Yea that “transferring ratio” video made no sense really. All I think it shows is that at the intervals when the vote totals were updated, the ratios of trump votes to trump totals changed, and that precincts that had one ratio before the update had a slightly different ratio after the update and other precincts that had a different ratio before now have the ratio you’re looking at after. Because he sorts his excel rows based on ratio it all looks like ratios “transfer”.
He makes a big deal about prime number ratios too “because that’s what a computer would do” (huh?) but looks at lots of ratios that are nonprime. Primes are used in cryptography. I see no reason why they’d have significance in vote flipping.
I'm still working to fully understand it myself but I think he's going into primes to show that the ratios, as fractions, are irreducible. Like with 15:2, you can't divide it any further. 15 is not prime, but they are Co prime together.
So if you are a ton of counts that all reduce to exactly 15:2, that's proof of fraud, of a clear algorithm. If the votes were natural you would get like 14.371:2 for example.
Listen, if you don’t understand it you shouldn’t be impressed by it.
All he’s doing is sorting a gazillion precincts and saying, look here’s a few at a particular ratio, which is exactly as you would expect to be. Then he’s saying when they update the counts, here’s some other precincts which have that ratio. This just happens because the old precincts changed a little bit and are not now squarely on the targeted ratio, and there are some new precincts that are (but were slightly off before).
Using language like “the ratio transferred” suggests there is some sort of shifting, which is not rational. Just because precinct A had ratio X at one time and precinct B had ratio X at another time, isn’t evidence of “transfer.” It’s only evidence of change.
Really, I think his videos are gobbledygook. You’ll never understand them because they don’t show anything.
I don't know, you don't think it'd be a bit too much of a coincidence for a whole bunch of precincts, supposedly disconnected, to update their totals with counts that are exactly a certain ratio? At the same time? What are the odds?
Yea that “transferring ratio” video made no sense really. All I think it shows is that at the intervals when the vote totals were updated, the ratios of trump votes to trump totals changed, and that precincts that had one ratio before the update had a slightly different ratio after the update and other precincts that had a different ratio before now have the ratio you’re looking at after. Because he sorts his excel rows based on ratio it all looks like ratios “transfer”.
He makes a big deal about prime number ratios too “because that’s what a computer would do” (huh?) but looks at lots of ratios that are nonprime. Primes are used in cryptography. I see no reason why they’d have significance in vote flipping.
I'm still working to fully understand it myself but I think he's going into primes to show that the ratios, as fractions, are irreducible. Like with 15:2, you can't divide it any further. 15 is not prime, but they are Co prime together.
So if you are a ton of counts that all reduce to exactly 15:2, that's proof of fraud, of a clear algorithm. If the votes were natural you would get like 14.371:2 for example.
Listen, if you don’t understand it you shouldn’t be impressed by it.
All he’s doing is sorting a gazillion precincts and saying, look here’s a few at a particular ratio, which is exactly as you would expect to be. Then he’s saying when they update the counts, here’s some other precincts which have that ratio. This just happens because the old precincts changed a little bit and are not now squarely on the targeted ratio, and there are some new precincts that are (but were slightly off before).
Using language like “the ratio transferred” suggests there is some sort of shifting, which is not rational. Just because precinct A had ratio X at one time and precinct B had ratio X at another time, isn’t evidence of “transfer.” It’s only evidence of change.
Really, I think his videos are gobbledygook. You’ll never understand them because they don’t show anything.
I don't know, you don't think it'd be a bit too much of a coincidence for a whole bunch of precincts, supposedly disconnected, to update their totals with counts that are exactly a certain ratio? At the same time? What are the odds?