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.
If this analysis is accurate and earth-shattering, it needs to be presented in a manner that the average person understands - and this posted analysis clearly is not it.
It's not the Edison feeds is it? Using those is a mistake becuase they report only to three decimal places. I've seen many people from the law teams or people supporting Trump talking about the three decimal points, and fractional voting, but that analysis is completely flawed. Edison doesn't report vote counts; they report percentage share of the total votes and they report to only 3 decimal places.
It's not edison, edison also doesn't have precinct data.
Here's the data used: https://gofile.io/d/qZcQl6 . I grabbed it from his first video. My understanding of the data is that they are still pulled from NYT but at a finer resolution, since NYT also reports precinct level data. There's some explanation somewhere about the API or JSON used to pull it.
I have seen some data of actual votes (not percentages) reported to decimal places (not from Edison).
I agree that the analysis that focus on Edison data proves nothing. Even if the patterns show something potentially nefarious, the defense is "that's how the data was reported in real time to their media customers, it does not prove that actual vote totals changed."
What the Edison numbers show is a POTENTIAL for a problem that would require analysis of the base data to prove or disprove.
I believe he's ordered precincts by Biden percentage in their current reported running totals over 96 updates or so (2656 × 3 × 96 rows) (the 3 is election day, absentee+early, provisional) updates and made note of every perfect Biden percentage that repeats more than one time. Isolated them and then summed together the total Biden and total votes at each percentage. he found that these ratios are related by being some fraction over 2231 where if you add up the total votes for trump across all of them you get an average of 14.65% and if you fill the column with the same number and times that by each perfect ratios and sum it across all the ratios, you also get 14.65%, which shows that the current perfect ratios and their totals were part of a perfect linear algebra equation which is balancing those votes to 14.65%. He then looked at the rest of the votes in the precincts where these perfect ratios were and determined that the average was 23% for Trump among the rest of the votes in them. He claims that if that percentage were used instead of those perfect ratio votes which must all be hijacked, then they'd be 23% trump as well and not 14.65%.
I believe that small amounts of votes like 40 for instance where Biden gets 37/40 votes were added in some cases to these precinct totals to make them up to the perfect percentages in the running totals. If you look at my paper. Biden has a tonne of 90% updates and the average Biden percentage increases linearly the smaller the batch size. https://thedonald.win/p/11QlKTqaXv/---happening-detailed-statistica/
He does explain it... he's not the best at explaining things to be fair. But he has multiple youtube videos of him breaking down his math. It's very high level math and I'd love for him to collaborate with other mathematicians to both prove his work as well as help him explain it for the average person.
Ok, do I see a link to the youtube videos? No. Did you include links to any youtube videos? No.
When you make a post, you are putting in a bit of effort. All that effort is wasted when you don't lift a finger to make the post intelligible to anybody.
Dude, it's simple. Use your wheel number to get the hijacked state such as prime over the number of false fail states and that's your youtube URL. My 3 year old monkey could do it. /s
Trump's GA filing seems to be completely based on facts. "In violation of O.C.G.A. § 21-2-217, Respondents, jointly and severally, allowed at least 395 individuals to vote in Georgia who also cast ballots in another state." Not any of this theoretical stuff?
By the way, how does someone prove this theory? Just count the physical ballots to see if the number match?
This analysis would make sense if either the claim was that the precincts were hijacked not temporarily but for the duration of the election or if the votes in the analysis were votes added during the hijacked update (not total votes at the time).
The analysis is very interesting and the findings are intriguing but could be red herring.
Also the claim that he reversed the algorithm is simply not true because he never presents such algorithm, he only analysis of ratio of total votes over precincts over time - which is very interesting and valuable nonetheless.
If this analysis is accurate and earth-shattering, it needs to be presented in a manner that the average person understands - and this posted analysis clearly is not it.
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlPDt5lA/mathpede-edward-solomon-saving-p/c/
Do you know where his data comes from?
It's not the Edison feeds is it? Using those is a mistake becuase they report only to three decimal places. I've seen many people from the law teams or people supporting Trump talking about the three decimal points, and fractional voting, but that analysis is completely flawed. Edison doesn't report vote counts; they report percentage share of the total votes and they report to only 3 decimal places.
It's not edison, edison also doesn't have precinct data.
Here's the data used: https://gofile.io/d/qZcQl6 . I grabbed it from his first video. My understanding of the data is that they are still pulled from NYT but at a finer resolution, since NYT also reports precinct level data. There's some explanation somewhere about the API or JSON used to pull it.
Here's what I found on NYTimes: https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/precincts/GAGeneral-latest.json
But that's just precinct level vote counts.
Is his entire analysis just based on the end results in each precinct? I guess that makes sense.
He has timestamped uploads for each precinct. From what I saw it has these columns:
Time, Precinct, County, Ballot type, Candidate, Total votes, New votes
So it would look like (actual pull):
2020-11-04T01:11:35.765.json / 06D / Fulton / Absentee / bidenj / 1173 / 0
And upon next upload for that precint would be something like this (pure example):
2020-11-04T0x:xx:xx.xxx.json / 06D / Fulton / Absentee / bidenj / 111173 / 110000 (this is where they 'accidentally' upload biden's 100k votes)
I have the file from here: https://gofile.io/d/PnJkyQ
I saw it linked in a comment in another thread of his.
I see now that it does show the total votes in each precinct at the timestamp.
Thanks!
Fractional voting is in the Dominion users manuals.
It has nothing to do with this. (which may be flawed, regardless)
I have seen some data of actual votes (not percentages) reported to decimal places (not from Edison).
I agree that the analysis that focus on Edison data proves nothing. Even if the patterns show something potentially nefarious, the defense is "that's how the data was reported in real time to their media customers, it does not prove that actual vote totals changed."
What the Edison numbers show is a POTENTIAL for a problem that would require analysis of the base data to prove or disprove.
Nope they aren't decimal places
Yes they are decimal places
Final Hijacked state is 287,424 total votes. 242,434 Biden, 42,109 Trump, Net Gain 200,325
Final Hijacked state is 14.65% Trump.
This is fucking meaningless to everybody. What are you talking about?
It doesn't do any good to do wonderful expert analysis if you can't explain it.
What is Hijacked?
What do you mean by 'Final Hijacked State'?
Of what? A precinct? A county? or some other measure?
Start from scratch. Explain what the fuck you are talking about.
I believe he's ordered precincts by Biden percentage in their current reported running totals over 96 updates or so (2656 × 3 × 96 rows) (the 3 is election day, absentee+early, provisional) updates and made note of every perfect Biden percentage that repeats more than one time. Isolated them and then summed together the total Biden and total votes at each percentage. he found that these ratios are related by being some fraction over 2231 where if you add up the total votes for trump across all of them you get an average of 14.65% and if you fill the column with the same number and times that by each perfect ratios and sum it across all the ratios, you also get 14.65%, which shows that the current perfect ratios and their totals were part of a perfect linear algebra equation which is balancing those votes to 14.65%. He then looked at the rest of the votes in the precincts where these perfect ratios were and determined that the average was 23% for Trump among the rest of the votes in them. He claims that if that percentage were used instead of those perfect ratio votes which must all be hijacked, then they'd be 23% trump as well and not 14.65%.
I believe that small amounts of votes like 40 for instance where Biden gets 37/40 votes were added in some cases to these precinct totals to make them up to the perfect percentages in the running totals. If you look at my paper. Biden has a tonne of 90% updates and the average Biden percentage increases linearly the smaller the batch size. https://thedonald.win/p/11QlKTqaXv/---happening-detailed-statistica/
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlPDt5lA/mathpede-edward-solomon-saving-p/c/
He does explain it... he's not the best at explaining things to be fair. But he has multiple youtube videos of him breaking down his math. It's very high level math and I'd love for him to collaborate with other mathematicians to both prove his work as well as help him explain it for the average person.
Ok, do I see a link to the youtube videos? No. Did you include links to any youtube videos? No.
When you make a post, you are putting in a bit of effort. All that effort is wasted when you don't lift a finger to make the post intelligible to anybody.
Dude, it's simple. Use your wheel number to get the hijacked state such as prime over the number of false fail states and that's your youtube URL. My 3 year old monkey could do it. /s
Is there the laymans laymans laymans version yet?
https://youtu.be/i1N5bn4TJes With a handy high quality animation.
Did he make it into the attachments on the Trump GA filling??
Trump's GA filing seems to be completely based on facts. "In violation of O.C.G.A. § 21-2-217, Respondents, jointly and severally, allowed at least 395 individuals to vote in Georgia who also cast ballots in another state." Not any of this theoretical stuff?
By the way, how does someone prove this theory? Just count the physical ballots to see if the number match?
A beautiful mind used as a force of good rather than evil. Thank you based patriot brother Edward.
Not even gonna pretend like I understand any of that...
This analysis would make sense if either the claim was that the precincts were hijacked not temporarily but for the duration of the election or if the votes in the analysis were votes added during the hijacked update (not total votes at the time).
The analysis is very interesting and the findings are intriguing but could be red herring.
Also the claim that he reversed the algorithm is simply not true because he never presents such algorithm, he only analysis of ratio of total votes over precincts over time - which is very interesting and valuable nonetheless.