40
State level irregularities are a good place to start, but we really need to bring the analysis down to the precinct level. The sum of all precincts has to match the total state number or any idiot could verify the discrepancy with excel in two minutes. The fraud has to occur at the precinct level.
posted ago by Mother_of_gains ago by Mother_of_gains +40 / -0

I find it hard to believe they would shave off some small percentage at the state level and allocate those votes out to the precincts.

Probably ties with shiva's earlier analysis that the algorithm works at the lowest level, and we just see the results at the state level when they get added to the total.

5 comments
5 comments share save hide report block hide child comments
Comments (5)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
▲ 1 ▼
– Di8ital 1 point ago +1 / -0

What data is available to evaluate and assess

permalink save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Mother_of_gains [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Beats me. My level of autism has shrunk over the years. I just don't want our autist friends obsessing over state level data when the real gold is in the precincts.

A lot of the states have SoS website where you can pull voting results.

permalink parent save report block reply