MIT PhD Analysis of Michigan Votes Reveals Unfortunate Truth

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You have the patience of a saint. Or a high pain threshold

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
You have the patience of a saint. Or a high pain threshold

Part of it is I don't have a dog in the Democrat/Republican fight so I can see the ridiculousness of their mutual behavior. Birthergate, with it's promises of Obama being removed from office, the Russia stuff and now get ready for four to ten years of hearing non-stop how President Elect Biden and Soon to Immediately Follow Him President Harris stole the election with massive voter fraud and proof coming 'any day now'.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

You know, some people on the left were making the same claim exactly after Trump won in 2016. Are you saying it's possible they were right - and Trump won illegitimately?

Did they find anything? Seems the left spent 3+ years looking?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

A conversation for another time maybe. I wonder what it would take to get you to fall in love with a candidate

I understand you. I often am you. But, one candidate is always going to be more of a problem than the other. Maybe

We just got lucky. This is me having a personal opinion. We'll see how it plays out



I wonder sometimes if Trump wasn't necessary to improving our process

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

You know, some people on the left were making the same claim exactly after Trump won in 2016. Are you saying it's possible they were right - and Trump won illegitimately?

Did they find anything? Seems the left spent 3+ years looking?

Not what I was asking

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
I wonder what it would take to get you to fall in love with a candidate

Libertarian scented candles and mood music.

originally posted by: Freeborn

Trump's concerns are primarily about mail-in voting fraud.
What about that?
Or on the day ballots?

Mass mailings is a concern and one that can provide an avenue for fraud. I think I saw a couple of videos where a person is selling votes for 5 bucks each and had 5,000 with access to more from vote harvesting. So have 10 people do this and we have enough to swing states... Remember they had 2 weeks to harvest...

All in all Trump's team better show something soon and in the 10,000 of fraudulent votes and not 100s or even a few 1000.

The easiest might be vote switching if the company is on board. You only need 1/2 the vote as one loses votes and the other gains, BUT it would be a company involved, or at the very least a small group in the company in the position to do it.

That’s a fair question as to it’s use in court. But I would wager these researchers aren’t fabricating this as you’re suggesting as it’s career suicide in academia to be this boldly off. I do however agree from outside the group, this should have been sent to press and legal teams along with their proposed reasoning for spreading it across in a grassroots way.

But I think just flatly staying this is fake is pretty reckless, and to suggest that these folks aren’t trustworthy based on degrees is pretty inaccurate too.

Any scientist can look at and understand the data they are examining is clearly forced data. Something is happening there. These guys are inferring it to algorithms being introduced. That may or may not be the case, but there is a clear interruption in the data that forces a reaction. This is how we prove our new ideas work is by looking for these signs in my field. Anyone worth their weight in research should be doing the same thing as these guys.
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

a reply to: Xtrozero

A lot of unsubstantiated if's involved there.
And we need large numbers of people who are renowned for keeping quiet.

And some of those people are that stupid that they are being videoed selling votes.....real scrupulous people whose word can be taken as gospel.

Do you honestly think anyone organising ballot fraud of the US Presidential election on such a scale would involve these type of people?
Secrecy would have to be THE paramount concern and that would require committed, intelligent and even trustworthy people......I have seen no evidence of any of that.

Sorry, I just don't buy it.
The shear logistics of any concerted and co-ordinated fraud on any significant scale would leave so much evidence and potential leaks....where is it?

At least you are beginning to realise that the lack of current evidence is beginning to suggest this is absolute nonsense.

originally posted by: brianrook
But I would wager these researchers aren’t fabricating this as you’re suggesting as it’s career suicide in academia to be this boldly off

You'd lose that wager, the guy is a career hoaxer with no credibility, just look him up yourself and read about his claims.

I’m offering reason you’re offering opinions. If that’s where you’re going to stay, then it’s not worth any further discourse. This is just your safe place to tout your opinions. But if you’re interested, let’s chat more on this with reasoning.

You had a great question regarding why this didn’t go to press. Let’s start there. Do you think universities would back this data? I am skeptical of the election being rigged. I just don’t think it’s that easy to keep everyone quiet who would have to be involved. But I trust data and honestly do trust their results. Stats require courage to infer meaning. That’s the art in our science. The data is probably likely... doesn’t mean it’s rigged. This isn’t a normal race or normal POTUS, so normal results shouldn’t be expected.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: brianrook
I’m offering reason you’re offering opinions.

It's not an opinion that he lied about creating email, it's a fact, it's not an opinion that he said Covid-19 is patented, it's a fact. I can go on but I think you get the point.

I’m offering reason you’re offering opinions. If that’s where you’re going to stay, then it’s not worth any further discourse. This is just your safe place to tout your opinions. But if you’re interested, let’s chat more on this with reasoning.

You had a great question regarding why this didn’t go to press. Let’s start there. Do you think universities would back this data? I am skeptical of the election being rigged. I just don’t think it’s that easy to keep everyone quiet who would have to be involved. But I trust data and honestly do trust their results. Stats require courage to infer meaning. That’s the art in our science. The data is probably likely... doesn’t mean it’s rigged. This isn’t a normal race or normal POTUS, so normal results shouldn’t be expected.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

a reply to: brianrook

You just reposted exactly what you said earlier so please see my above response, it won't change.

originally posted by: Freeborn

At least you are beginning to realise that the lack of current evidence is beginning to suggest this is absolute nonsense.

I have always said the evidence needs to come forward and let the process work without people freaking out on both sides. To be honest I really do not want to hear about Trump's tweets that he loss to fraud for the next 4 years if none is to be found. I liked his policies and commitment but always hated his tweets and character short comings.

So if Rudy says there is 650,000 fraud votes that better come forward very quickly or old Rudy needs to disappear never to be heard from again.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Freeborn

How did they know which counts to target?
How did they carry out this fraud?

Not saying it happened, but all they would need to do is pick the few key states in play. Most states are already known to be left or right before they even vote, but a few key swing states kind of narrows it down for them to focus on. Then the next focus would be high republican based counties that is once again is easy information to find known by anyone who wants to know. You would only need a few voting machines with the algorithm needed and so update software on election day then update again afterwards to get rid of the evidence.

Again...not saying it happened...

You know, some people on the left were making the same claim exactly after Trump won in 2016. Are you saying it's possible they were right - and Trump won illegitimately?

if you thought that and said nothing because you were afraid some on the right would call you names, wouldn't that piss you off to find out you were right.

Yea, me too. that's why I feel it's a good question to ask. I've been called names for 4 years.

It is a fact that voter registration databases are full of outdated information.

Dead people, name changes, address changes, etc

Some people had multiple ballots mailed to their address for previous residents.

Vote, forge a signature that will probably not get matched, and there you have a vote.

For California, who knows how many EXTRA ballots were floating around

a reply to: Freeborn

a reply to: Freeborn

I don’t recall saying one way or the other in regards to what I see around me happening trump no trump Biden no Biden (iPhone auto correct capitalized and de capitalized the names no doing on my behalf and I won’t change it) I think something is happening around people that pay attention we all can agree is unsatisfactory.

originally posted by: djz3ro
a reply to: timequake

You keep saying FACT while there are no facts, merely speculation. But let's see where the investigations go, lots of dead ends so far.

It is a fact that votes were switch due to the voting machines. This is not in dispute. The dispute is in regards to whether or not it was intentional or just a glitch or Human error.

a reply to: brianrook

You wouldn't need to keep that many people quiet if it was the voting machine itself that was cheating. Just a handful of people which probably aren't even in the US and don't care either way. They get a nice "bonus" check and told to keep quiet and that's the end of it.