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"
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