you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Edward Solomon is making an error in his application of Benford's Law. At certain quantities, not all data sets are suitable. Election precincts are at those quantities.

There can be a trillion features in an election. If one of those features has a 1 in a million chance of happening, you will find many such seemly impossible features. A real Mathematician knows this well before entering graduate school. I believe this so called "mathematician" took a conclusion and worked his way backward. That is not real math. You look for 2+2=? rather than that verify that 2+2=3.

In 2016, Trump barely beat Hillary Clinton. Green party votes added to democrats votes was greater than Trump votes. Last time, libtards became way less prone to voting for the Green Party because they were fed up with Trump.

The reality is Trump failed on covid and many voters recognized that. The election results didn't deviate much from the polling. To the extent it did deviate from the polling, it deviated in favor of Trump. If anybody conspired to cheat in this election, it was someone on the Trump team.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/984802?seq=1

[–]ValiantThorr 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

When did he mention Benford's law?

*Agree that Benford's law has been misused in discussing irregularities