What it basically means is that in GoP heavy areas, they slowly siphon votes from the GoP candidate to the Dem candidate just enough to reduce the candidate's "lead" in an area.
Here's a very rough idea of how it affects things. (Intentionally oversimplified as requested.)
Let's say a state has a 2 counties.
One Country county gets 150 votes for Trump and 25 for Biden.
The City county gets 275 for Biden and 250 for Trump.
Now, the results in this case would be 400 for Trump and 300 for Biden. Trump only wins 1 county but the whole state. You with me so far?
Now let's say you wanted the machine to "cheat" but not make it obvious. You know Trump won't win the City and Biden won't win the Country. So what do you do?
You tell the machine, late at night when nobody's watching, to take 50 of those "Country" votes and put them in Biden's bucket. Trump still "beats" Biden in the countryside, but now the totals are like this: 350 Biden 350 Trump.
It's basically embezzling votes. You take a little bit where they "won't notice", over and over again, in county after county after county, until Trump's lead from the rest of the state is pretty much nullified, and the "city" votes (legit or not) are the only ones being "counted".
But what if the President's lead is so huge you can't get away with it?
Well, just sit around Detroit manufacturing votes, of course!
Embezzling is a good analogy that's easy to understand. That's exactly what they did, only it was votes - not money.
The machines were coded so that when Trump's lead got to a certain percentage, a certain small percentage of Trump votes would be quietly, and automatically, moved over to Biden.
Do that often enough and you win - as long as nobody looks too closely.
I'm about 40 minutes into it and I understand it. One question I have is doesn't this data mean that John James didn't do as well as Trump? It seems like Trump easily won Michigan if they were to reverse these votes, but none of these votes were actually taken away from John James? Now I believe James would still win in a fair election but this data doesn't address the huge influx of dead votes and other avenues of cheating.
What it basically means is that in GoP heavy areas, they slowly siphon votes from the GoP candidate to the Dem candidate just enough to reduce the candidate's "lead" in an area.
Here's a very rough idea of how it affects things. (Intentionally oversimplified as requested.)
Let's say a state has a 2 counties.
One Country county gets 150 votes for Trump and 25 for Biden.
The City county gets 275 for Biden and 250 for Trump.
Now, the results in this case would be 400 for Trump and 300 for Biden. Trump only wins 1 county but the whole state. You with me so far?
Now let's say you wanted the machine to "cheat" but not make it obvious. You know Trump won't win the City and Biden won't win the Country. So what do you do?
You tell the machine, late at night when nobody's watching, to take 50 of those "Country" votes and put them in Biden's bucket. Trump still "beats" Biden in the countryside, but now the totals are like this: 350 Biden 350 Trump.
It's basically embezzling votes. You take a little bit where they "won't notice", over and over again, in county after county after county, until Trump's lead from the rest of the state is pretty much nullified, and the "city" votes (legit or not) are the only ones being "counted".
But what if the President's lead is so huge you can't get away with it?
Well, just sit around Detroit manufacturing votes, of course!
Embezzling is a good analogy that's easy to understand. That's exactly what they did, only it was votes - not money.
The machines were coded so that when Trump's lead got to a certain percentage, a certain small percentage of Trump votes would be quietly, and automatically, moved over to Biden.
Do that often enough and you win - as long as nobody looks too closely.
Wow.
Thanks for explaining. I legit feel like that guy saying he was a neanderthal.
I've been out of school long enough that all I understand is work at this point.
As if leftist elites couldnt be any more derogatory towards people who live in rural areas
Oh, I'm sure they can find ways...🙄
I'm about 40 minutes into it and I understand it. One question I have is doesn't this data mean that John James didn't do as well as Trump? It seems like Trump easily won Michigan if they were to reverse these votes, but none of these votes were actually taken away from John James? Now I believe James would still win in a fair election but this data doesn't address the huge influx of dead votes and other avenues of cheating.
Good question, we need to run the same analysis on James