Embedded Files
On Wisconsin/Off Wisconsin
On Wisconsin/Off Wisconsin
January 6, 2021: Has anybody 'splained this to Ricky? These screen captures are from the tuber video: Election Night 2020: Coverage of Trump, Biden and key races | USA TODAY. (There's more than one video, but my very smart audience can figure this out.) You can see the time codes at the bottoms of the images, so you can check this information for yourselves. The captures are in pairs, 2 seconds apart so as to show the transitions -- except for the last one where Biden is declared the winner by 0.7% (49.6%(B) to 48.9%(T)) with 5% of the votes remaining. Unless there were delays in updating the screen (and there may well have been), that is very odd. And if the lead did in fact go to Biden sometime near the 95% vote-count and then finished with essentially the same percentages, that is extremely odd and is an anomaly that needs to be explained when one looks at the variations in the lead over the evening.
January 6, 2021: Has anybody 'splained this to Ricky? These screen captures are from the tuber video: Election Night 2020: Coverage of Trump, Biden and key races | USA TODAY. (There's more than one video, but my very smart audience can figure this out.) You can see the time codes at the bottoms of the images, so you can check this information for yourselves. The captures are in pairs, 2 seconds apart so as to show the transitions -- except for the last one where Biden is declared the winner by 0.7% (49.6%(B) to 48.9%(T)) with 5% of the votes remaining. Unless there were delays in updating the screen (and there may well have been), that is very odd. And if the lead did in fact go to Biden sometime near the 95% vote-count and then finished with essentially the same percentages, that is extremely odd and is an anomaly that needs to be explained when one looks at the variations in the lead over the evening.
The following list shows data transitions in the Wisconsin voting percentages: And there are questions about Michigan and Pennsylvania too, but I don't have time for them right now — 46 e-votes that would indeed reverse the overall winner. (I was watching those three states on Nov. 3 -- which were enough for a win -- and I thought Trump had them when I fell asleep; I think many people saw the same thing.) But enough strangeness in one sizable and pivotal state is enough for an audit; and that would make democracy much "healthier" (assuming it's healthy at all and can be in the first place). You know, ignoring some seemingly small symptom that may turn out to be a huge deal is the ticket for health down the drain. So, what am I missing, Lucy...and Ben Sasse and John Thune, in particular?
The following list shows data transitions in the Wisconsin voting percentages: And there are questions about Michigan and Pennsylvania too, but I don't have time for them right now — 46 e-votes that would indeed reverse the overall winner. (I was watching those three states on Nov. 3 -- which were enough for a win -- and I thought Trump had them when I fell asleep; I think many people saw the same thing.) But enough strangeness in one sizable and pivotal state is enough for an audit; and that would make democracy much "healthier" (assuming it's healthy at all and can be in the first place). You know, ignoring some seemingly small symptom that may turn out to be a huge deal is the ticket for health down the drain. So, what am I missing, Lucy...and Ben Sasse and John Thune, in particular?
Also, in the first transition, (timecode 53:30 to 53:32), Trump drops by 1.7% and Biden gains by 1.7%. The vote count goes from 94 to 95%. Assuming these numbers are accurate -- and rounded off accurately too -- a transition from 94% to 95% could be a 2% transition from 93.5 to 95.5 (never mind round-up/down). That would mean that Biden got 85% (or more) of that 2% tranche of votes. And there was a 0.1% adjustment upward for Trump at 56:31-33, but that's still a very big haul that was not repeated if in fact that percentage stayed the same until the end. And if some large tranches for Biden occurred during that final 5%, some large tranches had to have also occurred for Trump in order to have a final of 0.7%. This isn't complicated.
Also, in the first transition, (timecode 53:30 to 53:32), Trump drops by 1.7% and Biden gains by 1.7%. The vote count goes from 94 to 95%. Assuming these numbers are accurate -- and rounded off accurately too -- a transition from 94% to 95% could be a 2% transition from 93.5 to 95.5 (never mind round-up/down). That would mean that Biden got 85% (or more) of that 2% tranche of votes. And there was a 0.1% adjustment upward for Trump at 56:31-33, but that's still a very big haul that was not repeated if in fact that percentage stayed the same until the end. And if some large tranches for Biden occurred during that final 5%, some large tranches had to have also occurred for Trump in order to have a final of 0.7%. This isn't complicated.
Perhaps another video has more transitions and actual vote numbers. Perhaps there should be an audit, Ben (who got in the front door of my political pantheon with his "bullshit" remark) and John Thune? The transitions here -- and the finish -- smell fishy, to say the least; and may be "bullshit," Ben. And you non-lawyers, Ben and Sen. Thune, are getting outclassed by lawyers Hawley and Cruz. This is not good. Hawley and Cruz are asking questions. Asking questions, debate, and putting votes on the record are the core of a "healthy" democracy, assuming there is such a thing. (And what I mean is the people are suckered; so don't be a sucker, as my "slogan" goes.)
Perhaps another video has more transitions and actual vote numbers. Perhaps there should be an audit, Ben (who got in the front door of my political pantheon with his "bullshit" remark) and John Thune? The transitions here -- and the finish -- smell fishy, to say the least; and may be "bullshit," Ben. And you non-lawyers, Ben and Sen. Thune, are getting outclassed by lawyers Hawley and Cruz. This is not good. Hawley and Cruz are asking questions. Asking questions, debate, and putting votes on the record are the core of a "healthy" democracy, assuming there is such a thing. (And what I mean is the people are suckered; so don't be a sucker, as my "slogan" goes.)
Again, if Biden did in fact take the lead by 0.3% with 94-95% counted -- and finished at 0.7% especially with little or no fluctuation in his lead during the remaining 5% -- that is extremely difficult to believe...especially if one gives credence to this "blue shift" theory where large counties report late (Dane, 340k; Milwaukee, 457k; both 70-75% Biden...and Waukesha 260k 60% Trump.
Again, if Biden did in fact take the lead by 0.3% with 94-95% counted -- and finished at 0.7% especially with little or no fluctuation in his lead during the remaining 5% -- that is extremely difficult to believe...especially if one gives credence to this "blue shift" theory where large counties report late (Dane, 340k; Milwaukee, 457k; both 70-75% Biden...and Waukesha 260k 60% Trump.
53:30 (4:31am update) ... 51.1(T) 47.4(B) 94% of votes
53:30 (4:31am update) ... 51.1(T) 47.4(B) 94% of votes
53:32 (4:33am update) ... 49.7(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
53:32 (4:33am update) ... 49.7(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
56:31 (4:34am update) ... 49.7(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
56:31 (4:34am update) ... 49.7(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
56:33 (4:36am update) ... 49.8(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
56:33 (4:36am update) ... 49.8(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
59:32 (4:36am update) ... 49.8(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
59:32 (4:36am update) ... 49.8(T) 48.8(B) 95% of votes
59:34 (4:39am update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 95% of votes
59:34 (4:39am update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 95% of votes
3:31:50 (7:10am update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 95% of votes
3:31:50 (7:10am update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 95% of votes
3:31:52 (7:11am update) ... 48.9(T) 49.6(B) 95% of votes
3:31:52 (7:11am update) ... 48.9(T) 49.6(B) 95% of votes
5:39:01 (9:17am update) ... 48.9(T) 49.6(B) 95% of votes
5:39:01 (9:17am update) ... 48.9(T) 49.6(B) 95% of votes
5:39:03 (9:17am update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 94% of votes
5:39:03 (9:17am update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 94% of votes
6.07.03 (9:26am last update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 94% of votes
6.07.03 (9:26am last update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 94% of votes
6:07:05 (9:46am new update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 95% of votes
6:07:05 (9:46am new update) ... 49.1(T) 49.4(B) 95% of votes
10.39.34 (2:18pm new update) ... 48.9%(T) 49.6(B) 95%, Biden declared winner
10.39.34 (2:18pm new update) ... 48.9%(T) 49.6(B) 95%, Biden declared winner
About John: Engineer - electronic hardware design and test; MSEE Stanford/Ginzton Lab-applied physics; B.A. Oberlin College, physics, math. email: john4midwest@gmail.com .
The More On Wisconsin; The More Off Wisconsin...
The More On Wisconsin; The More Off Wisconsin...
January 8, 2021: ... appears to me. It's hard to find intermediate reporting results, especially on Wisconsin, and I've been really busy with various other things, including battles.
January 8, 2021: ... appears to me. It's hard to find intermediate reporting results, especially on Wisconsin, and I've been really busy with various other things, including battles.
First, I want to say something about statistics (and at a later time, damn statistics and Alan Greenspan statistics). Statistics don't lie; lousy statisticians do. I've mentioned my dad several times and his crippled, shrunken, atrophied, shortened right arm from polio. I think he had a form of perfect pitch. He didn't read music or know anything theoretical about it. He knew its emotional impact on him. But from my earliest memories, he would come in the front door humming/singing, for example, Marche Slave (you can listen to it on Tuber) or any of dozens of pieces, including popular pieces from his generation. He would sit down at the upright piano, and with his left hand immediately play the tune (in an octave). And as I remember, with very few exceptions, he would play in the exact key in which he was humming. Occasionally he would shift the key slightly to get to where he had been humming, but it was quick and not much of a shift. In later years, thinking back, I realized he probably had this form of perfect pitch. This was a statistical inference. I didn't need to analyze it in any more detail; I was quite confident because he matched the key he was humming a high percentage of the time. I've got some more data on Wisconsin voting. The statistics are very fishy.
First, I want to say something about statistics (and at a later time, damn statistics and Alan Greenspan statistics). Statistics don't lie; lousy statisticians do. I've mentioned my dad several times and his crippled, shrunken, atrophied, shortened right arm from polio. I think he had a form of perfect pitch. He didn't read music or know anything theoretical about it. He knew its emotional impact on him. But from my earliest memories, he would come in the front door humming/singing, for example, Marche Slave (you can listen to it on Tuber) or any of dozens of pieces, including popular pieces from his generation. He would sit down at the upright piano, and with his left hand immediately play the tune (in an octave). And as I remember, with very few exceptions, he would play in the exact key in which he was humming. Occasionally he would shift the key slightly to get to where he had been humming, but it was quick and not much of a shift. In later years, thinking back, I realized he probably had this form of perfect pitch. This was a statistical inference. I didn't need to analyze it in any more detail; I was quite confident because he matched the key he was humming a high percentage of the time. I've got some more data on Wisconsin voting. The statistics are very fishy.
Next, I want to repeat some things I wrote up the page:
Next, I want to repeat some things I wrote up the page:
September 13, 2020: I do not and will not support violence. I am far more conservative than the Federalist Society. True conservatives are very skeptical of monopolies. I am extremely skeptical of them. (There are some lawyers, who don't know me, who would probably chuckle. As I said, I'm itchin' for a real, open debate.)
September 13, 2020: I do not and will not support violence. I am far more conservative than the Federalist Society. True conservatives are very skeptical of monopolies. I am extremely skeptical of them. (There are some lawyers, who don't know me, who would probably chuckle. As I said, I'm itchin' for a real, open debate.)
I want to add here that I had forgotten that that the Federalist Society considers itself consisting of, at least in part, "libertarians." ("The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians." https://fedsoc.org/about-us#FAQ ) This is "bullshit" of the "bullshittiest" order. Libertarians are (at least in theory) as anti -government-monopoly as you get. The legal Dues Process monopoly is the root cause of our problems (along with unlimited money printing), and for a lawyer to call him or herself a "libertarian, without at least stridently -- if not vituperatively -- pushing for a disbarring of the bar -- i.e. deep six-ing the monopolistic abomination -- is total "bullshit." I put "bullshit" in quotation marks, because I'm quoting Ben Sasse, who is on the verge of getting thrown out on his "dumbass" from the front foyer of my political pantheon (and I think you will care at some point, Ben). As I've noted, Ron Paul and Paul Tsongas share their own antechamber in the pantheon, and Sasse got in the door with his "bullshit" remark; but that's not all that far into the pantheon. I read Ben's "NPR" interview transcript, and he's nearly full of "bullshit;" and getting bullshittier. I also read his recent asseoir-visage posting (it's French, you can look it up), and there's more "bullshit."
I want to add here that I had forgotten that that the Federalist Society considers itself consisting of, at least in part, "libertarians." ("The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians." https://fedsoc.org/about-us#FAQ ) This is "bullshit" of the "bullshittiest" order. Libertarians are (at least in theory) as anti -government-monopoly as you get. The legal Dues Process monopoly is the root cause of our problems (along with unlimited money printing), and for a lawyer to call him or herself a "libertarian, without at least stridently -- if not vituperatively -- pushing for a disbarring of the bar -- i.e. deep six-ing the monopolistic abomination -- is total "bullshit." I put "bullshit" in quotation marks, because I'm quoting Ben Sasse, who is on the verge of getting thrown out on his "dumbass" from the front foyer of my political pantheon (and I think you will care at some point, Ben). As I've noted, Ron Paul and Paul Tsongas share their own antechamber in the pantheon, and Sasse got in the door with his "bullshit" remark; but that's not all that far into the pantheon. I read Ben's "NPR" interview transcript, and he's nearly full of "bullshit;" and getting bullshittier. I also read his recent asseoir-visage posting (it's French, you can look it up), and there's more "bullshit."
Again, from up the page:
Again, from up the page:
"I have said before -- and I'll repeat -- that I do NOT in any way support or suggest violence against judges or lawyers (and I'm not winking with any under-the-table message or anything). No, no, no, no violence. Many of these lawyers and judges are the devil or worse, but what they deserve is to have to truly compete -- without their monopoly bailing them out. As I've quoted Bobby Fischer: you want to see them squirm. A truly free market is brutal, and they will pay the price in a truly-free legal market."
"I have said before -- and I'll repeat -- that I do NOT in any way support or suggest violence against judges or lawyers (and I'm not winking with any under-the-table message or anything). No, no, no, no violence. Many of these lawyers and judges are the devil or worse, but what they deserve is to have to truly compete -- without their monopoly bailing them out. As I've quoted Bobby Fischer: you want to see them squirm. A truly free market is brutal, and they will pay the price in a truly-free legal market."
I have not yet read Trump's actual twitlins and their timing because I've been too busy and they are hard to find (and I advised him to take his Twitphones and put them in front and back of my pickup truck tires while I go forward and reverse several times; look for the truck photo up the page), so I don't know the first-hand facts. But as I wrote up the page:
I have not yet read Trump's actual twitlins and their timing because I've been too busy and they are hard to find (and I advised him to take his Twitphones and put them in front and back of my pickup truck tires while I go forward and reverse several times; look for the truck photo up the page), so I don't know the first-hand facts. But as I wrote up the page:
September 30, 2020: One thing DJT does not do - which Biden has had a habit of falling back on - is physical "intimidation" (so-called intimidation in Biden's case). This is really, really bad, especially in a time when violence is front and center. Biden has to be 100% "handled" (while DJT can't be handled at all) due to Biden's senescence or senility. But even decades ago, Biden showed his reliance on getting in the face, literally, of people who challenged him. He has always had a penchant for returning to some physical "intimidation" -- meeting behind the gym or physically approaching that Iowa farmer who asked a question he couldn't handle. And then there's the push-up and IQ test. Biden would be pathetic in other contexts, but if he weren't handled, he'd be far more "dangerous" than DJT would ever be. Remember, too, that DJT is under a constant media assault unlike anyone ever.
September 30, 2020: One thing DJT does not do - which Biden has had a habit of falling back on - is physical "intimidation" (so-called intimidation in Biden's case). This is really, really bad, especially in a time when violence is front and center. Biden has to be 100% "handled" (while DJT can't be handled at all) due to Biden's senescence or senility. But even decades ago, Biden showed his reliance on getting in the face, literally, of people who challenged him. He has always had a penchant for returning to some physical "intimidation" -- meeting behind the gym or physically approaching that Iowa farmer who asked a question he couldn't handle. And then there's the push-up and IQ test. Biden would be pathetic in other contexts, but if he weren't handled, he'd be far more "dangerous" than DJT would ever be. Remember, too, that DJT is under a constant media assault unlike anyone ever.
So, from what I saw on video over decades going back to the 80's with Biden -- and recent years with Trump -- the actual evidence of Trump's vs. Biden's proclivities towards physical intimidation and suggesting violence showed Biden the abject loser: Biden used confrontational, physical stare-downs and literally getting in people's faces with "IQ challenges" and "behind the gym" threats; Trump had NY schtik. If Trump really forfeited that advantage, then that is a big problem. That said, Wisconsin (and I suspect Pennsylvania and maybe Michigan) was superfishy; and I think it's a big problem that the Chant News Network and the Kafka gallery -- including Sasse and Thune -- are doing the "pay no attention to the statistics behind the curtain" dance. Here are six (I keep finding data points) screen captures of intermediate Wisconsin tallies, which were all I could find after about two hours of searching. Here's the best video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgTO4OR7nBM I could find, with a lot of intermediate tallies over the states.
So, from what I saw on video over decades going back to the 80's with Biden -- and recent years with Trump -- the actual evidence of Trump's vs. Biden's proclivities towards physical intimidation and suggesting violence showed Biden the abject loser: Biden used confrontational, physical stare-downs and literally getting in people's faces with "IQ challenges" and "behind the gym" threats; Trump had NY schtik. If Trump really forfeited that advantage, then that is a big problem. That said, Wisconsin (and I suspect Pennsylvania and maybe Michigan) was superfishy; and I think it's a big problem that the Chant News Network and the Kafka gallery -- including Sasse and Thune -- are doing the "pay no attention to the statistics behind the curtain" dance. Here are six (I keep finding data points) screen captures of intermediate Wisconsin tallies, which were all I could find after about two hours of searching. Here's the best video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgTO4OR7nBM I could find, with a lot of intermediate tallies over the states.
Samples I was able to find at 26, 32, 35, 43 65, 72% (with a 1.1% vote swap between 32 and 35%, and an unchanged percentage between 35 and 43% for that 250k total vote increase...extremely surprising for a nearly 20% increase in vote total with substantially less than 50% of the vote counted) and nearly all the samples within probably only several tenths of a percent change of each other-especially when taking account of independent and small party candidates. If you can find more samples, please email me. Given the large spread between Biden and Trump within each of a great many counties (shown immediately below), the virtually unchanged Biden-Trump percentages are 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 a nearly unchanged percentages without many remarkable coincidences.
Samples I was able to find at 26, 32, 35, 43 65, 72% (with a 1.1% vote swap between 32 and 35%, and an unchanged percentage between 35 and 43% for that 250k total vote increase...extremely surprising for a nearly 20% increase in vote total with substantially less than 50% of the vote counted) and nearly all the samples within probably only several tenths of a percent change of each other-especially when taking account of independent and small party candidates. If you can find more samples, please email me. Given the large spread between Biden and Trump within each of a great many counties (shown immediately below), the virtually unchanged Biden-Trump percentages are 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 a nearly unchanged percentages without many remarkable coincidences.
Only Columbia, Door, Green, Kenosha, Portage, Racine, Sauk, Vernon, Winnebago counties have spreads under 5%. Only Kenosha, Racine, and Winnebago have vote totals over 40k (and most of the others have totals considerably under 40k), and those three are 80-100k. Yes, there are varying numbers of precincts within counties, but it should make intuitive sense to my very smart, practically-oriented audience that randomly pulling lopsided percentages (many much greater than 5%) out of a sequence of ballot boxes, is quite unlikely to yield results at 26, 32, 35, 43 65, 72% of the vote within 5% of each other AND WITH HARDLY ANY VARIATIONS OF MORE THAN A FEW TENTHS OF A PERCENT. This is, certainly at first blush, very fishy. For example, from that same video, other states show an expected variation: (Statistics continued shortly)
Only Columbia, Door, Green, Kenosha, Portage, Racine, Sauk, Vernon, Winnebago counties have spreads under 5%. Only Kenosha, Racine, and Winnebago have vote totals over 40k (and most of the others have totals considerably under 40k), and those three are 80-100k. Yes, there are varying numbers of precincts within counties, but it should make intuitive sense to my very smart, practically-oriented audience that randomly pulling lopsided percentages (many much greater than 5%) out of a sequence of ballot boxes, is quite unlikely to yield results at 26, 32, 35, 43 65, 72% of the vote within 5% of each other AND WITH HARDLY ANY VARIATIONS OF MORE THAN A FEW TENTHS OF A PERCENT. This is, certainly at first blush, very fishy. For example, from that same video, other states show an expected variation: (Statistics continued shortly)
About John: Engineer - electronic hardware design and test; MSEE Stanford/Ginzton Lab-applied physics; B.A. Oberlin College, physics, math. email: john4midwest@gmail.com .
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse