I wish this guy had a speech writer because he is a mess of a run on sentence for the first 15 minutes. Without seeing what he was showing as far as #s the words are meaningless. He didn't describe what data he used to bucketize people into the 5 political buckets.
Where he hits the mark is on population growth rate vs. voting growth rate. I believe he is dead nuts on the money that people gradually cheated more and more every year, to the point now that it is obvious (assuming his input data isn't garbage...it's gummint data so it certainly could be trash).
I wouldn't get too excited about this guy until/unless the data is posted on .win for peer review.
He used voter data over the last 22 years, to track how men, women, and U voted across all repub, mostly repub, half and halfs, mostly dem, all dem.
Basically like taking a 3 number combination lock, and trying every single combination.
So based on total number of registered voters, at any given age group, for male, or female, he could tell you the basic percentage of them that would fall into any of the 5 political buckets, and he ran that across every variable to come up with the 980,000 buckets, and he had 22 years of voter data to use. And things started going sideways in 2008.
I wish this guy had a speech writer because he is a mess of a run on sentence for the first 15 minutes. Without seeing what he was showing as far as #s the words are meaningless. He didn't describe what data he used to bucketize people into the 5 political buckets.
Where he hits the mark is on population growth rate vs. voting growth rate. I believe he is dead nuts on the money that people gradually cheated more and more every year, to the point now that it is obvious (assuming his input data isn't garbage...it's gummint data so it certainly could be trash).
I wouldn't get too excited about this guy until/unless the data is posted on .win for peer review.
He used voter data over the last 22 years, to track how men, women, and U voted across all repub, mostly repub, half and halfs, mostly dem, all dem.
Basically like taking a 3 number combination lock, and trying every single combination.
So based on total number of registered voters, at any given age group, for male, or female, he could tell you the basic percentage of them that would fall into any of the 5 political buckets, and he ran that across every variable to come up with the 980,000 buckets, and he had 22 years of voter data to use. And things started going sideways in 2008.
At least that is how I understood it.
What voter data exactly? Last I checked this country votes via secret ballot. Did he use polling data? That is very different.
Check Arizona, specifically in this instsnce, and other states if curious about them.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/access-to-and-use-of-voter-registration-lists.aspx