2020 General Election

[kalm]

The ones claiming over 100% vote have been for sure. You are going to only recount votes, not imaginary votes. You guys are as bad as the Russian collusion group.

The one in PA where they officially said 1.8 million absentee ballots were sent out, but received back 2.5 million. That's been debunked?

I didn't know they matched signatures to envelops already.

Benghazi!

[Gil Dobie]

The ones claiming over 100% vote have been for sure. You are going to only recount votes, not imaginary votes. You guys are as bad as the Russian collusion group.

The one in PA where they officially said 1.8 million absentee ballots were sent out, but received back 2.5 million. That's been debunked?

I didn't know they matched signatures to envelops already.

Common Man, you can do better. This is the official tally. You are cornfused my friend, stay away from Parlar.

Party.......... Returned Ballots.....Requested Ballots
Democrats............1,702,623..........1,941,436
Republicans.............623,098.............785,083
Minor.......................20,090..............25,369
No Party Affiliation .,..283,372.............336,235
TOTAL..................2,629,183...........3,088,123

[AZGrizFan]

Sorry, but when you use absolutes like “ONLY” and “COMPLETELY”, they’re not true statements. Trump’s alleged fraud isn’t the ONLY fraud in play here, potentially. Trump and the Republicans aren’t the ONLY potentially fraudulent groups. That’s why they’re looking at evidence and what they’re trying to ascertain. There are documented cases of fraud. They may be small, but they exist. The question is, where they enough (and in the right places) to turn the election. One would think that ANy reasonable person would surely want the answer to that question. 53% of the public thinks Trump won the election, yet here we sit in the middle of a “transition” taking place. That should concern everyone, and not just conservatives.

Most of the fraud claims have been dismissed because they have been proven to be false. I sincerely doubt 53% of Americans believe Trump won, but then 7% think chocolate milk comes from brown cows.

Here’s the truth: I want nothing more than there to end up being no fraud. I REALLY do not want there to be any kind of systemic fraud found. But there are enough strange, statistical anomalies that they should be investigated to the fullest extent capable to ensure the integrity of the election process for the American public.

[Gil Dobie]

Most of the fraud claims have been dismissed because they have been proven to be false. I sincerely doubt 53% of Americans believe Trump won, but then 7% think chocolate milk comes from brown cows.

Here’s the truth: I want nothing more than there to end up being no fraud. I REALLY do not want there to be any kind of systemic fraud found. But there are enough strange, statistical anomalies that they should be investigated to the fullest extent capable to ensure the integrity of the election process for the American public.

I wouldn't be surprised at a few cases. Nothing will turn the election. I've seen a lot of claims like SG posted. And nearly all are 100% proven false.

[Ibanez]

No it's not. That is pretty much meaningless.

Out of 3,000+ counties in the US, you had 19 which had correctly pick the winner in the last 15 elections going back to 1960. If Vegas had put odds on those counties, the odds 18 of those 19 would go for the loser would be like a million to 1..

19 of 3000 is such a small number. .006. I’m not sure I understand what your position is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

The Gateway Pundit is far right garbage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Out of 3,000+ counties in the US, you had 19 which had correctly pick the winner in the last 15 elections going back to 1960. If Vegas had put odds on those counties, the odds 18 of those 19 would go for the loser would be like a million to 1..

19 of 3000 is such a small number. .006. I’m not sure I understand what your position is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well then you must not understand what a bellweather is..

*correction, was the last 10 elections going back to 1980. The last 15 elections going back to 1960 is Florida and Ohio. Doesn't change the premise.

[BDKJMU]

I lost track of where it was but in one of the links posted I saw a claim that Trump won the highest percentage of the non White vote in 60 years or something like that. That is false. I just went back to G.W. Bush in 2004 because he was the last one before Obama and also I knew he got a relatively higher percentage of the hispanic vote. He lost among non Whites by 70% to 28%. That's 42 percentage points. Trump lost among non Whites by 71% to 26%. That's 45 percentage points.

It's an issue because the person who wrote it was making the argument that Trump's OUTSTANDING performance among non Whites was a factor in believing something was amiss about Biden winning. But it was a false statement. Amazing how often that happens with conservatives nowadays.

It was the exit polls from election day that you like to champion, that claimed that Trump had the highest non white for a conk POTUS candidate in last 60 years. Like everything else in this election, I sure the #s were revised in the following days/week less favorable to Trump..

[SeattleGriz]

The Gateway Pundit is far right garbage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are they so far right they can edit Twitter?

A video is a video regardless who posts it.

[SeattleGriz]

Here’s the truth: I want nothing more than there to end up being no fraud. I REALLY do not want there to be any kind of systemic fraud found. But there are enough strange, statistical anomalies that they should be investigated to the fullest extent capable to ensure the integrity of the election process for the American public.

I wouldn't be surprised at a few cases. Nothing will turn the election. I've seen a lot of claims like SG posted. And nearly all are 100% proven false.

We'll have to see about your claim, because Rudy brought it to light just yesterday.

[Gil Dobie]

I wouldn't be surprised at a few cases. Nothing will turn the election. I've seen a lot of claims like SG posted. And nearly all are 100% proven false.

We'll have to see about your claim, because Rudy brought it to light just yesterday.

The Trump clan makes a lot of crap up to make Donald feel important. If they tell him the truth, they get fired.

[AZGrizFan]

Out of 3,000+ counties in the US, you had 19 which had correctly pick the winner in the last 15 elections going back to 1960. If Vegas had put odds on those counties, the odds 18 of those 19 would go for the loser would be like a million to 1..

19 of 3000 is such a small number. .006. I’m not sure I understand what your position is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? You’re kidding here, right?

[JohnStOnge]

It is a fact that we now have a major political party trying to overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election. That is not an opinion from the standpoint of any reasonable person. That is what is going on.

Why didn't you speak up when Al Gore tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2000 or Nancy Pelosi tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2019?

I don't know what you're talking about with Pelosi but I did live through the Bush/Gore thing. I thought it was bad that they kept changing the ballot counting methods and rules. It came across as trying one thing then, if it looked like that wouldn't get Gore over the top, they'd try another thing.

However, it was a very different situation than this one. Everything came down to one State where the initial count had Bush up by less than 2000 votes. The initial machine recount narrowed the lead to about 300. That's when Gore requested a hand recount and all the back and forth about stuff like hanging chads started. People weren't arguing about fraud. They were arguing about the interpretation of what each of certain ballots said. It was not at ALL the kind of obvious result the result of the 2020 election was.

In this case Trump's people are trying to overturn results in six states with the closest initial count had Biden winning by about 10,000 votes. We've got Trump trying to overturn the results in Michigan when the margin is over 150,000 votes and trying to overturn the results in Pennsylvania when the margin is over 80,000 votes. There is zero legitimate question that Biden won Michigan and Pennsylvania. And Trump's people are arguing that there was fraud when all of the agencies actually responsible for monitoring for that sort of thing say there is no evidence of it.

This is not comparable to the Bush/Gore thing at all. There was legitimate doubt about who won Florida. There isn't really legitimate doubt over the fact that Biden won Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. There is just a bunch of conspiracy theory bullshit that doesn't stand up under scrutiny.

[JohnStOnge]

The Benford's Law thing is kind of interesting. However, I found a study from 2011 that debunks the idea that it means anything in an election. I think that fact that it is from 2011 is important because it was done way before we were in this current situation and people were trying to use Benford's Law to say there must've been fraud. The paper is at https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 1CE91AAF6D.

Here is a quote from the abstract:

It is not simply that the Law occasionally judges a fraudulent election fair or a fair election fraudulent. Its “success rate” either way is essentially equivalent to a toss of a coin, thereby rendering it problematical at best as a forensic tool and wholly misleading at worst.

So if you are on Facebook or something and see somebody using Benford's Law to try to claim there was fraud, refer them to that paper. And tell them, "Just stop. Biden won the election because more people voted for him."

[JohnStOnge]

No it's not. That is pretty much meaningless.

Out of 3,000+ counties in the US, you had 19 which had correctly pick the winner in the last 10 elections going back to 1980. If Vegas had put odds on those counties, the odds 18 of those 19 would go for the loser would be like a million to 1..

I think it'd be interesting if the oddsmakers did that while having polling data on the counties involved because, overall, oddsmakers had Biden as a 2:1 favorite. I don't think there is any reason to think that what happens in those "Bellweathers" has any impact on what happens anywhere else. Like for instance I can remember watching election coverage with Steve Kornacki talking about how the Pennsylvania suburbs shifted towards Biden this time. What happens in Vigo county, Indiana, has nothing to do with that.

Things are changing. A county that was in line with America overall in 1980 may not be in line with America overall now. In 1980, for example, 88 percent of those who voted were non-hispanic White. In 2020 it was 67%. At some point changes like that are going to have impacts.

The idea that the "Bellweather Counties" thing provides evidence that something nefarious went on is ridiculous.

[Skjellyfetti]

5 More Ways Joe Biden Magically Outperformed Election Norms
Surely the journalist class should be intrigued by the historic implausibility of Joe Biden’s victory. That they are not is curious, to say the least.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/23/5- ... ion-norms/

I already debunked this earlier in the thread... but, this kind of thing is easily disproved if you simply look it up.

Baris noted a statistical oddity from 2020’s election returns: “Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton in every major metro area around the country, save for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia.”

First, Biden underperformed Clinton in Philadelphia.
2020: 81.4%
2016: 82.3%



Second, Biden didn't underperform Clinton in every other metro area.

Some examples.

Allegheny County, PA
2020: 59.4%
2016: 55.9%

Maricopa County, AZ
2020: 50.3%
2016: 44.8%

Harris County, TX
2020: 56.0%
2016: 54.0%

Dallas County, TX
2020: 64.9%
2016: 60.8%

Cook County, IL
2020: 74.4%
2016: 73.9%

Mecklenburg County, NC
2020: 66.7%
2016: 62.3%

Wake County, NC
2020: 62.3%
2016: 57.4%


That "statistical oddity" is flat wrong.

[houndawg]

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.

I'd say a 1-38 start qualifies as "the weak stuff"...Rudy is playing possum, right?

[AZGrizFan]

Why didn't you speak up when Al Gore tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2000 or Nancy Pelosi tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2019?

I don't know what you're talking about with Pelosi but I did live through the Bush/Gore thing. I thought it was bad that they kept changing the ballot counting methods and rules. It came across as trying one thing then, if it looked like that wouldn't get Gore over the top, they'd try another thing.

However, it was a very different situation than this one. Everything came down to one State where the initial count had Bush up by less than 2000 votes. The initial machine recount narrowed the lead to about 300. That's when Gore requested a hand recount and all the back and forth about stuff like hanging chads started. People weren't arguing about fraud. They were arguing about the interpretation of what each of certain ballots said. It was not at ALL the kind of obvious result the result of the 2020 election was.

In this case Trump's people are trying to overturn results in six states with the closest initial count had Biden winning by about 10,000 votes. We've got Trump trying to overturn the results in Michigan when the margin is over 150,000 votes and trying to overturn the results in Pennsylvania when the margin is over 80,000 votes. There is zero legitimate question that Biden won Michigan and Pennsylvania. And Trump's people are arguing that there was fraud when all of the agencies actually responsible for monitoring for that sort of thing say there is no evidence of it.

This is not comparable to the Bush/Gore thing at all. There was legitimate doubt about who won Florida. There isn't really legitimate doubt over the fact that Biden won Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. There is just a bunch of conspiracy theory bullshit that doesn't stand up under scrutiny.

So, you don’t find it the least bit odd that Biden’s ENTIRE margin of victory in the state of Michigan happened in ONE vote dump at 3:52 in the morning where he got 100% of the 138,000 votes dumped? That doesn’t just make the little hairs on the back of your neck stand up? As a numbers guy? A statistics guy? You’re perfectly ok with that? You’re ok with the fact Trump won 18 of 19 bell weather counties, every bellweather state and STILL lost? A laundry list of statistical anomalies and trend breakers present themselves and not just one, but EVERY one of them come to pass and you don’t find that even remotely strange?

[SeattleGriz]

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/23/5- ... ion-norms/

I already debunked this earlier in the thread... but, this kind of thing is easily disproved if you simply look it up.

Baris noted a statistical oddity from 2020’s election returns: “Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton in every major metro area around the country, save for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia.”

First, Biden underperformed Clinton in Philadelphia.
2020: 81.4%
2016: 82.3%



Second, Biden didn't underperform Clinton in every other metro area.

Some examples.

Allegheny County, PA
2020: 59.4%
2016: 55.9%

Maricopa County, AZ
2020: 50.3%
2016: 44.8%

Harris County, TX
2020: 56.0%
2016: 54.0%

Dallas County, TX
2020: 64.9%
2016: 60.8%

Cook County, IL
2020: 74.4%
2016: 73.9%

Mecklenburg County, NC
2020: 66.7%
2016: 62.3%

Wake County, NC
2020: 62.3%
2016: 57.4%


That "statistical oddity" is flat wrong.

Let's see a link to this debunking please.

[BDKJMU]

Out of 3,000+ counties in the US, you had 19 which had correctly pick the winner in the last 10 elections going back to 1980. If Vegas had put odds on those counties, the odds 18 of those 19 would go for the loser would be like a million to 1..

I think it'd be interesting if the oddsmakers did that while having polling data on the counties involved because, overall, oddsmakers had Biden as a 2:1 favorite. I don't think there is any reason to think that what happens in those "Bellweathers" has any impact on what happens anywhere else. Like for instance I can remember watching election coverage with Steve Kornacki talking about how the Pennsylvania suburbs shifted towards Biden this time. What happens in Vigo county, Indiana, has nothing to do with that.

Things are changing. A county that was in line with America overall in 1980 may not be in line with America overall now. In 1980, for example, 88 percent of those who voted were non-hispanic White. In 2020 it was 67%. At some point changes like that are going to have impacts.

The idea that the "Bellweather Counties" thing provides evidence that something nefarious went on is ridiculous.

We’re not just talking 1980 compared to 2020. We’re also talking 2016 to 2020. 1980 to 2020 nationwide is a pretty good sized voter demographic change, but its only a slight change for each of the previous 10 elections every 4 years. 2016-2020 is only a slight change. But its wasn’t a slight change for these counties. It was all 19 going for the supposed winner, to 18 of 19 going for the supposed loser, in 1 election.

The bellweather county thing is a huge statistical anomaly. You of all people should recognize that.

[BDKJMU]

I already debunked this earlier in the thread... but, this kind of thing is easily disproved if you simply look it up.



First, Biden underperformed Clinton in Philadelphia.
2020: 81.4%
2016: 82.3%



Second, Biden didn't underperform Clinton in every other metro area.

Some examples.

Allegheny County, PA
2020: 59.4%
2016: 55.9%

Maricopa County, AZ
2020: 50.3%
2016: 44.8%

Harris County, TX
2020: 56.0%
2016: 54.0%

Dallas County, TX
2020: 64.9%
2016: 60.8%

Cook County, IL
2020: 74.4%
2016: 73.9%

Mecklenburg County, NC
2020: 66.7%
2016: 62.3%

Wake County, NC
2020: 62.3%
2016: 57.4%


That "statistical oddity" is flat wrong.

Let's see a link to this debunking please.

Ditto.

[SeattleGriz]

If it good enough for Kanye, it's good enough for our recounts.

[AZGrizFan]

I think it'd be interesting if the oddsmakers did that while having polling data on the counties involved because, overall, oddsmakers had Biden as a 2:1 favorite. I don't think there is any reason to think that what happens in those "Bellweathers" has any impact on what happens anywhere else. Like for instance I can remember watching election coverage with Steve Kornacki talking about how the Pennsylvania suburbs shifted towards Biden this time. What happens in Vigo county, Indiana, has nothing to do with that.

Things are changing. A county that was in line with America overall in 1980 may not be in line with America overall now. In 1980, for example, 88 percent of those who voted were non-hispanic White. In 2020 it was 67%. At some point changes like that are going to have impacts.

The idea that the "Bellweather Counties" thing provides evidence that something nefarious went on is ridiculous.

We’re not just talking 1980 to 2020. We’re also talking 2016 to 2020. 1980 to 2020 nationwide is a pretty good sized voter demographic change, but its only a sleight change for each of the previous 10 elections ever 4 years. 1916-2020 is only a sleight change. But its wasn’t a sleight change for these counties. It was all 19 going for the supposed winner, to 18 of 19 going for the supposed loser, in 1 election.

The bellweather county thing is a huge statisical anomaly. You of all people should recognize that.

*slight

[UNI88]

Why didn't you speak up when Al Gore tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2000 or Nancy Pelosi tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2019?

I don't know what you're talking about with Pelosi

Impeachment was an obvious attempt by Pelosi and the Democratic Party to use spurious Russia collusion charges to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election".

Now please proceed to give me multiple paragraphs of BS logic for why the charges weren't spurious and impeachment wasn't an attempt to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election".

[UNI88]

Why didn't you speak up when Al Gore tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2000 or Nancy Pelosi tried to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election" in 2019?

I don't know what you're talking about with Pelosi

Impeachment was an obvious attempt by Pelosi and the Democratic Party to use spurious Russia collusion charges to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election".

Now please proceed to give me multiple paragraphs of BS logic for why the charges weren't spurious and impeachment wasn't an attempt to "overturn the obvious results of a free and fair election".