Anyone know where to get the raw data for this? (Or, rather, anyone know here I can just look at a more detailed chart with exact numbers and such? -- I wouldn't really know what to do with the raw data.)
[Edit:] Never mind, found it: https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/race-page/michigan/president.json
Looks like an 80/20 split in Milwaukee (city itself) is similar to that in 2016:
2016: Clinton 188,653, Trump 45,167; total votes cast (excluding third parties and write-ins) 233,820
2020: Biden 194,646, Trump 48,413; total votes cast: 243,059
And re: 2012,
Obama’s victory margin in Milwaukee grew by 15,070 votes in 2012 compared with 2008, boosted by a turnout that saw 87% of the city’s registered voters casting a presidential ballot. His winning margin in the city was a stunning 170,831 votes.
(The 2012 split was indeed almost exactly 80/20 here.)
143,379 votes is a big chunk of 195,000. If that number indeed represents votes just in the city itself, the remaining split would have looked like 51,267 Biden / 23,250 Trump (a 55/45 split).
The narrative is now shifting to "doomers are lowering morale." But it doesn't change the fact that Powell has repeated so much ridiculous and unsubstantiated shit this past week.
Most recently, she even posted the absurdly fake bait going around on Twitter, which said that the allegedly seized German Scytl servers had the "real" election results, which show Trump winning by 410 electoral votes (including CA, etc.).
She's throwing about 1,000 things at the wall, and only like 2 are sticking that are worth anything.
Asymptomatic transmission is well-established for various pathogens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymptomatic_carrier
Including respiratory viruses, etc.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6518513/
Why would they waste their (presumably) valuable time just trying to mess with random people on this forum? That seems extremely conspiratorial. It's literally just an internet forum.
Thanks, do you happen to have that tweet?
In the OANN segment, they sourced the claim to a tweet by the woman who ran for the VA 11th Congressional District: https://twitter.com/Manga4Congress/status/1327731838920630272
Guess they thought a congressional candidate wouldn't repeat false info.
Anything is possible and plausible.
But when the results match more or less exactly with the historical trend, by definition it makes "anomaly" less plausible.
the real number is probably closer to 30-40 million.
I mean, is this just a blind guess, or is there some statistics this is based on? Because organizations have methodologies for estimating the numbers here — not just gut intuitions. (And at least one of the numbers which estimated the number of being in the 11-12 million range comes from the Office of Immigration Statistics at DHS itself.)
I've just gotten some stunning evidence from a first-hand witness — a high-ranking military officer who was present when Smartmatic was designed in a way that the... — and I'm going to read you some of these statements, if you don't mind . . . from the affidavit.
'Designed in a way that the system could change the vote of each voter without being detected. He wanted the software itself to function in such a manner that if the voter were to place their thumbprint or fingerprint on a scanner, then the thumbprint would be tied to a record of the voter's name and identity as having voted' but that the voter would not be tracked to the changed vote. He made it clear that the system would have to be set up, but not leave any evidence of the changed vote for the specific voter, and that there would be no evidence to show, and nothing to contradict, that the name or the fingerprint or thumbprint was going with a changed vote.
Smartmatic agreed to create such a system and produce the software and hardware that accomplished the result for President Chavez. After the Smartmatic electoral management system was put in place, he closely observed several elections where the results were manipulated using the Smartmatic software. One such election was December 2006, where Chavez was running against Rosales. Chavez won with a landslide over Rosales — a margin of nearly 6 million votes for Chavez, versus 3.7 million for Rosales. In 2013 he witnessed another Venezuelan national election, where the Smartmatic management system was used to manipulate and change the results for Chavez.'
(There's more; I'll transcribe in a sec.)
... If one looked at any particular screen, they could determine that the vote from any specific area, or . . . national total, was going to be against either candidate. Persons controlling the vote tabulation computer had the ability to change the reporting of votes by moving votes from one candidate to another by using the Smartmatic software. ...
As far as I'm concerned, if people stick to the facts and don't jump hastily to conclusions, skepticism can be warranted. For example, several times now, I've pushed back against people saying things like
you took the news of one of the most respected lawyers in America and pissed all over it
Sidney Powell has been looking very sketchy the past week or so. As I've pointed out a few times now, several of the main sources she's explicitly said she's gotten her info from (re: Dominion and other things) include Dennis Montgomery and Thomas McInerney, e.g. for the "Hammer" and "Scorecard" stuff. You'd be hard-pressed to find less reputable people than these.
Then, she's been relying on that problematic statistical analysis from TheDonald itself for her claims about "2.7 million" votes being switched, etc. (which then made its way to the President himself).
After that was the whole Dominion or Scytl raid in Germany claim — which, although I'm not sure if Powell directly commented on, has still been another prominent piece of apparent misinformation that's been floating around close to Trump's inner circle: Lin Wood, etc. (The current iteration of the rumor suggests that it was a raid on "CIA" servers. But I'd be willing to bet this is soon going to be revealed as erroneous information, too.)
We've been seeing people try to subtly trying to insinuate that we can connect the dots between that statistical analysis on TheDonald and actual known evidence and persons. Some people have even exaggerated by stating that there are whistle-blowers who do have knowledge about millions of votes being switched. But every time, what comes out is that they only have some vague thing to report — that they were aware of some security vulnerability that hypothetically could allow for vote-switching, etc.
Now, in this current instance, the affidavit does get a bit more specific, honing in on someone who witnessed apparent vote-switching in relation to the 2013 Venezuelan election between Maduro and Capriles Radonski.
But — precisely because of Powell's susceptibility to dubious information so far — I think we should be preparing ourselves for the fact that a direct connection for the U.S. election may never come. Re: Dominion, I think we're going to find a lot of individual affidavits from people who've seen small irregularities, and a case that tries to suggest (more by innuendo than anything) that these possibly could have amounted to more.
It's unbelievably funny that people in this site think they know better than a high-power attorney like Sidney Powell who is directly working for Trump.
Powell has already explicitly supported "Scorecard" and "Hammer" on live TV, which have no basis in any sort of plausible reality at all (being fictitious concoctions by verified grifter Dennis Montgomery).
The other main claim that she's been making, about millions of votes being switched/deleted by Dominion, is traced back to an analysis on the very forum we're on right now — where it was then disseminated to OANN, GatewayPundit, and various Trump associates on Twitter, and then eventually posted by Trump himself.
If you think Powell isn't susceptible to unsubstantiated nonsense just because she's an attorney, think again.
Those are rookie numbers for the number of illegal aliens voting in CA.
Pew estimates that there are 11 million total illegal immigrants in the U.S., with 2.2 million in California. Even if every single one of them in CA somehow managed to vote — and even if every single one of them had voted for Trump, not Biden — it still wouldn't have been enough. So where exactly are you pulling your info from?
I'm in Chicago and there were a ton of people voting trump.
He won 24% of the vote in Cook County — only marginally higher than his 21.5% in 2016. Similarly, McCain got 23% in Cook County in 2008. (In DuPage County it was 40%; 40% in 2016; and then 44% for McCain in 2008.)
Just because you may personally know a lot of people who voted Trump (or saw other visible expressions of support for him via rallies on TV, etc.), it'd be illogical to think that this was anything too unusual.
He OVERWHELMINGLY won every state, if he hadn't we would never have seen even a blip of the fraud show on the national radar.
Current numbers have Trump down by 5,000,000 in CA — not dissimilar to his 4.3 million vote loss there in 2016, too. Do we really think he actually won CA?
That's a really poor article. First off, the claim of a Scytl raid basically seems to be dead in the water at this point. We don't know where Gohmert got his info from, but it just looks like it was incorrect.
Second, most of the article is just theoretical speculation about the scope of the EO from someone who appears to have no legal expertise whatsoever, and basically takes it as an egregious authoritarian mandate. Trust me that absolutely no one wants that precedent.
I very clearly stated there are text messages between Joe Biden and Hunter Biden that describe Hunter's sexual assaults on Joe Biden's granddaughter
Which text in particular said this?
I trust Sydney Powell also. I’ve never seen her lie or exaggerate her evidence.
She promoted Dennis Montgomery/Tom McInerney and their theory about "Hammer" and "Scorecord" earlier in the week, though. I don't think she's quite as hyper-cautious and measured as people think.
I think she also promoted that statistical analysis from TheDonald itself, which now looks like it was based on some fundamental errors. (I think that's where her claims about "millions of votes being turned" comes from.)
I think we should be super cautious about this. I know we'd like to think that the President's own legal counsel would make absolutely sure that the info they have is good before publicly claiming it. But not only is this as much a PR game as anything else, but I think a lot of figures in Trump's orbit haven't been so cautious, and it's come back to bite them.
For one, Powell seems to have already promoted the conspiracy about "Hammer" and "Scorecord," which I think most people are now skeptical of.
Above all, I think members of the Trump team, along with OANN and others, seem to still be banking on the information first presented in this post being true, while a number of people — here and elsewhere — have now raised serious concerns about it. (And I'm thinking this is still what Powell's claim about "millions of votes being turned" is premised on.)
Similarly, Louie Gohmert's claims about Scytl being raided — which somehow became conflated with Dominion — don't seem to have panned out, either.
It's hard to know how this specific one will eventually play out; so by all means feel free to come back in a week or so and downvote me if it turns out I was overly cautious. But for now, I think we should be prepared to find out that these Dominion whistleblowers mentioned by Powell actually don't know the faintest thing about millions of votes being switched. Perhaps, like Richard Hopkins from USPS, they have one tiny piece of a puzzle that they caught a glimpse of, but then this is being exaggerated and misrepresented — and conflated with other, dubious claims.
I mean, you're also right that it's among the most audacious accusations. Guess I'm just saying there's a sense among critics that all his claims are roughly "equal" (=equally dubious) anyways.
If he doesn't, conservative thought and our culture shift will be shamed and silenced for a generation.
I don't see that happening. It's already widely assumed by Trump critics and skeptics that a large majority of the things he claims and shares are inaccurate, if not simply fabricated wholesale. I don't see why this specific claim would be considered particularly worse than any other — it'd just be "added to the pile."
I don't know how Gateway Pundit would have gotten access to those, but they appear to be face shots of a woman giving "Harper" a blowjob. I don't think Hunter is a keen intellect by any stretch, but I cannot believe that he'd put a face shot of Hallie Biden on pornhub sucking his dick.
Well that's kind of what I was suggesting: even from people who've been able to "friend" that PH account and access private material, I don't think the face pictures were available on Pornhub. Maybe PH accounts have an option to keep pics totally private, even from "friends," and that the PH account was hacked, and that's where the GP article got it from.
The problem is, it doesn't particularly look like Hallie Biden
The leaked pic from February 2018 in Annapolis conclusively seems to be Hallie Biden; and if so, I think there's a decent argument that at least the pic that's the background image or header or whatever on the PH page — the woman on her stomach — is also her.
I'm honestly more curious about the other pics in the Gateway Pundit article. The implication seemed to be that they also came from the PH page ("Hunter also includes pictures of that same woman within his account"); but they aren't there, and I haven't seen anyone talking about those at all.
Not sure if there's a one-stop-shop debunking post, but in this pic, you can clearly see a tattoo on the right forearm of the woman on the left. And just in general, they have bodies/body types that are clearly much older than 14 or 15, or however old Natalie and her friends were at the time (especially the woman on the right).
Also, the pic is dated October 5, 2018, and Natalie Biden was in Greenville, Delaware on that day according to the geotag on one of her posts.
The Gateway Pundit posted a few different blurred pics. The one where it's a woman on her stomach is almost certainly Hallie Biden — probably taken in Annapolis. It's uncertain who's featured in the photos that were described as "Hunter also includes pictures of that same woman within his account"; but it certainly doesn't look anything like Natalie. I could see a much stronger case for them being Hallie. And after all, GP suggests they're the same person, too (though it's uncertain how they know that).
Just going to piggy-back on this comment because it seems like a good one, but... I've been trying to find out more about the raw data that the chart here was compiled from. This is the true raw NYT/Edison data; but this also seems to be batch update data organized into a rudimentary chart form.
The label on the tweet in question says that at 6:31 AM, there was a sudden spike of 134,886 Biden votes. The chart also shows that at that time, Biden had a total vote count in the high-2.1 million mark.
When I look at the raw data in the other (rudimentary) chart, when Biden is in the 2.1 millions, there's a batch update of +139,902 for him (not far off from the other chart's/label's 134,886) @ 04:04 on Nov. 4, bringing him up to 2.269 million total — with only about 9,000 more for Trump. Then @ 04:22, Biden suddenly loses 58,000 votes, and Trump 40,000, before gaining roughly the same number back on the next update a couple of minutes later.
I suppose these could be different web scrapes (the other one I'm looking at actually isn't labeled). But I'm curious about some of the discrepancies.