I'd Like To Be A Fly On The Wall During This Fustercluck

[ex-khobar Andy]

I never eat the egg salad at the picnic. Why do you always do that?

https://gnews.org/534248/

A couple of days ago, we had a bit of a discussion about Benford's Law and how (or if) it can be applied to election results. Matt Parker posted a video about this earlier today and it's well worth the 16 minutes.

Matt Parker is an Australian mathematician who was one of the original presenters on Numberphile which is a series of YouTube videos on (mostly) recreational mathematics. Some of it is quite deep but it's always entertaining. Matt has gone on to write books (I have Humble Pi which he references a couple of times) and doing standup routines about math(s).

He demonstrates why Biden's numbers do not accord with Benford's Law and why Trump's do. (Spoiler alert - it's because Trump received far fewer votes in Chicago - the area under discussion and the source of the numbers Darren's post quoted - than did Biden.)

[wesw]

do you really think that darren is an idiot, andy?

the fat lady is barely warming up her pipes...

and just when you think God Save the Queen is coming up, she might just belt out My Country 'Tis of Thee...

lady liberty is the fat ladies understudy

as of now, joe biden has zero electoral votes

neither candidate seems likely to achieve 270....

one state one vote.....

it might come down to just that....

all llegally, all constitutionally....

just maybe....

i d like to be a fly on the wall too...., or maybe in the ointment....

[ex-khobar Andy]

do you really think that darren is an idiot, andy? I started to type a much longer response here. I've deleted it. No.

the fat lady is barely warming up her pipes...

and just when you think God Save the Queen is coming up, she might just belt out My Country 'Tis of Thee...

lady liberty is the fat ladies understudy

as of now, joe biden has zero electoral votes Agreed. Nor of course has Trump, officially.

neither candidate seems likely to achieve 270....Are you taking bets on this, wes?

one state one vote.....

it might come down to just that....

all llegally, all constitutionally....

just maybe....

i d like to be a fly on the wall too...., or maybe in the ointment....

[wesw]

ya know...

if you had just replied to me, you wouldn t have had to use the quote function and that red writing.

... and no, i gave up gambling when i started to feel bad when i took someone s money.

it turned into a no win situation

maybe darren is still taking bets...

[Gob]

And we all know that the cowardly shitbag known as wesw doesn't have any way of paying people, even when three members here kindly offer to help him do that...

[wesw]

gob, if you were on fire, i wouldn t cross the street to piss on you

old boris is gonna be fucked if trump succeeds in his legal challenges

joe didn t win the vote, he only won the counting

stalin would be proud

it only matters who counts the votes.....

you know it makes sense....

[Big RR]

Well wes, time will tell, but I seriously doubt even one recount or court case will reveal any voting irregularities of note, let alone one big enough to change the outcome. Get used to a president Biden, it's only a little over two more months before we are saying that and Trump exits or id dragged out of the WH.

[Sue U]

joe didn t win the vote, he only won the counting

You are delusional.

As of today, Biden has won over 5.1 million more votes than Trump. (You may recall that Trump also lost to Hillary Clinton by about 3 million votes.)

As of today, Biden has won the largest percentage margin of victory over any incumbent president since FDR's election over Herbert Hoover in 1932.

As of today (with 99% in), Biden leads Trump in the Pennsylvania vote count by more than 60,000. If you think Trump and his lackeys are going to find a way to throw out more than 60,000 Biden votes (which would mean having to invalidate more than 300,000 votes in total -- about 5% of all ballots cast -- to give Trump the win), you are on serious drugs.

As of today (with 99% in), Biden leads Trump in the Michigan vote count by more than 150,000. Apart from the complete lack of legal merit in the claim, Trump's lawyers couldn't even manage to file their lawsuit in the right court, a source of endless hilarity on Law Twitter yesterday.

For all its Trump appointees and conservative bent, the Supreme Court is not going to save Trump by granting cert in lawsuits that are being laughed out of the lower federal courts. Kavanaugh excepted, I am fairly confident that there is still sufficient concern among the justices for the institutional integrity of the Court that they will not toss an election just because President Whiny Soreloser doesn't like the result.

[BoSoxGal]

“President Whiny Soreloser”

That’s brilliance right there! Bwahahaha!

[Scooter]

As of today, Biden has won the largest percentage margin of victory over any incumbent president since FDR's election over Herbert Hoover in 1932.

I've seen variations of this claim and am not sure how they could be measuring it. Biden is ahead of Trump by about 3.5 percentage points. Yet Clinton beat Bush Sr. by 5.5 points and Reagan beat Carter by almost 10 points.

[wesw]

RR, if there were significant irregularities would you still be ok with biden winning, as long as trump left?

and i ask that of all of you

[MajGenl.Meade]

RR, if there were significant irregularities would you still be ok with biden winning, as long as trump left?

and i ask that of all of you

There are no significant irregularities. That's just bullshit

[BoSoxGal]

Exactly; it’s total bullshit so it is a moot point but quite obviously we who, sickened and disappointed, still conceded the race to Twitler in 2016 actually care about the integrity of our democracy. It’s quite clear by now just who cares more about THAT.

[Sue U]

As of today, Biden has won the largest percentage margin of victory over any incumbent president since FDR's election over Herbert Hoover in 1932.

I've seen variations of this claim and am not sure how they could be measuring it. Biden is ahead of Trump by about 3.5 percentage points. Yet Clinton beat Bush Sr. by 5.5 points and Reagan beat Carter by almost 10 points.

I hadn't bothered to go look, but it seems the statistic comes from the share of the total popular vote. Clinton did beat GHW Bush by 5.5% or so, but only took 43% of the vote with Ross Perot picking up 18.9%, so his "margin" was actually -13.3%. Likewise, Reagan beat Carter with 50.7% of the vote to Carter's 41%, but John Anderson took 6.6% of the total to narrow Reagan's margin of total votes to 3.1%.

[Big RR]

I agree, there are no significant irregularities, so what is the point of asking that? It's like saying, if there were a lot more people attending Trump's inauguration, would you say he had a big crowd? Or like the line from Casablanca, when the nazi major asks rick about his view of the nazis occupying London, and Rick answers, "Why don't you ask me when you get there?". Ask me the question when you find all these "significant irregularities"; and I'll bet I won't hear anything other than you insisting they exist even though none are found.

[Bicycle Bill]

joe didn t win the vote, he only won the counting

And what were they counting?
The votes.
ALL the votes ...
Even the ones that WEREN'T cast by the Racists for Trump, Bigots for Trump, Shitheads for Trump, or Zombies for Trump.

-"BB"-

[Crackpot]

Which group or forums contain wes and Darren?

[ex-khobar Andy]

There is a further video by Matt Parker on the Michigan votes. A MIT PhD (Shive Ayyadurai) said there is something wrong here and did a mathematical 'analysis' of the data, and concluded that votes were stolen from Trump and given to Biden.

Parker took the same data and analyzed it properly. He explains how Ayyadurai 'analyzed' the data and he develops the exact same plot using Ayyadurai's method. At 6:08 while he is explaining the procedure, he subtracts two percentages, one from the other. At that point I said "You can't do that!" - and Parker takes another 10 minutes to explain why you can't do that. The data shows exactly what you expect it to show - no more no less - and when you apply the procedure to Biden's data (Ayyadurai only looked at the Trump numbers) it shows exactly the same pattern in both the 'wrong' analysis and the corrected analysis.

Well worth the 18 minutes and you really do not have to be a maths nerd to understand it.