Assuming the 213 million properly accounts for those who registered same-day on election day (and, IIRC, it does), your analysis seems accurate.
Obviously, people could challenge your assumption re 10% voter roll error (I am not, just pointing out others could).
It is acknowledged that the 66.2% turnout (calculated as voters divided by eligible voters, as discussed above) is a very high value (I believe 1900 or so was the last time it was higher). Depending on how the percentage of “eligble voters” who are registered voters has trended over time, perhaps the 72.5 to 80 or so percent would gibe with expectations of reality. Then again, maybe not.
This is a long-winded way of saying your analysis is asking the right questions. However, OP’s flawed analysis, which concludes a mathematically impossible number of people voted, is not a valid analysis.
Nonetheless, just because OP’s analysis is, effectively, nonsensical, it doesn’t mean there weren’t a shit ton of fraudulent votes. A lot of evidence suggests there were.
Drives me absolutely insane knowing there are not more people in the media, government, law enforcement, and courts with the common sense and/or ethics enough to ask logical questions and get to honest answers while providing full transparency.
Alk this cloak and dagger, man behind the curtain bullshit is giving me anxiety.
Assuming the 213 million properly accounts for those who registered same-day on election day (and, IIRC, it does), your analysis seems accurate.
Obviously, people could challenge your assumption re 10% voter roll error (I am not, just pointing out others could).
It is acknowledged that the 66.2% turnout (calculated as voters divided by eligible voters, as discussed above) is a very high value (I believe 1900 or so was the last time it was higher). Depending on how the percentage of “eligble voters” who are registered voters has trended over time, perhaps the 72.5 to 80 or so percent would gibe with expectations of reality. Then again, maybe not.
This is a long-winded way of saying your analysis is asking the right questions. However, OP’s flawed analysis, which concludes a mathematically impossible number of people voted, is not a valid analysis.
Nonetheless, just because OP’s analysis is, effectively, nonsensical, it doesn’t mean there weren’t a shit ton of fraudulent votes. A lot of evidence suggests there were.
Thanks for the reply.
Drives me absolutely insane knowing there are not more people in the media, government, law enforcement, and courts with the common sense and/or ethics enough to ask logical questions and get to honest answers while providing full transparency.
Alk this cloak and dagger, man behind the curtain bullshit is giving me anxiety.
Word.