Hmm. This guy implicates Hart as well as Dominion..
Can the concept be summarized in a paragraph? It sounds like from the very first tabulation report, that for any given county, a 10th order polynomial describes the reported Trump quotient per precinct if the precincts are ordered in ascending Trump quotient order. If this exists from the first report, and it is not natural, then there is no connection between real ballots cast and what is reported.
If this is true in all MI counties, that's a lot of manipulation that would have to be followed up upon, to give logical results in an audit. Not all machines in MI are Dominion; Oakland county uses Hart, for instance. Whatever mechanism they use to cover their tracks would have to apply across different machine types.
So each subsequent tabulation report also follows a 10th order polynomial? There has to be and end goal in mind, i.e. Biden winning. You showed how that comes to be with the targeted fractions and wheel analogy in GA. How are they using polynomials to target a Biden win here. I see that the data are fitted well by a 10th order, but I don't see how they are using polynomials to attain a goal..
I don't understand how there could be so many rejected ballots that go to adjudication, were these mail-in ballots? The write-ins (daffy duck, Kanye, etc) must have been a small percentage, so that doesn't explain the volume. Were there election day in-person rejects? In my precinct ( a non-Dominion MI county), you fill out the bubbles on a sheet, insert it into a ballot scanner which sits atop a lock-box, and if it is filled out correctly, the ballot drops into the lockbox any you get a message on the screen, "congratulations, you voted!" If there's a mistake on the ballot, it kicks it back to you, you give it back to the election staff for them to void in their logs, and they issue a new blank ballot for you to 'try again'. There doesn't seem to be an opportunity for a reject without the voter knowing, on the in-person ballots.
I don't understand how there could be so many rejected ballots, were these mail-in ballots? The write-ins (daffy duck, Kanye, etc) must have been a small percentage, so that doesn't explain the volume. Were there election day in-person rejects? In my precinct ( a different MI county), you fill out the bubbles on a sheet, insert it into a ballot scanner which sits atop a lock-box, and if it is filled out correctly, the ballot drops into the lockbox any you get a message on the screen, "congratulations, you voted!" If there's a mistake on the ballot, it kicks it back to you, you give it back to the election staff for them to void in their logs, and they issue a new blank ballot for you to 'try again'. There doesn't seem to be an opportunity for a reject without the voter knowing, on the in-person ballots.
It looks like the MI House Speaker Lee Chatfield is to blame. He issued a statement, including this, “I can’t fathom risking our norms and institutions to pass a resolution retroactively changing the electors for Trump, simply because some think there may have been enough widespread fraud to give him the win,”
Honestly, MI needs a new constitution. Yes, that's a lot of work. The current one, Michigan's fourth went into effect in 1964. It's been polluted because it's too easy to add shitty amendments through popular vote ballot initiatives. Also, all existing laws need to be evaluated against the new constitution and scrapped if obsolete. MI needs an electoral process at the state level, with one elector per county. I'm not sure how a State shitcans a constitution, especially in a peaceful way, but apparently they've done it several times in the past.
Do I understand correctly, that purposeful errors led to adjudication of a large fraction of ballots, and there is no log file found for the adjudication process, although log files were found for previous years' elections? Was the adjudication done outside this country?
I think this is a good idea. However, we did just enshrine in the MI constitution a new way of gerrymandering congressional districts, now heavily influenced by the Secretary of State, via a 2018 ballot proposal. Who thought that was a good idea, to make a simple idea into a complex process, then put it in the constitution? Another way to select electors could be to do popular vote counts by county, then have the most popular county outcome take all electors. The cities would hate that, but it would also minimize the amount of potential fraud.
This ties into the algorithm Edward Solomon is exposing. The algorithm is largely feed-forward, based on initial input from DNC internal polling prior to election day. Certain people were tasked with providing feed-back, however, and at 10:30-11:00 had to stop the counting to re-calibrate the algorithm because Trump was outperforming the DNC internal polling. My speculation.
Yes, this is essentially a feed-forward algorithm, based on initial inputs which are derived from polling data beforehand. It would be too obvious if it were based entirely on feedback - information coming in from the polling centers on voting day. They had a fair idea of how many manufactured ballots they'd need. There initial polling was off, however, and they did have to make corrections based on voting day feedback, and our eyes were drawn to these areas first.
It's obvious that in Michigan 2018 was setting up for 2020. Three ballot proposals - weed, new gerrymandering (constitutional change), and another constitutional change for straight ticket voting / same day registration. Unions were used to get enough votes to put the proposals on the ballot. Union members urged to vote yes-yes-yes (I saw the flyers). Then, gubernatorial and SOS candidates who support the pot proposal. Sprinkle in some election fraud. Easy way to bypass the legislature: get a group to write up a ballot proposal to change the constitution, get the unions to vote to put it on the ballot, have your election fraud mechanism ensure it passes.
from Ballotpedia: 'Michigan Proposal 3, the Voting Policies in State Constitution Initiative, was on the ballot in Michigan as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018.[1] The measure was approved.
A "yes" vote supported adding eight voting policies to the Michigan Constitution, including straight-ticket voting, automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration, and no-excuse absentee voting.'
Yes. Dumbasses voted for this change to the Michigan Constitution (you'd better have a good reason to change the Constitution!!). Or maybe they didn't really vote for it; I don't trust the results of Michigan's 2018 elections either.
You should reiterate this. The algorithm needs time and uncounted ballots. Maybe that's why Michigan's Secretary of State was 'Johnny on the spot' sending out mail-in ballot applications to every Michigander and then some, while Covid was still ramping up (Michigan is never so coordinated, and it wasn't her job anyway). Also why she said beforehand we should consider it to be an election week and not an election day...
I had an idea of assigning each bubble on a paper ballot a unique prime number. You could fill out your sample ballot before voting, multiply your primes together, and bring that resultant with you when voting. The tabulator at the precinct would be a relatively 'dumb' machine, which reads your filled-in bubbles, computes the product of the primes, shows that on a display for your confirmation, sends that prime number to an independent database, but also tallies the bubble counts. Several means of verification. The product of the primes gets to be a huge number, though, if there are a lot of ballot entries. Maybe breaking the ballot into Federal/state/local sections would keep the number small enough not to lose numerical significance.
There were some 'lessons learned' in 2016, and they added a 'straight ticket' ballot option and 'same day voter registration' as proposed constitutional changes on the 2018 ballot, and that proposal passed, what do you know! Idiotic voters, or 2018 election fraud, you decide..
- the 'rule of law' is a special case of the more general 'rule of the strong', one where 'the strong' hold themselves to the same standards as they hold others.
- 'the strong' are the armed people of the several States, as long as they recognize it uniformly
- you can't have 'government of, by, and for the people' unless the people are 'the strong', i.e. armed
- people who aren't armed are widgets
I agree. He did use the momentum to create the "Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election". At the time it seemed a reaction to Russia, Russia, but now it seems tailored to what's going on with this election. I liked this verbalization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2MkvWh7poY
It's usually hard to capture how steep a hill is on video; that's a steep hill that truck climbed!