Showing posts with label Statistical abnormalities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Statistical abnormalities. Show all posts

Monday, November 30, 2020

5 statistical abnormalities from the election

Since the election, an ever growing list of statistical implausibilities has been uncovered. Here are a few more statistical abnormalities:

1) Record low number of counties for Biden


In 2012, Obama set an all-time record low for the number of counties won in a presidential election with 689 of the 3,141 counties in the U.S. That's 22% of all counties for a total of 66 million votes.

In 2020, Joe Biden won only 524 counties, which is only 17% of all counties. Yet he allegedly had 14 million more votes than Obama.

That means Joe Biden supposedly received 14 million more votes than Obama in 2012 despite losing 165 more counties that Obama did.

Saturday, November 28, 2020

Michigan 2020 Voting Analysis Report highlights statistical implausibilities in Monroe County

The National Pulse has highlighted a recently published 'Michigan 2020 Voting Analysis Report' produced by 'unpaid citizens and volunteer experts' which reveals numerous examples of statistical voting abnormalities in Michigan.

One of the most statistically implausible trends highlighted in the report, is the ratio of democrat absentee ballots to Republican absentee ballots in Monroe County. The report explains, 'the percentage of democratic absentee voters exceeds the percentage of Republican absentee voters in every precinct. Even more remarkable - and unbelievable - these two independent variables appear to track one another.'

As you can see from the graph below, the percentage of democrat absentee ballots in every precinct of Monroe County does indeed track the percentage of Republican absentee ballots.


It's almost as if someone has taken the Republican ballot percentages and simply added 30% to get the democrat ballot percentages. The chances of absentee ballots for democrats and Republicans in every precinct following such an identical ratio is ridiculously implausible, and looks very much like the work of an algorithm.

Related Posts