You're confusing it with the other version. OP screenshot is the "White House" version which is 30 min, whereas the one with 199k likes is from the "Biden Inaugural Committee" channel and is about 6 hours or some ungodly length.
Clearly the difference in likes is because most people who subscribed to the White House channel are based Trump supporters (since the channel was started during his tenure), whereas the Biden Inaugural Committee version hit the trending page (whether with Youtube's help or not) where the normies are finding it.
Ehhhh... it's not nearly that cut-and-dry
(article discussing the legality of it if you're interested: https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-former-president-be-impeached-and-convicted)
This bill doesn't even seem that bad though. We want real people, to be registered to vote legally. Things like automatic registration at the DMV sounds like a good thing to me, I don't know why the article frames it as a negative. Ditto for the final point about making it a crime to knowingly lie about a federal election - that's no-brainer.
And former felons... I'm ok with them voting too (I don't have strong feelings either way). The author's sensationalist example of a "child raping murderer" makes me question the whole article.
I think the Alex Jones comparison is a good one, as long as I can remember he's always been teetering on the edge of caricature, sanity, possibly bipolar (IMO). I'm not calling for a ban of all Lin Wood discussion, I just don't understand how he seems to have so much credibility when he predicts that, surprise, life long politician Pence will give lip service to Trump but won't actually do anything radical.
(idk about not being a real Christian, is that referring to the lgbt group that were dancing a few blocks from a house he rented?)
I'm curious as well, in the press release they say
The mob mentality behavior that took place on several flights to the D.C. area yesterday [Jan 5th] was unacceptable and threatened the safety and security of every single person onboard.
But I have no idea what they're talking about.
What did he predict with 100% accuracy, that Pence wouldn't somehow overthrow the certification process? Maybe he's predicted more that I don't know about, but if that Pence thing was enough to get everyone back on the Lin train then people had their heads far deeper in the sand than I thought. It was obvious from a mile away Pence wasn't going to upend the election.
If no traitors have been arrested by Sunday, can we all agree that Lin Wood is a looney fraud and stop talking about him?
It depends where you're looking, but precincts are drawn up to be roughly equal, so they're usually the same order of magnitude (in the example of Chicago, there are a few with less than 100 votes and a few more than 1000, but the vast majority are 3 digits).
I haven't seen any analysis on historical votes, or Biden's votes anywhere else. In Chicago, there were enough small, super left leaning districts where Trump won 10-19 votes total to make it look like it followed the pattern. Could be the same case with the example of "Michigan" from the OP, the infographic data is so vague it's meaningless. And again, all mathematicians are in agreement that you can't use first digit analysis for election fraud (and even 2nd digit is controversial).
Yeah this place used to be pretty tolerant to different views, as long as you supported GEOTUS you were welcome. Now we've been infiltrated by a lot of glowies and I suspect liberal trolls just pushing extremist viewpoints only.
It only works on number sets that span multiple orders of magnitude, so precinct votes, for example, don't work if they're mostly 3 digits.
There are a ton of YouTube videos and academic papers explaining in more detail if you're interested, but that's the short answer.
"The first-digit distribution has nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of election fraud."
That's a quote from the statisticien who uncovered election fraud in Iran.
They fell right into his trap