This is like a time warp back to pre-Thanksgiving times. A compelling case has been made that Benfords law doesn’t apply here, given the nature of the data, but honestly, this always seemed like a weird long shot.
The thing is, if things happened how this post claims, then proving fraud is easy. We have 170k+ votes that can’t be tied to voters, yet when MI certified, the number of voters matched the number of ballots, which means 174k people just in Detroit must be marked as voted who didn’t vote. This is all public record. We haven’t found a single registered voter listed as participating in the election who didn’t. We should have been (should be) going door to door in Detroit finding these people. We aren’t bringing this to the level of individual fraud. The people who stole the election have done so. Why haven’t we found any of these .174k people?
And I’ll say this again about using the “time stamp” for when votes came in. This has very little to do with how votes were counted and isn’t a part of the official tally. Votes are updated in all kinds of different ways by different Precincts, and in the course of an evening that had hundreds of thousands of individual, human-entered updates to a database, there are going to be mistakes. It was always folly to be running around trying to show how this stuff, by itself, was proof of anything, a good place to start a real, systematic, search for provable fraud, but a bad place to draw conclusions from. News media auto-updating tallies are not part of the official process and are rife with real time errors that have no bearing on the official count, which is checked and rechecked multiple times after the initial rush to report things first, regardless of accuracy. Even election experts on our side who believe fraud could have happened have warned against this vein of analysis. Why are we still repeating this stuff? Practically, it got us no where, and fundamentally, it’s not the most compelling evidence we have.
This is like a time warp back to pre-Thanksgiving times. A compelling case has been made that Benfords law doesn’t apply here, given the nature of the data, but honestly, this always seemed like a weird long shot.
The thing is, if things happened how this post claims, then proving fraud is easy. We have 170k+ votes that can’t be tied to voters, yet when MI certified, the number of voters matched the number of ballots, which means 174k people just in Detroit must be marked as voted who didn’t vote. This is all public record. We haven’t found a single registered voter listed as participating in the election who didn’t. We should have been (should be) going door to door in Detroit finding these people. We aren’t bringing this to the level of individual fraud. The people who stole the election have done so. Why haven’t we found any of these .174k people?
And I’ll say this again about using the “time stamp” for when votes came in. This has very little to do with how votes were counted and isn’t a part of the official tally. Votes are updated in all kinds of different ways by different Precincts, and in the course of an evening that had hundreds of thousands of individual, human-entered updates to a database, there are going to be mistakes. It was always folly to be running around trying to show how this stuff, by itself, was proof of anything, a good place to start a real, systematic, search for provable fraud, but a bad place to draw conclusions from. News media auto-updating tallies are not part of the official process and are rife with real time errors that have no bearing on the official count, which is checked and rechecked multiple times after the initial rush to report things first, regardless of accuracy. Even election experts on our side who believe fraud could have happened have warned against this vein of analysis. Why are we still repeating this stuff? Practically, it got us no where, and fundamentally, it’s not the most compelling evidence we have.