3409
Comments (155)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
15
WeWillRejoice 15 points ago +15 / -0

If shown to a "skeptic," what would/could they say to refute this?

32
Niqlndym 32 points ago +32 / -0

This chart could have been created by “working backwards” from the election results: If you look at the final vote tally, it represents a ratio - In this case, that could have been that Biden got 65.9% of the votes, Trump received 32.2%, and the 3rd Party candidates got 1.9%. That totals 100%

Then, if you build a chart, which shows the votes flowing in (without knowing who actually received each vote), you could total up the count fractionally, and arrive at the actual election results.

This is a perfect argument, which emphasizes that the source of this data is extremely important.

11
Gatsby2x4 11 points ago +11 / -0

Thats a great analysis, except for the 1 vote being split. Someone should have had 100% vs 0

5
Granny 5 points ago +5 / -0

Also how does it make any sense, to create a record with an accurate bottom line, but the rest of the data is useless fiction?

Edit: I think I might answer my own question, if I'm correct - the bottom line is also fiction.

3
CuomoisaMassMurderer 3 points ago +3 / -0

The 1 vote being split is key to the rest.

4
Granny 4 points ago +4 / -0

Haha ya, it's the "Rosetta stone" of election fraud.

1
Chosimbaone 1 point ago +1 / -0

well 1.0 vs Zero. Gotta keep those decimals

6
Keeneix 6 points ago +6 / -0

Thank you for that. So where did this information come from. Was it made by working backwards, was it part of the voting tally and if it was part of the voting tally is it based off the end result and in effect worked backwards by electronic means.

Seriously on face value this seems iron clad but after a moments thought it seems flimsy at best with out more context.

1
leakmouth 1 point ago +1 / -0

Where is this chart from?

5
TehAgent 5 points ago +5 / -0

3rd Party candidates got 1.9%

Off topic, but in my state the 3rd Party got 12.9%. Thats outstanding. I even voted liberterian in the gubb'ner race despite not really liking many Liberterians these days. Jo Jorgenson for instance was a shit candidate that just took shit Democrat policies and added 'we like guns' to the end.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

That's not a perfect argument. That's complete denial of reality.

Exactly what Marxists have to do.

5
Niqlndym 5 points ago +5 / -0

Huh? Sounds like you’re the one denying reality. Point being, this chart is worthless, unless it can be shown that it was collected in real-time, before the results were know.

0
CuomoisaMassMurderer 0 points ago +1 / -1

Not the way reality works.

You have yet to explain how 1 vote is something other than 1 vote.

Neither have you bothered to investigate the source.

-2
GlockArm -2 points ago +1 / -3

"That's not a perfect argument. That's complete denial of reality."

You didn't make an argument or a point.

Just like leftists. You're a fuckboy.

27
x79q3pb 27 points ago +27 / -0

Sceptics and believers alike should be asking for the source data and not just referring to a random table of data, in order to verify it for themselves.

5
Moriartis 5 points ago +5 / -0

So much this. I'm a Data Scientist by trade and I would LOVE to get ahold of some damn source data, but all I keep seeing are claims and snapshots of data in videos.

7
IvIA6A 7 points ago +7 / -0

"This isn't real. Why would they show votes as decimal and percentages?" Probably

They'd attack the presentation and source without realizing that's the fucking point.

3
Pumpitrealgood 3 points ago +3 / -0

it is real, when you add a filter code into the tabulation machines for every Trump vote, say .75, and every biden vote 1.2, that is a huge swing, and that is how you end up with these weird % , odd numbers.

4
befehlistbefehl 4 points ago +5 / -1

"Racist Trumpite!"

4
Fishdicks_ 4 points ago +5 / -1

Orange man bad