MAGeeky Simulation #1 (for the particular enlightenment of NPR & its quasi-"reporter" Shannon Bond)
November 5, 2022: Make America Geeky Again Solutions (MAGeeky Engineer Berman for Congress) releases Berman's javascript simulation (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ) that lets people simulate, for themselves, random sequences of the 72 Wisconsin counties reporting with a running total of their results as each county reports, in a simulated 2020 election night (an example, below).
November 5, 2022: Make America Geeky Again Solutions (MAGeeky Engineer Berman for Congress) releases Berman's javascript simulation (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ) that lets people simulate, for themselves, random sequences of the 72 Wisconsin counties reporting with a running total of their results as each county reports, in a simulated 2020 election night (an example, below).
"The simulation essentially confirms that the 2020 Wisconsin election-night returns seen on internet and TV were not plausible," says Berman. "I had written a couple of blog entries two years ago (On Wisconsin/Off Wisconsin) showing intuitively that the broadcast election returns were flatly inconsistent with the county-by-county vote counts. I later spoke with the Wisconsin Election Commission and learned that Wisconsin law mandates a system where each of the 72 counties reports its vote count on its website, but there is no central summing point where the votes are officially added up for broadcast. This meant there was a great likelihood that the broadcast results were not at all accurate, which was consistent with what I saw on the internet."
"The simulation essentially confirms that the 2020 Wisconsin election-night returns seen on internet and TV were not plausible," says Berman. "I had written a couple of blog entries two years ago (On Wisconsin/Off Wisconsin) showing intuitively that the broadcast election returns were flatly inconsistent with the county-by-county vote counts. I later spoke with the Wisconsin Election Commission and learned that Wisconsin law mandates a system where each of the 72 counties reports its vote count on its website, but there is no central summing point where the votes are officially added up for broadcast. This meant there was a great likelihood that the broadcast results were not at all accurate, which was consistent with what I saw on the internet."
Berman adds, "In my blog, I wrote that the Wisconsin election returns were 'extremely unlikely without some 'management,' manipulation, or cooking of the books. You simply cannot sample from ballot boxes with widely varying percentages and remain at nearly unchanged percentages without many remarkable coincidences.' " And a little research, with Berman's questioning the Wisconsin Commission, bore this out: "I said that the broadcast results seem to be garbage, then. The response was that some people call them that."
Berman adds, "In my blog, I wrote that the Wisconsin election returns were 'extremely unlikely without some 'management,' manipulation, or cooking of the books. You simply cannot sample from ballot boxes with widely varying percentages and remain at nearly unchanged percentages without many remarkable coincidences.' " And a little research, with Berman's questioning the Wisconsin Commission, bore this out: "I said that the broadcast results seem to be garbage, then. The response was that some people call them that."
Berman decided to write his "little javascript simulation for the particular benefit of Shannon Bond, an NPR reporter, whose reports about 'false information' and 'conspiracy theories' provoke nausea after a brief time," says Berman. "The point is not that Wisconsin necessarily had an actually fraudulent vote count because I don't know how to prove or disprove that. The computational "proof" [(a Monte Carlo simulation)] here is that the broadcast Wisconsin election returns were so improbable as to be essentially impossible—just by looking at them and the official county-by-county returns that were released a couple of weeks later." And Berman writes (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ) that "it was completely reasonable to doubt the legitimacy of the highly-improbable 2020 Wisconsin returns, as they appeared on TV/internet (this was intuitively clear on election night, as well); and the broadcast returns were probably garbage due to Wisconsin's decentralized ("Veg-O-Matic") vote-count statute. But reaching the 'garbage' conclusion takes some analysis and research — things the news media, including NPR, lack. (Yet another reason for seeing that no public money whatsoever funds NPR or its affiliates.)"
Berman decided to write his "little javascript simulation for the particular benefit of Shannon Bond, an NPR reporter, whose reports about 'false information' and 'conspiracy theories' provoke nausea after a brief time," says Berman. "The point is not that Wisconsin necessarily had an actually fraudulent vote count because I don't know how to prove or disprove that. The computational "proof" [(a Monte Carlo simulation)] here is that the broadcast Wisconsin election returns were so improbable as to be essentially impossible—just by looking at them and the official county-by-county returns that were released a couple of weeks later." And Berman writes (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ) that "it was completely reasonable to doubt the legitimacy of the highly-improbable 2020 Wisconsin returns, as they appeared on TV/internet (this was intuitively clear on election night, as well); and the broadcast returns were probably garbage due to Wisconsin's decentralized ("Veg-O-Matic") vote-count statute. But reaching the 'garbage' conclusion takes some analysis and research — things the news media, including NPR, lack. (Yet another reason for seeing that no public money whatsoever funds NPR or its affiliates.)"
This is Berman's particular message to NPR and Shannon Bond, who, in Berman's view, are state propaganda mouthpieces incapable of any independent observation and thought. "My point is that real reporters and commentators would look at the data displayed on their boards and notice the anomalies. That they do not is ample reason to arouse at least some suspicion about everything they report. This is not a 'conspiracy theory.' It's called the scientific method: noticing a pattern, asking a question, and demanding an answer."
This is Berman's particular message to NPR and Shannon Bond, who, in Berman's view, are state propaganda mouthpieces incapable of any independent observation and thought. "My point is that real reporters and commentators would look at the data displayed on their boards and notice the anomalies. That they do not is ample reason to arouse at least some suspicion about everything they report. This is not a 'conspiracy theory.' It's called the scientific method: noticing a pattern, asking a question, and demanding an answer."
A refreshed webpage shows a new random sequence of the 72 Wisconsin counties, with each county's Trump/Biden ratio added to a running sum expressed as cumulative T/B. As explained on the webpage (with further explanation on an additional linked page): "the simulation addresses the specific question: is there any reporting sequence of counties, which gives the narrow Wisconsin T/B spread (ratio) seen throughout the election-night broadcast? It is very unlikely that there is any such sequence."
A refreshed webpage shows a new random sequence of the 72 Wisconsin counties, with each county's Trump/Biden ratio added to a running sum expressed as cumulative T/B. As explained on the webpage (with further explanation on an additional linked page): "the simulation addresses the specific question: is there any reporting sequence of counties, which gives the narrow Wisconsin T/B spread (ratio) seen throughout the election-night broadcast? It is very unlikely that there is any such sequence."
"[T]his is NOT an assertion that Trump was the actual winner," Berman emphasizes (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ). "But in a close race like Wisconsin's, where the nearly-unchanging vote returns are implausible, it is reasonable and natural for an observer to wonder, as scientists do when they see an apparent contradiction, what the heck is going on? To call any such doubt a 'conspiracy theory' shows that the media 'have become an Orwell-Huxley-Kafka amalgam that uses the word, 'LIE,' in a repetitive chant to stifle any questioning of media-deemed 'valid' government information."
"[T]his is NOT an assertion that Trump was the actual winner," Berman emphasizes (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ). "But in a close race like Wisconsin's, where the nearly-unchanging vote returns are implausible, it is reasonable and natural for an observer to wonder, as scientists do when they see an apparent contradiction, what the heck is going on? To call any such doubt a 'conspiracy theory' shows that the media 'have become an Orwell-Huxley-Kafka amalgam that uses the word, 'LIE,' in a repetitive chant to stifle any questioning of media-deemed 'valid' government information."
"It's quite amazing what the 'vigorous' Fourth Estate has become—a bunch of lazy, preening, rubber stamps for government information," adds Berman.
"It's quite amazing what the 'vigorous' Fourth Estate has become—a bunch of lazy, preening, rubber stamps for government information," adds Berman.
Berman continues (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ): "This is an assertion that there was ample statistical basis for a "conspiracy theory" or whatever you want to call monkeying around with votes as shown in the broadcast WI election returns. This [Berman's Make America Geeky Again] project is about actual analysis and actual debate—things long absent from the DC-NY nucleus of government-media group think (and very much including the courts) with its unthinking jargonistic patter of 'baseless' this or that."
Berman continues (at https://bulloney.com/wv.html ): "This is an assertion that there was ample statistical basis for a "conspiracy theory" or whatever you want to call monkeying around with votes as shown in the broadcast WI election returns. This [Berman's Make America Geeky Again] project is about actual analysis and actual debate—things long absent from the DC-NY nucleus of government-media group think (and very much including the courts) with its unthinking jargonistic patter of 'baseless' this or that."
Berman adds, "that the anomalous Wisconsin results are explainable by the distributed vote-count system doesn't relieve the media from their abject failure to question data or their failure to understand how people can reasonably become suspicious of everything out of the unquestioning media, which, in particular, take a hands off approach to judges—the large majority of whom are incompetent and/or corrupt—as Berman is demonstrating in his compilation of data. The data already include the Minneapolis and 8th Circuit protection racket (one of many), where—six weeks before George Floyd's death—Berman identified a "military regime" controlled by the petty dictator Kevin S. Burke, "a simpleton fraud of a judge who had to concoct an obvious scam to get his Minneapolis lawyer-pals off the hook." This, together with Mr. Floyd's death, was the impetus for Berman's political project that has evolved into Make America Geeky Again.
Berman adds, "that the anomalous Wisconsin results are explainable by the distributed vote-count system doesn't relieve the media from their abject failure to question data or their failure to understand how people can reasonably become suspicious of everything out of the unquestioning media, which, in particular, take a hands off approach to judges—the large majority of whom are incompetent and/or corrupt—as Berman is demonstrating in his compilation of data. The data already include the Minneapolis and 8th Circuit protection racket (one of many), where—six weeks before George Floyd's death—Berman identified a "military regime" controlled by the petty dictator Kevin S. Burke, "a simpleton fraud of a judge who had to concoct an obvious scam to get his Minneapolis lawyer-pals off the hook." This, together with Mr. Floyd's death, was the impetus for Berman's political project that has evolved into Make America Geeky Again.
The simulation is run each time the webpage ( https://bulloney.com/wv.html ) is refreshed—generating a new random sequence of counties. "You can refresh the page as much as you like and see for yourself that the wide spread of simulated, cumulative T/B ratios looks nothing like the narrow spread displayed on election night 2020 (.98<T/B<1.1 a Trump lead of no more than ~5% until the reversal very near the end for a .98 Biden win). I documented the WI election returns and questioned them here at On Wisconsin/Off Wisconsin "
The simulation is run each time the webpage ( https://bulloney.com/wv.html ) is refreshed—generating a new random sequence of counties. "You can refresh the page as much as you like and see for yourself that the wide spread of simulated, cumulative T/B ratios looks nothing like the narrow spread displayed on election night 2020 (.98<T/B<1.1 a Trump lead of no more than ~5% until the reversal very near the end for a .98 Biden win). I documented the WI election returns and questioned them here at On Wisconsin/Off Wisconsin "
County Vote T/B | Ratio | Running Sum up to and including this County (Largest counties in red) REFRESH PAGE for a new random sequence
County Vote T/B | Ratio | Running Sum up to and including this County (Largest counties in red) REFRESH PAGE for a new random sequence
3285/1721______ ratio 1.9__ cumulative ratio 1.9__ FOREST
3285/1721______ ratio 1.9__ cumulative ratio 1.9__ FOREST
5394/3032______ ratio 1.77_ cumulative ratio 1.82_ PRICE
5394/3032______ ratio 1.77_ cumulative ratio 1.82_ PRICE
9752/10044_____ ratio 0.97_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ DOOR
9752/10044_____ ratio 0.97_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ DOOR
5719/3239______ ratio 1.76_ cumulative ratio 1.33_ MARQUETTE
5719/3239______ ratio 1.76_ cumulative ratio 1.33_ MARQUETTE
33851/22789____ ratio 1.48_ cumulative ratio 1.42_ WALWORTH
33851/22789____ ratio 1.48_ cumulative ratio 1.42_ WALWORTH
8833/6285______ ratio 1.4__ cumulative ratio 1.41_ TREMPEALEAU
8833/6285______ ratio 1.4__ cumulative ratio 1.41_ TREMPEALEAU
2438/1533______ ratio 1.59_ cumulative ratio 1.42_ IRON
2438/1533______ ratio 1.59_ cumulative ratio 1.42_ IRON
60237/26650____ ratio 2.26_ cumulative ratio 1.72_ WASHINGTON
60237/26650____ ratio 2.26_ cumulative ratio 1.72_ WASHINGTON
58385/47667____ ratio 1.22_ cumulative ratio 1.52_ OUTAGAMIE
58385/47667____ ratio 1.22_ cumulative ratio 1.52_ OUTAGAMIE
75871/65511____ ratio 1.15_ cumulative ratio 1.39_ BROWN
75871/65511____ ratio 1.15_ cumulative ratio 1.39_ BROWN
17493/18108____ ratio 0.96_ cumulative ratio 1.36_ SAUK
17493/18108____ ratio 0.96_ cumulative ratio 1.36_ SAUK
12815/9796_____ ratio 1.3__ cumulative ratio 1.35_ PIERCE
12815/9796_____ ratio 1.3__ cumulative ratio 1.35_ PIERCE
4617/6147______ ratio 0.75_ cumulative ratio 1.34_ BAYFIELD
4617/6147______ ratio 0.75_ cumulative ratio 1.34_ BAYFIELD
9261/5903______ ratio 1.56_ cumulative ratio 1.34_ VILAS
9261/5903______ ratio 1.56_ cumulative ratio 1.34_ VILAS
13671/10105____ ratio 1.35_ cumulative ratio 1.34_ ONEIDA
13671/10105____ ratio 1.35_ cumulative ratio 1.34_ ONEIDA
24308/16365____ ratio 1.48_ cumulative ratio 1.35_ WOOD
24308/16365____ ratio 1.48_ cumulative ratio 1.35_ WOOD
28684/37846____ ratio 0.75_ cumulative ratio 1.27_ LA CROSSE
28684/37846____ ratio 0.75_ cumulative ratio 1.27_ LA CROSSE
5909/7828______ ratio 0.75_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ IOWA
5909/7828______ ratio 0.75_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ IOWA
4821/3647______ ratio 1.32_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ LAFAYETTE
4821/3647______ ratio 1.32_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ LAFAYETTE
37609/27101____ ratio 1.38_ cumulative ratio 1.27_ SHEBOYGAN
37609/27101____ ratio 1.38_ cumulative ratio 1.27_ SHEBOYGAN
10923/13218____ ratio 0.82_ cumulative ratio 1.25_ DOUGLAS
10923/13218____ ratio 0.82_ cumulative ratio 1.25_ DOUGLAS
44972/42193____ ratio 1.06_ cumulative ratio 1.23_ KENOSHA
44972/42193____ ratio 1.06_ cumulative ratio 1.23_ KENOSHA
7330/3704______ ratio 1.97_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ LANGLADE
7330/3704______ ratio 1.97_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ LANGLADE
27218/16818____ ratio 1.61_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ MANITOWOC
27218/16818____ ratio 1.61_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ MANITOWOC
2584/1489______ ratio 1.73_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ PEPIN
2584/1489______ ratio 1.73_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ PEPIN
16927/16410____ ratio 1.03_ cumulative ratio 1.25_ COLUMBIA
16927/16410____ ratio 1.03_ cumulative ratio 1.25_ COLUMBIA
44624/30808____ ratio 1.44_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ MARATHON
44624/30808____ ratio 1.44_ cumulative ratio 1.26_ MARATHON
25341/31620____ ratio 0.8__ cumulative ratio 1.23_ EAU CLAIRE
25341/31620____ ratio 0.8__ cumulative ratio 1.23_ EAU CLAIRE
16611/9370_____ ratio 1.77_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ POLK
16611/9370_____ ratio 1.77_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ POLK
13173/9897_____ ratio 1.33_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ DUNN
13173/9897_____ ratio 1.33_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ DUNN
5909/4498______ ratio 1.31_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ SAWYER
5909/4498______ ratio 1.31_ cumulative ratio 1.24_ SAWYER
78794/260121___ ratio 0.3__ cumulative ratio 0.92_ DANE
78794/260121___ ratio 0.3__ cumulative ratio 0.92_ DANE
6462/3569______ ratio 1.81_ cumulative ratio 0.93_ BURNETT
6462/3569______ ratio 1.81_ cumulative ratio 0.93_ BURNETT
7362/4329______ ratio 1.7__ cumulative ratio 0.93_ ADAMS
7362/4329______ ratio 1.7__ cumulative ratio 0.93_ ADAMS
10002/4524_____ ratio 2.21_ cumulative ratio 0.94_ CLARK
10002/4524_____ ratio 2.21_ cumulative ratio 0.94_ CLARK
134482/317527__ ratio 0.42_ cumulative ratio 0.79_ MILWAUKEE
134482/317527__ ratio 0.42_ cumulative ratio 0.79_ MILWAUKEE
33912/26517____ ratio 1.27_ cumulative ratio 0.8__ OZAUKEE
33912/26517____ ratio 1.27_ cumulative ratio 0.8__ OZAUKEE
4834/2860______ ratio 1.69_ cumulative ratio 0.8__ BUFFALO
4834/2860______ ratio 1.69_ cumulative ratio 0.8__ BUFFALO
21317/13983____ ratio 1.52_ cumulative ratio 0.81_ CHIPPEWA
21317/13983____ ratio 1.52_ cumulative ratio 0.81_ CHIPPEWA
278/1303_______ ratio 0.21_ cumulative ratio 0.81_ MENOMINEE
278/1303_______ ratio 0.21_ cumulative ratio 0.81_ MENOMINEE
16226/6715_____ ratio 2.41_ cumulative ratio 0.82_ OCONTO
16226/6715_____ ratio 2.41_ cumulative ratio 0.82_ OCONTO
7657/2693______ ratio 2.84_ cumulative ratio 0.83_ TAYLOR
7657/2693______ ratio 2.84_ cumulative ratio 0.83_ TAYLOR
8218/7457______ ratio 1.1__ cumulative ratio 0.83_ VERNON
8218/7457______ ratio 1.1__ cumulative ratio 0.83_ VERNON
18952/9703_____ ratio 1.95_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ WAUPACA
18952/9703_____ ratio 1.95_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ WAUPACA
5257/2517______ ratio 2.08_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ RUSK
5257/2517______ ratio 2.08_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ RUSK
4620/3953______ ratio 1.16_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ CRAWFORD
4620/3953______ ratio 1.16_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ CRAWFORD
5791/4256______ ratio 1.36_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ JACKSON
5791/4256______ ratio 1.36_ cumulative ratio 0.84_ JACKSON
15173/7131_____ ratio 2.12_ cumulative ratio 0.85_ SHAWANO
15173/7131_____ ratio 2.12_ cumulative ratio 0.85_ SHAWANO
10169/10851____ ratio 0.93_ cumulative ratio 0.85_ GREEN
10169/10851____ ratio 0.93_ cumulative ratio 0.85_ GREEN
32199/23190____ ratio 1.38_ cumulative ratio 0.86_ ST. CROIX
32199/23190____ ratio 1.38_ cumulative ratio 0.86_ ST. CROIX
4871/3995______ ratio 1.21_ cumulative ratio 0.86_ RICHLAND
4871/3995______ ratio 1.21_ cumulative ratio 0.86_ RICHLAND
7168/3344______ ratio 2.14_ cumulative ratio 0.87_ GREEN LAKE
7168/3344______ ratio 2.14_ cumulative ratio 0.87_ GREEN LAKE
27208/19904____ ratio 1.36_ cumulative ratio 0.87_ JEFFERSON
27208/19904____ ratio 1.36_ cumulative ratio 0.87_ JEFFERSON
6334/3867______ ratio 1.63_ cumulative ratio 0.88_ WASHBURN
6334/3867______ ratio 1.63_ cumulative ratio 0.88_ WASHBURN
15304/7366_____ ratio 2.07_ cumulative ratio 0.88_ MARINETTE
15304/7366_____ ratio 2.07_ cumulative ratio 0.88_ MARINETTE
10017/6261_____ ratio 1.59_ cumulative ratio 0.89_ LINCOLN
10017/6261_____ ratio 1.59_ cumulative ratio 0.89_ LINCOLN
37138/46658____ ratio 0.79_ cumulative ratio 0.88_ ROCK
37138/46658____ ratio 0.79_ cumulative ratio 0.88_ ROCK
54479/50159____ ratio 1.08_ cumulative ratio 0.89_ RACINE
54479/50159____ ratio 1.08_ cumulative ratio 0.89_ RACINE
15803/9194_____ ratio 1.71_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ BARRON
15803/9194_____ ratio 1.71_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ BARRON
2133/781_______ ratio 2.73_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ FLORENCE
2133/781_______ ratio 2.73_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ FLORENCE
14142/10998____ ratio 1.28_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ GRANT
14142/10998____ ratio 1.28_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ GRANT
19299/20428____ ratio 0.94_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ PORTAGE
19299/20428____ ratio 0.94_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ PORTAGE
9016/4388______ ratio 2.05_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ WAUSHARA
9016/4388______ ratio 2.05_ cumulative ratio 0.9__ WAUSHARA
3841/4801______ ratio 0.8__ cumulative ratio 0.9__ ASHLAND
3841/4801______ ratio 0.8__ cumulative ratio 0.9__ ASHLAND
8749/4746______ ratio 1.84_ cumulative ratio 0.91_ JUNEAU
8749/4746______ ratio 1.84_ cumulative ratio 0.91_ JUNEAU
18156/12116____ ratio 1.49_ cumulative ratio 0.91_ CALUMET
18156/12116____ ratio 1.49_ cumulative ratio 0.91_ CALUMET
35754/20588____ ratio 1.73_ cumulative ratio 0.92_ FOND DU LAC
35754/20588____ ratio 1.73_ cumulative ratio 0.92_ FOND DU LAC
13775/8433_____ ratio 1.63_ cumulative ratio 0.93_ MONROE
13775/8433_____ ratio 1.63_ cumulative ratio 0.93_ MONROE
159649/103906__ ratio 1.53_ cumulative ratio 0.97_ WAUKESHA
159649/103906__ ratio 1.53_ cumulative ratio 0.97_ WAUKESHA
47796/44060____ ratio 1.08_ cumulative ratio 0.97_ WINNEBAGO
47796/44060____ ratio 1.08_ cumulative ratio 0.97_ WINNEBAGO
31355/16356____ ratio 1.91_ cumulative ratio 0.98_ DODGE
31355/16356____ ratio 1.91_ cumulative ratio 0.98_ DODGE
7927/3976______ ratio 1.99_ cumulative ratio 0.98_ KEWAUNEE
7927/3976______ ratio 1.99_ cumulative ratio 0.98_ KEWAUNEE
The simulation essentially "proves" that no sequence exists, which can be sampled to yield the election-night returns that were displayed .
The simulation essentially "proves" that no sequence exists, which can be sampled to yield the election-night returns that were displayed .