Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
Please do not support this lunatic with your analysis ....
For Michigan, the spot you pointed out, and also the jump at votes 5,303,442 to 5,291,005 (which hurt Biden), are the only places in the votes that are not possible due to rounding. There are some that are odd, but not impossible. He has come up with far more, that are completely possible, and therefore make no sense. It's totally bunk and I've tried to engage with him on it, resulting in a complete waste of time.
You did it again because your analysis is shit and if anyone doubts this feel free to check my comment history for an attempt to get one intelligent thought out of this yokel
What are the explanations for Biden losing votes at other times? This seems to suggest that the changes might have some other explanation other than nefarious changes?
This. I think it has something to do with the Edison data likely pulling from multiple servers, with some of them lagging behind others. So when it pulls from a server lagging behind, votes disappear, then they come back later.
The switching can be explained by some servers lagging behind in certain precincts, others lagging in other precincts.
This. When you build an api it needs to correct a problem if one arises. Not saying that’s what happened, but it’s very unlikely that proof of fraud would be pushed live
I checked it with simple integer-based math after fixing the 3-digit ratio imprecision...there is no other way to explain the simultaneous increases in vote totals and dilutions of the percentages that lead to wide variances in the higher resolution data, like the decreases that we see here...they don't happen everywhere but they do happen
exactly...like how there were a few explanations for the switching of 5500 Trump votes to Biden in two counties in MI...and a few explanations to the switching of 93k votes in a county in VA on election night from - you guessed it - Trump to Biden...or the magical 450k votes across the country with no downballot votes, which is an inexplicable figure, all going straight to Biden...the data isn't noise, it is granular because the significant figures of the raw vote totals is high enough that greater resolution on regressing the non truncated values of the ratios can be achieved well beyond the 3rd digit place, and 16k has a 4-digit magnitude...Edison wont mutate the inputs algorithmically beyond low resolution time sampling for non ratios, and for high resolution time sampling for truncated ratios, which shifts liability for fraud beyond their purview...Dominion can claim ignorance of any fraud by blaming any anomalies on human operator error or cyberattacks, due to their lack of security protocols they were certain to place blame on...the door is wide open for a third party physical intrusion into the data feed...Hammer and Scorecard are real programs with real intrusive track records in clandestine operations...I am not saying that this is what is indicated here, I am saying that this is the granular information that we need in order to find out what really happened here.
First off, false equivalency, second off the 450k votes has nothing to do with this.
The data isn’t noise, sure, but it’s quite close to it. You’re basically saying that if I wrote on a piece of paper ‘10 votes trump, 3 votes Biden” but then crossed out 10 and puta 5 there and changed the 3 to eight.
This data is not from Edison. It’s from the New York Times. They’ve obviously manipulated the data they received fromEdison since their links are in the JSON, and knowing this business fairly well I bet their contract states they couldn’t just release the raw Edison data, especially if they’re paying for it.
And this:
it is granular because the significant figures of the raw vote totals is high enough that greater resolution on regressing the non truncated values of the ratios can be achieved well beyond the 3rd digit place, and 16k has a 4-digit magnitude...Edison wont mutate the inputs algorithmically beyond low resolution time sampling for non ratios, and for high resolution time sampling for truncated ratios,
Is obviously psuedospeak. What you’re saying is ‘the numbers are high enough to make a difference, and Edison wouldn’t correct the issue.”
But that’s incorrect. I’ve built apis that have provided similar datasets that have 9 digit contracts on the line for entities bigger than New York Times, and if someone was manipulating the data pre client endpoint, they would hide it. This is not the information needed to figure this out, unless you were trying to blame New York Times.
I love how you sort through data that looks like pure gibberish to me but then add kindergarten style arrows.
Truly a work of art. God Bless ya.
quick and dirty
^^^This!
Haha, work of a true autist
edison claimed this wasn their data or something as far as I know that was the last excuse
wtf...it said it in the source data
I don't know they are probably lying?
More like plausible deniability.
...and therefore cannot be used to validate fraudulent behavior
Yeah, and I also never fucked a girl on top of a church haha
Get this to the TRUMP TEAM!
they already have it
trust me we are working on it...it will be YUGE
Ddhq time series should point to the counties doing this shit
already onto that part of the task
GEOTUS said so himself, we are going to win!
If SCOTUS doesn't end this, we need to end it
I used revised ratios in my analysis...you can find it here: https://gofile.io/d/64wtx8
You are spot on about the appearance even in the truncated ratios!
Please do not support this lunatic with your analysis ....
For Michigan, the spot you pointed out, and also the jump at votes 5,303,442 to 5,291,005 (which hurt Biden), are the only places in the votes that are not possible due to rounding. There are some that are odd, but not impossible. He has come up with far more, that are completely possible, and therefore make no sense. It's totally bunk and I've tried to engage with him on it, resulting in a complete waste of time.
Here is the video of the switch happening on live TV for those who wanna see it:
https://thedonald.win/p/11PpYkjTPw/holy-shit-start-of-video-pa-tota/c/
10:08 pm or 11:08pm?
Damnit I did it again...lol...I meant 11:08 PM
You did it again because your analysis is shit and if anyone doubts this feel free to check my comment history for an attempt to get one intelligent thought out of this yokel
ratios are the simplest mathematical tools to understand...so is the machinations of your mind apparently you moron
there we go again
25 day old account? fuck right back off to wherever you came from
might be a 25 day old account...I and my analytical skills are neither 25 days old or 25 years old
Isn't Edison data the results of exit polls and not actual votes? Two very different things if that is true.
this was from the raw data file
Edison puts nyt links in its data?
Nyt pays for Edison data and published it. We also are working on decision desk hq's data to narrow down to the counties
I’m asking this for a reason. In hopes that you’ll get that this is not raw Edison data.
Right. We also have raw ddhq data. County level and higher resolution timewise.
Anything that comes from a static file stored by a company that paid for data should not be considered a trustworthy data source.
What are the explanations for Biden losing votes at other times? This seems to suggest that the changes might have some other explanation other than nefarious changes?
This. I think it has something to do with the Edison data likely pulling from multiple servers, with some of them lagging behind others. So when it pulls from a server lagging behind, votes disappear, then they come back later.
The switching can be explained by some servers lagging behind in certain precincts, others lagging in other precincts.
So are you saying that could be the explanation for all the changes, including those injuries to TD, instead of an algorithm?
This. When you build an api it needs to correct a problem if one arises. Not saying that’s what happened, but it’s very unlikely that proof of fraud would be pushed live
You're assuming they're smart
third party gains...like a voting shell game
Excellent work
Excellent work, keep em coming!
working on that
send this up!!!
This does not mean what people think it means. This is also unverifiable data.
I checked it with simple integer-based math after fixing the 3-digit ratio imprecision...there is no other way to explain the simultaneous increases in vote totals and dilutions of the percentages that lead to wide variances in the higher resolution data, like the decreases that we see here...they don't happen everywhere but they do happen
There are a few explanations for behavior like this.
exactly...like how there were a few explanations for the switching of 5500 Trump votes to Biden in two counties in MI...and a few explanations to the switching of 93k votes in a county in VA on election night from - you guessed it - Trump to Biden...or the magical 450k votes across the country with no downballot votes, which is an inexplicable figure, all going straight to Biden...the data isn't noise, it is granular because the significant figures of the raw vote totals is high enough that greater resolution on regressing the non truncated values of the ratios can be achieved well beyond the 3rd digit place, and 16k has a 4-digit magnitude...Edison wont mutate the inputs algorithmically beyond low resolution time sampling for non ratios, and for high resolution time sampling for truncated ratios, which shifts liability for fraud beyond their purview...Dominion can claim ignorance of any fraud by blaming any anomalies on human operator error or cyberattacks, due to their lack of security protocols they were certain to place blame on...the door is wide open for a third party physical intrusion into the data feed...Hammer and Scorecard are real programs with real intrusive track records in clandestine operations...I am not saying that this is what is indicated here, I am saying that this is the granular information that we need in order to find out what really happened here.
lol, like how epstein killed himself
First off, false equivalency, second off the 450k votes has nothing to do with this.
The data isn’t noise, sure, but it’s quite close to it. You’re basically saying that if I wrote on a piece of paper ‘10 votes trump, 3 votes Biden” but then crossed out 10 and puta 5 there and changed the 3 to eight.
This data is not from Edison. It’s from the New York Times. They’ve obviously manipulated the data they received fromEdison since their links are in the JSON, and knowing this business fairly well I bet their contract states they couldn’t just release the raw Edison data, especially if they’re paying for it.
And this:
Is obviously psuedospeak. What you’re saying is ‘the numbers are high enough to make a difference, and Edison wouldn’t correct the issue.”
But that’s incorrect. I’ve built apis that have provided similar datasets that have 9 digit contracts on the line for entities bigger than New York Times, and if someone was manipulating the data pre client endpoint, they would hide it. This is not the information needed to figure this out, unless you were trying to blame New York Times.