I know. I'm saying the bump is referenced. It's the nearest I could find to a reliable source that talks about it. Unfortunately it doesn't verify it. Sorry pede.
That USA Today article is a fact check claiming that this didn't happen. USA Today does fact checks for FB, they are shills. We shouldn't use fact check articles from sources that are biased against the President. Direct sources are best.
That tweet that references an article that references another tweet is not credible at all. The whole thing seems to be about that famous spike from Milwaukee again, the 169,000 votes of which around 130,000 were for Biden and the rest for Trump, his red spike being hidden behind the blue Biden spike, leading to people claiming that all the votes in the spike were for Biden.
This is wasting valuable time and resources on something that has already been debunked and will not hold up in court.
It says "From 3:26 to 3:44 a.m. in The Associated Press election reporting stream, the vote for Biden jumped by 149,520 (9.2% of Biden's total votes) and Trump's vote jumped by 31,803 votes (2% of his total votes). Milwaukee County accounted for nearly all of that jump."
A source would be nice. If it's real, then Wisconsin legislators need to audit the heck out of it. If it's just a random twitter person making stuff up, then shame on them.
Assuming equal probability of a single vote being for Trump or Biden, the probability that all 125,000 votes will go to Biden is
1 time in 2^(125000) = 1 time in 5.6 x 10^37628
That number is 37,628 digits long. It would take a piece of paper 37 meters long to even write that number down, if you could write one number per millimeter.
Literally impossible for all of them to go to Biden.
Thanks! I lurked for a long time on the old unspeakable site (run by the commies), but when it was clear they were going to ban it and the based mods made this site, I had to create an account.
I've been very busy as of late, but I have been trying to look at some of the election data. Looks like everybody has been doing a great job with all that so far!
I would link you to my publications, but I don't want to dox myself.
Even if they try to argue it was a legit dump containing only registered democrat votes, if even one in a thousand registered dems voted for Trump the probability is already as low as 0.999x10^125000=4.85x10^-55 that 125k consecutive ballots will be all for Biden, aka around 1 in 2 septendecillion (aka around 1 in a trillion^9).
Even if you lowball even further and say only one in ten thousand registered dems voted Trump the odds are still pretty bad; the moment the amount of dems that voted for Trump gets any higher (which imo it would be, there's usually at least a few % who vote for the other side's candidate) these odds get progressively worse.
Factor into that, you then need to multiply the probabilities of all these different dumps being only Biden votes together to get the chance they all really happened at once, giving you an even lower probability.
So yeah, the people arguing on Twatter that they just separated the ballots are still wrong about it being possible. No matter which way you cut it, it doesn't add up, whether you look at it from intuition or maffs.
I had a look at the .json data (records every individual update) on the NYT website. Based on that data there was 1 batch with 143k for Biden and 25k for Trump, which is still very statistically improbable, especially in a battleground state. That is the batch where the cheating occurred I believe.
Reported by who?
Any source on this? I'd love to have something solid on this to pass around
Same here.
This brave patriot sources :) You're doing God's work, fren.
Copy/pasting for pedes:
It's referenced on USA Today-
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/04/fact-check-no-fraud-wisconsin-overnight-vote-spike/6167188002/
that story says it didnt happen though.
I know. I'm saying the bump is referenced. It's the nearest I could find to a reliable source that talks about it. Unfortunately it doesn't verify it. Sorry pede.
Yeah, I think this is the explanation
The AP. You could watch election tallies on election night.
Where is a source though? I need to send this to people.
https://nationalfile.com/suspicious-biden-got-100-of-votes-in-wisconsin-michigan-during-late-night-vote-counting/
Copy/pasting for pedes:
It's referenced on USA Today-
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/04/fact-check-no-fraud-wisconsin-overnight-vote-spike/6167188002/
Stop posting fake news like USA Today.
I kinda agree, has a header saying Trump is the enemy of the people, fuck USA Today!
That USA Today article is a fact check claiming that this didn't happen. USA Today does fact checks for FB, they are shills. We shouldn't use fact check articles from sources that are biased against the President. Direct sources are best.
That tweet that references an article that references another tweet is not credible at all. The whole thing seems to be about that famous spike from Milwaukee again, the 169,000 votes of which around 130,000 were for Biden and the rest for Trump, his red spike being hidden behind the blue Biden spike, leading to people claiming that all the votes in the spike were for Biden.
This is wasting valuable time and resources on something that has already been debunked and will not hold up in court.
Is there any way to look at that data right now?
It's frustrating that most news here don't have a source. I don't trust Gateway Pundit and twitter.
I prefer source material when possible. I think we'll get some terrific info from the audits
Jim Hoft on GP seems decent, he’s had some good info the last couple of weeks. Fuck Twitter though.
Seems legit, he may overhype a bit but the info is solid.
Copy/pasting for pedes:
It's referenced on USA Today-
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/04/fact-check-no-fraud-wisconsin-overnight-vote-spike/6167188002/
It says "From 3:26 to 3:44 a.m. in The Associated Press election reporting stream, the vote for Biden jumped by 149,520 (9.2% of Biden's total votes) and Trump's vote jumped by 31,803 votes (2% of his total votes). Milwaukee County accounted for nearly all of that jump."
Iirc Milwaukee had North Korean style turnout at 95% or something insane like that
Milwaukee has same-day at the poll registration, so we won't know the actual turnout until they update their numbers to take that into account
It's referenced on USA Today:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/04/fact-check-no-fraud-wisconsin-overnight-vote-spike/6167188002/
Thanks that's a foot in the door.
https://nationalfile.com/suspicious-biden-got-100-of-votes-in-wisconsin-michigan-during-late-night-vote-counting/
Nice. Thanks!
I'll have to ask my Chinese friend Sum Ting Wong about this
When the Democrats saw how many votes they were behind President Trump, they said, "Ho Lee Fuk."
Sum Ting Wong said "we tu low, need mo ballots"
A source would be nice. If it's real, then Wisconsin legislators need to audit the heck out of it. If it's just a random twitter person making stuff up, then shame on them.
https://nationalfile.com/suspicious-biden-got-100-of-votes-in-wisconsin-michigan-during-late-night-vote-counting/
Assuming equal probability of a single vote being for Trump or Biden, the probability that all 125,000 votes will go to Biden is
That number is 37,628 digits long. It would take a piece of paper 37 meters long to even write that number down, if you could write one number per millimeter.
Literally impossible for all of them to go to Biden.
Oh shit, this dude maths. Physicists 4 Trump.
astrophysicist :D
so like picking one hydrogen atom in the whole universe, scrambling it all, and picking the same atom again, a few hundred times?
There are only 10^80 hydrogen atoms in the universe.
This number is 37,548 orders of magnitude larger than that.
So, do you process 10^37548 times. Much much much much much larger.
Username checks out.
And before anybody gets any ideas...no, I am not a douchey astrophysicist like Neil deGrasse Tyson.
I've been based my entire life (parents are based and they taught me well...though apparently not well enough to keep me out of academia, lmao).
No problem!
I'm doing my part!
Thanks! I lurked for a long time on the old unspeakable site (run by the commies), but when it was clear they were going to ban it and the based mods made this site, I had to create an account.
I've been very busy as of late, but I have been trying to look at some of the election data. Looks like everybody has been doing a great job with all that so far!
I would link you to my publications, but I don't want to dox myself.
Even if they try to argue it was a legit dump containing only registered democrat votes, if even one in a thousand registered dems voted for Trump the probability is already as low as 0.999x10^125000=4.85x10^-55 that 125k consecutive ballots will be all for Biden, aka around 1 in 2 septendecillion (aka around 1 in a trillion^9).
Even if you lowball even further and say only one in ten thousand registered dems voted Trump the odds are still pretty bad; the moment the amount of dems that voted for Trump gets any higher (which imo it would be, there's usually at least a few % who vote for the other side's candidate) these odds get progressively worse.
Factor into that, you then need to multiply the probabilities of all these different dumps being only Biden votes together to get the chance they all really happened at once, giving you an even lower probability.
So yeah, the people arguing on Twatter that they just separated the ballots are still wrong about it being possible. No matter which way you cut it, it doesn't add up, whether you look at it from intuition or maffs.
Thank you for your service!
articles and ALL OF US need to stop using twitter as a reference, archive that shit, twitter removes content that doesn't fit the narrative.
This can't be true. Snopes told me this was false. /s
I had a look at the .json data (records every individual update) on the NYT website. Based on that data there was 1 batch with 143k for Biden and 25k for Trump, which is still very statistically improbable, especially in a battleground state. That is the batch where the cheating occurred I believe.
I guess....I'd like official tallies from the state though. AP could just say they were uploading tallies for each candidate separately or some shit.
Cant wait for real audit results
lol this is what happens when your diversity hires are in charge of the defrauding department.
Someone archived the article before anyone can yoink it. https://archive.is/8cpqV
If confirmed, this is just one of the many things that completely blows my mind.
They thought they could actually get away with this. Seems too easy.
Well isn't that convenient.
All sources in the tweet links to an article that links to a tweet of a suspended account.
Yes; but that news use a suspended account as source.
According to that web:
If you follow the link you get a suspended account promp in Twitter
Statistically impossible.
Is it anything new?
In Wisconsin, they did this two years ago in the governors race. It was a practice for the 2020 election and it worked then too.
I’m sure it was just a mistake.
I can find no verification of this and it should be easy to verify.
So on the Edison data that was sent to news sites that is stickied, it only has
Wisconsin : Switched : 2,078 Lost Votes : 3,408
So one of these is wrong.
Seems like a random tweet, need source.