon too?

Nope. Never got anywhere close to Q.

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Things don't add up. Too many standard deviations from normal. At first you could accept it was just really high turnout, but now that people are looking deeper, there are just too many anomalies.

What is "too many standard deviations from normal"?

[SeattleGriz]

Without all the statistical anomalies, yes, but with them, no. Not saying they have a winning case, but they have to be able to not get laughed off the stage to at least save face.

They don't appear to have any case at all by the number of judges that are summarily dismissing their bullshit

I have no idea if it's a plan, but I would expect all the weak stuff to come first. Ain't going straight to the Supreme Court. It's got to lose it's way there.

[SeattleGriz]

Nope. Never got anywhere close to Q.

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Things don't add up. Too many standard deviations from normal. At first you could accept it was just really high turnout, but now that people are looking deeper, there are just too many anomalies.

What is "too many standard deviations from normal"?

If you're asking for a number, 5.5. That's way out of there.

[Skjellyfetti]

What was 5.5 standard deviations above the norm? Turnout? Mail in ballots?

[SeattleGriz]

It was called hardball back when Obama had votes invalidated due to signature requirements.

https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/29 ... .campaign/

[JohnStOnge]

Are you Qanon too?

Nope. Never got anywhere close to Q.

Just looking at the statistics supplied by people on the internet. I have some faith in them, as most will ask that others check their work.

Things don't add up. Too many standard deviations from normal. At first you could accept it was just really high turnout, but now that people are looking deeper, there are just too many anomalies.

Give an example. From what I've seen the "statistical anomalies" get shot down. Like the thing where it was supposedly very unlikely that Wisconsin turnout could have increased as much as it did. Then it turned out the people saying that were miscalculating Wisconsin turnout.

There is nothing that happened that didn't happen as expected.The betting odds as of election day had Biden as a 2:1 favorite. See https://www.actionnetwork.com/politics/ ... -joe-biden. People betting aren’t being politically biased. They are trying to win bets.

Polling made Biden the favorite. If you look at the Real Clear Politics “No Toss Ups” map at https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... s_ups.html and compare who had an edge in the polls by jurisdiction to who won the State, the candidate who had the edge in the polls won in 51 of the 53 jurisdictions. Biden had the polling edge in Florida but Trump won. Trump had the polling edge in Georgia but Biden won.

Because Democrats voted by mail at a much higher rate than Republicans, a situation in which Biden would make up ground when mail votes were counted was completely expected. An example of such situations is reported at https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/0 ... nia-433951. On election day we knew that about 1.6 million Pennsylvania Democrats had voted by mail about about 586,000 Republicans had. Rudimentary math would’ve told anyone that Donald Trump’s 600,000 vote election night lead prior to counting mail ballots would not be expected to hold up.

Then there’s the crackpot Dominion voting machines conspiracy theory. The United States Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency reported that ““The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history” and added “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.” See https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12/jo ... l-election.

There is zero doubt that Joe Biden being President is the Will of the People. The only question now is whether a corrupt President and a corrupt political Party can negate the will of the people with games played by State and local Republican officials finding ways to do that.

It’s horrible and very sad that the effort is even being made. And if it succeeds we are going to have a real crisis on our hands because the majority of the People in this country are going to know a banana republic thing just happened in the United States.

This is nonsense. Trump is an historically unpopular President and the People of the United States just voted to get rid of him. That's what happened.

[JohnStOnge]

And, by the way, there is no way to say a turnout increase is "statistically unlikely" in a situation like this anyway. You had historically unprecedented resentment on one side and historically intense support on the other side. The whole idea of trying to say any particular turnout level is "statistically unlikely" is bogus.