Milwaukee: This is where over a hundred thousand absentee ballots appeared out of nowhere around 4AM on November 4th. The state law asserts that all “absentee ballots must be delivered to the location where they are being counted by 9PM”. These absentee ballots overwhelmingly went to Biden, even though there were more Republican absentee ballots registered/returned than Democrat absentee ballots. The vote totals from Milwaukee Precincts fail to conform to Benford’s law. Dominion was used to count the votes in Wisconsin, but was not used in Milwaukee.
I would change that to one widely known incident. Good work with the post spamming of the various states. It would be awesome if someone stickied the posts for a bit. I saved all the images.
You are correct, and what happened in Green Bay was orchestrated from Racine.
Zuckerberg, CTCL, Knight Foundation and other partners chose Racine for many reasons. The daughter of James Knight lives in Racine. Anna Makanju led community organizing in Racine. It is the historic Bellwether district. Biden endorsed the Billion Dollar Referendum in Racine. The mayor’s brother runs Mason Lab linked with Fauci, Gates and Cornell. Caron Butler and LeBron James led the Rock the Vote scam with connections to China. And Brad Smith, President of Microsoft and ElectionGuard, grew up in Racine.
Expose the Root. Reveal the Agenda. Deny the Mark.
Racine, Wisconsin is the model community for COVID, Elections and the real agenda beyond 21 and 2030 of modern, global and eternal enslavement.
Holy smokes! You articulated that incredibly well. Some of it is information I’ve heard previously but some were also connections I was not at all familiar with. It was my understanding that “vape lung injuries” were the introduction of COVID and was not actually related to vaping. Is this something you’re familiar with?
There is much more to each one of these names and connections.
To your point, it is no coincidence that many of the first vaping “outbreaks” began in Northern Illinois and Southeast Wisconsin. There is also the related case of the alleged affairs with the Sheriff’s office in Racine County and the cover-up of a massive illegal vaping distribution network in the area.
Benford's law is not valid where there is structure in the underlying data set and where the data set doesn't span several order of magnitude. This is a gross misapplication of Benford's law.
It was likely originally propagated as disinformation designed to undercut voter fraud claims.
I love this post! This is the right kind of energy. Keep it up. We need to keep bringing up the clear and irrefutable fraud everyday until Nov 5, 2024. Nicely done patriot!
The most important instance of Wisconsin fraud: the "indefinitely confined" votes that were several times higher than in the past, and has been ruled to have been used illegally in this election.
Can an admin sticky these 4 posts, please, and leave it up at least a week? We needed this in the week before Jan 6, but better late than never I suppose. I'd say this is a tad bit more important than pepe memes.
Propaganda like this "Red Mirage" narrative was spread via Mike Bloomberg and his cronies to setup the steal and prevent the media from claiming a Trump victory on election night and allow the Democrats to seal the steal with fake ballots disguised as "mail-in votes".
Municipal officials (city, village or township) count absentee ballots.
After the counting is complete, the ballots are secured and transferred to the county, who stores them in case of recount.
Absentee ballots being transferred to the county at 4am isn't proof of fraud, and claiming it is just gives the other side the ability to claim we don't know what we're talking about.
Pede, Nice work. If the GOP has balls, Biden would be impeached for fraud (and for threatening to disarm Americans and a million other reasons relating to the border & basically the entire US Constitution).
YOU CANNOT USE BENFORD’S LAW TO DETERMINE ELECTION FRAUD. Though it might highlight or give small indicators to fraud, it cannot be used as direct evidence. Shit light this is going to make us look stupid.
Edit:
A short 17 min vid and a paper that addresses this very issue.
Its used commonly to help detect fraud, of course its not 100% proof, its a statistical analysis, but combined with evidence it helps paint the story. Its smoke, and leads us to the fire. It does not make us look stupid if you have an understanding of what it is...
People will downvote me but I'm a data science guy and using benfords law as proof or indication is so stupid, because it is applied incorrectly in this case. I can go into details but I don't really care. I've expalined it too many times and people keep posting it anyway.
It doesn't help our case because benfords law in this specific instance is MISUSED. It is pure propaganda and we have the truth on our side, so there is no need for that.
If benfords law is used in court or in a debate with leftists, it only gives them a chance to point out how stupid we are, which puts EVERYTHING else we have in jeopardy.
If you "lie" once, credibility goes down and when we're talking about indicators, statistical evidence and so on, then credibility is very important.
Sharing this meme is detrimental to our cause
If benfords law fits for all the candidates in other districts, and all the candidates except one in certain districts: it is an indicator. Not proof. But indicative that further investigation should be done.
Dems strawmanned this with a a hard push that "there could be rational excuses, it's not proof, it doesn't count for anything". Just because their first two assertions are correct (there could be reasons, it's not proof) doesn't mean their conclusion (therefor it's not worth looking into at all) is correct.
It's like if you feel a lump on your ball/boob: There are plenty of possible explanations. You can't use that to prove cancer. But it does mean it's worth a second look, especially if your other ball/boob doesn't have any lumps. Nobody would say "lumps could be anything so you should ignore them"
Benford's law requires datasets without structure that spans orders of magnitude.
Voter precincts are set to a range of sizes based on geography, population density, and logistics. This fails both of these criteria for Benford's law to be valid.
It is so non-credible I think it was likely intentional disinformation put out early to discredit other claims of voter fraud.
I have a mathematics background. I understand the potential for dataset sizes to set frequency of leading digits. I just haven't seen anyone offer evidence that that actually happened.
Lots of people saying "well if every district was exactly 1000 people then that would give a different benford curve" with nobody saying "Here is the list of district sizes"
Wrong. It is used in financial fraud NOT ELECTION FRAUD. Do you know how it works? Did you watch the video and the paper that I linked to? Since our votes across the country are mostly cast in precincts with only a few thousand voters per, you will get anomalies. These anomalies do not mean that anything nefarious occurred. The test misleads you to believe so.
Fraud happened, Trump is prez, but using Benfords law to prove or point towards the likely hood of fraud is stupid. That’s all I’m saying.
So in other words, if there is an indication of voter fraud due to Benford's law, and then there are irregularities that come to light like in OPs post, that would be okay?
You cant use a massive pool of blood in someones home to prove a murder but it should lead to a thorough forensic investigation to collect evidence that would.
Benfords law, in this case, reveals a mile high plume of smoke, and only an asshole says "hurr durr, that doesnt prove theres a fire"
It can... but the data set has to exhibit certain characteristics. You just have to be careful when you use it... but in most cases, its a bad tool to use.
Wisconsin had one major incident of voter fraud:
I would change that to one widely known incident. Good work with the post spamming of the various states. It would be awesome if someone stickied the posts for a bit. I saved all the images.
Outstanding Posts!
And these don't even touch on the other types of fraud:
They cheated in every way possible
Green Bay investigation?
Imagine that. What a surprise.
START DOWNLOADING AND SHARING EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
DONE....now let’s do Maricopa County!!!!
These should be stickied until the false elections rigged results are overturned.
Great job pede!
Agreed. It is the ONE subject that matters above the rest.
Absolutely
I dig your graphics but I’m in Wisconsin and it seems the green bay incident may have a profound impact nationwide.
You are correct, and what happened in Green Bay was orchestrated from Racine.
Zuckerberg, CTCL, Knight Foundation and other partners chose Racine for many reasons. The daughter of James Knight lives in Racine. Anna Makanju led community organizing in Racine. It is the historic Bellwether district. Biden endorsed the Billion Dollar Referendum in Racine. The mayor’s brother runs Mason Lab linked with Fauci, Gates and Cornell. Caron Butler and LeBron James led the Rock the Vote scam with connections to China. And Brad Smith, President of Microsoft and ElectionGuard, grew up in Racine.
Expose the Root. Reveal the Agenda. Deny the Mark.
Racine, Wisconsin is the model community for COVID, Elections and the real agenda beyond 21 and 2030 of modern, global and eternal enslavement.
Holy smokes! You articulated that incredibly well. Some of it is information I’ve heard previously but some were also connections I was not at all familiar with. It was my understanding that “vape lung injuries” were the introduction of COVID and was not actually related to vaping. Is this something you’re familiar with?
There is much more to each one of these names and connections.
To your point, it is no coincidence that many of the first vaping “outbreaks” began in Northern Illinois and Southeast Wisconsin. There is also the related case of the alleged affairs with the Sheriff’s office in Racine County and the cover-up of a massive illegal vaping distribution network in the area.
Benford's law is not valid where there is structure in the underlying data set and where the data set doesn't span several order of magnitude. This is a gross misapplication of Benford's law.
It was likely originally propagated as disinformation designed to undercut voter fraud claims.
Youre a true Patriot good sir! Thanks for these
OP sure is - saved every single one of these!
thanks to whoever put all these nice visual summaries together.
Do VIRGINIA!!!
Hang 'em High.
I love this post! This is the right kind of energy. Keep it up. We need to keep bringing up the clear and irrefutable fraud everyday until Nov 5, 2024. Nicely done patriot!
The most important instance of Wisconsin fraud: the "indefinitely confined" votes that were several times higher than in the past, and has been ruled to have been used illegally in this election.
GOOD ADMINS
A well deserved Quad Sticky
As others have said, these should remain stickied for good
Hmmm. Commie Yank Shitholes ....you dont say?
Yes! Brother, I love you man. Thank you.
Can an admin sticky these 4 posts, please, and leave it up at least a week? We needed this in the week before Jan 6, but better late than never I suppose. I'd say this is a tad bit more important than pepe memes.
Propaganda like this "Red Mirage" narrative was spread via Mike Bloomberg and his cronies to setup the steal and prevent the media from claiming a Trump victory on election night and allow the Democrats to seal the steal with fake ballots disguised as "mail-in votes".
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/an-election-night-red-mirage-is-a-nightmare-for-democrats/ar-BB18B4l3
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/what-is-a-e2-80-98red-mirage-e2-80-99-michael-bloomberg-e2-80-99s-hawkfish-warns-of-a-nightmarish-election-crisis/ar-BB18Bds1
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/red-mirage-2020-election/
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/31/red-mirage-trump-election-scenario-victory
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-red-mirage-election-night-victory-unlikely-political-scientists-1531709
Their trial run for the 2020 steal was in 2018 when Evers was "elected".
About the two in the upper lift corner...
Municipal officials (city, village or township) count absentee ballots.
After the counting is complete, the ballots are secured and transferred to the county, who stores them in case of recount.
Absentee ballots being transferred to the county at 4am isn't proof of fraud, and claiming it is just gives the other side the ability to claim we don't know what we're talking about.
And none of it mattered. Joe "won".
These need a perma-sticky.
Pede, Nice work. If the GOP has balls, Biden would be impeached for fraud (and for threatening to disarm Americans and a million other reasons relating to the border & basically the entire US Constitution).
YOU CANNOT USE BENFORD’S LAW TO DETERMINE ELECTION FRAUD. Though it might highlight or give small indicators to fraud, it cannot be used as direct evidence. Shit light this is going to make us look stupid.
Edit: A short 17 min vid and a paper that addresses this very issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etx0k1nLn78
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-analysis/article/benfords-law-and-the-detection-of-election-fraud/3B1D64E822371C461AF3C61CE91AAF6D
Its used commonly to help detect fraud, of course its not 100% proof, its a statistical analysis, but combined with evidence it helps paint the story. Its smoke, and leads us to the fire. It does not make us look stupid if you have an understanding of what it is...
People will downvote me but I'm a data science guy and using benfords law as proof or indication is so stupid, because it is applied incorrectly in this case. I can go into details but I don't really care. I've expalined it too many times and people keep posting it anyway.
It doesn't help our case because benfords law in this specific instance is MISUSED. It is pure propaganda and we have the truth on our side, so there is no need for that.
If benfords law is used in court or in a debate with leftists, it only gives them a chance to point out how stupid we are, which puts EVERYTHING else we have in jeopardy.
If you "lie" once, credibility goes down and when we're talking about indicators, statistical evidence and so on, then credibility is very important. Sharing this meme is detrimental to our cause
If benfords law fits for all the candidates in other districts, and all the candidates except one in certain districts: it is an indicator. Not proof. But indicative that further investigation should be done.
Dems strawmanned this with a a hard push that "there could be rational excuses, it's not proof, it doesn't count for anything". Just because their first two assertions are correct (there could be reasons, it's not proof) doesn't mean their conclusion (therefor it's not worth looking into at all) is correct.
It's like if you feel a lump on your ball/boob: There are plenty of possible explanations. You can't use that to prove cancer. But it does mean it's worth a second look, especially if your other ball/boob doesn't have any lumps. Nobody would say "lumps could be anything so you should ignore them"
When Benford's law was checked on areas where no vote fraud is claimed it also doesn't work. It is a gross misapplication of Benford's law
Link?
Benford's law requires datasets without structure that spans orders of magnitude.
Voter precincts are set to a range of sizes based on geography, population density, and logistics. This fails both of these criteria for Benford's law to be valid.
It is so non-credible I think it was likely intentional disinformation put out early to discredit other claims of voter fraud.
I have a mathematics background. I understand the potential for dataset sizes to set frequency of leading digits. I just haven't seen anyone offer evidence that that actually happened.
Lots of people saying "well if every district was exactly 1000 people then that would give a different benford curve" with nobody saying "Here is the list of district sizes"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aokNwKx7gM8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etx0k1nLn78
Yeah. I can cherry pick examples too. Do you have a bulk analysis to prove general trends?
Not it doesn't paint a story or smoke. It makes us look stupid and undercuts all the valid vote fraud evidence.
Benford's law is not valid for datasets with structure. Benford's law is not valid for datasets that don't span orders of magnitude.
Voter Precincts have a set range of sizes based on logistics and geography, it is a complete misapplication to use Benford's law on vote counts.
When it is done for areas where no vote fraud is alleged Benford's law is also violated (because it is invalid for this situation)
Wrong. It is used in financial fraud NOT ELECTION FRAUD. Do you know how it works? Did you watch the video and the paper that I linked to? Since our votes across the country are mostly cast in precincts with only a few thousand voters per, you will get anomalies. These anomalies do not mean that anything nefarious occurred. The test misleads you to believe so.
Fraud happened, Trump is prez, but using Benfords law to prove or point towards the likely hood of fraud is stupid. That’s all I’m saying.
So in other words, if there is an indication of voter fraud due to Benford's law, and then there are irregularities that come to light like in OPs post, that would be okay?
You know what law should have been used to prove election fraud? State election laws.
You cant use a massive pool of blood in someones home to prove a murder but it should lead to a thorough forensic investigation to collect evidence that would.
Benfords law, in this case, reveals a mile high plume of smoke, and only an asshole says "hurr durr, that doesnt prove theres a fire"
Did you watch the vid or read that paper?
I believe it has previously been allowed as evidence of election fraud in court. So yes, it can.
It can... but the data set has to exhibit certain characteristics. You just have to be careful when you use it... but in most cases, its a bad tool to use.