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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thats a great analysis, except for the 1 vote being split. Someone should have had 100% vs 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.
The 1 vote being split is key to the rest.
Haha ya, it's the "Rosetta stone" of election fraud.
well 1.0 vs Zero. Gotta keep those decimals
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.
Where is this chart from?
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.
That's not a perfect argument. That's complete denial of reality.
Exactly what Marxists have to do.
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.
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.
"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.