The tabulators switched after 500 votes and restricted dems to 45%, the data looks artificially smoothed to hide this. The same pattern is visible on elections going back to 2014.
They also found the remote access code for Dominion machines on a public repo with the private admin password in it, there’s evidence of breaches all around the country from people associated with Trump. They got caught red handed, told us they were doing it the full time.
And that’s before we get to the voter suppression, and 10-20% of the country being in a state of algorithmically induced psychosis.
A lot is made of the ‘drop-off’, which is easily explained by the fact that Trump is a unique phenomenon. People are shocked that some Trump voters might swing towards a democrat downballot, and I can’t imagine the mindset personally, but I acknowledge it exists. Remember, they aren’t Republican voters, they are Trump voters. Further, NC has a history of voting for democrat state offices and republican federal offices.
I think if they were going full tampering, you wouldn’t see the drop-off, because they’d rig the down-ballot as well.
As to the graphs look funny, well, I think I’ll need to see more analysis from more data by a broader set of analysts. I know that statistics will say anything if you torture the numbers enough, so I’m not going to get too invested in visualizations from one source.
Scrutinizing the vote is fine, but feel like this looks more like denial than an educated analysis.
For this case specifically, again, a ‘Trump’ voter is not a republican voter, the democrat party is way more energized to vote against a would-be Trump ally than before the election. Finally, I don’t know about this race, but it’s possible that those two in particular have something in the local population making the democrat more popular. For example in NC the republican governor candidate was way specifically a problem, so there’s a much easier explanation for why he lost by an anomalous amount.
While it might seem simple to attribute the drop-off phenomenon to personal preferences for Trump or against Harris, the SMART Elections analysis shows that this pattern is far more complex and inconsistent with such an explanation. For instance, if Harris were uniquely unpopular, you’d expect her drop-off to be uniformly large across all states, but it isn’t. In Michigan, her drop-off is negligible (0.87%), while in Montana, it’s a staggering -19%, even though Montana has little connection to the pro-Gaza movement that critics say might have influenced her support. Similarly, the Republican drop-off (votes for Trump but not for down-ballot candidates) is just as significant, sometimes exceeding the margins of victory in key swing states. Down-ballot candidates refer to those running for lower-profile positions, such as governors, state legislators, or other local offices, as opposed to high-profile ones like the president. This suggests the issue isn’t simply about liking Trump or disliking Harris but instead points to a mix of unusual voter behaviors or even potential systemic issues in how votes were cast or counted. The consistent pattern of drop-off across vastly different demographics and states demands more scrutiny, not simple assumptions.
Thats pretty impressive. Sad it took 10+ years for the first comprehendible mention of it. Let’s go on like this but a little faster please.
It is absolutely insane that only a couple million worldwide are on the fediverse. This information can NOT AT ALL be on single, non federated websites. Federate this stuff immediately.
Edit: correction and addition -> nice one with the algorithmic induced psychosis. I wish we could get some psychologists on this to make it actual science so its not some randos like us screaming into the void.
They did, the early versions of the first ones anyway. They’re adjusted afterwards and weighted to match the alleged vote counts as they come out.
Exit Polls were spot on for all down ballot races, but were wildly off base with Trump.
State Edison Exit Polls (EEP) (MoE 3%) vs. Reported Results. In Swing States. EEPs show Harris wins 4 beyond MoE, Trump 0. 3 within MoE. Returns Trump wins all 7. 6 of 7 beyond MoE. But DownBallot EEPs are right and falloff counts are hard to believe.
There’s actually quite a lot of evidence.
https://electiontruthalliance.org/
https://smartelections.substack.com/p/so-clean
The tabulators switched after 500 votes and restricted dems to 45%, the data looks artificially smoothed to hide this. The same pattern is visible on elections going back to 2014.
They also found the remote access code for Dominion machines on a public repo with the private admin password in it, there’s evidence of breaches all around the country from people associated with Trump. They got caught red handed, told us they were doing it the full time.
And that’s before we get to the voter suppression, and 10-20% of the country being in a state of algorithmically induced psychosis.
A lot is made of the ‘drop-off’, which is easily explained by the fact that Trump is a unique phenomenon. People are shocked that some Trump voters might swing towards a democrat downballot, and I can’t imagine the mindset personally, but I acknowledge it exists. Remember, they aren’t Republican voters, they are Trump voters. Further, NC has a history of voting for democrat state offices and republican federal offices.
I think if they were going full tampering, you wouldn’t see the drop-off, because they’d rig the down-ballot as well.
As to the graphs look funny, well, I think I’ll need to see more analysis from more data by a broader set of analysts. I know that statistics will say anything if you torture the numbers enough, so I’m not going to get too invested in visualizations from one source.
Scrutinizing the vote is fine, but feel like this looks more like denial than an educated analysis.
For this case specifically, again, a ‘Trump’ voter is not a republican voter, the democrat party is way more energized to vote against a would-be Trump ally than before the election. Finally, I don’t know about this race, but it’s possible that those two in particular have something in the local population making the democrat more popular. For example in NC the republican governor candidate was way specifically a problem, so there’s a much easier explanation for why he lost by an anomalous amount.
The challenge with this example is that it suggests that they bothered to rig things against Harris in Montana of all places.
They were rigging it via voter suppression and fighting it in court so they must think it relevant enough to involve themselves in anyway
https://youtu.be/E7aH2_F8v5Q
Thats pretty impressive. Sad it took 10+ years for the first comprehendible mention of it. Let’s go on like this but a little faster please.
It is absolutely insane that only a couple million worldwide are on the fediverse. This information can NOT AT ALL be on single, non federated websites. Federate this stuff immediately.
Edit: correction and addition -> nice one with the algorithmic induced psychosis. I wish we could get some psychologists on this to make it actual science so its not some randos like us screaming into the void.
I feel like the exit polls would have revealed something if it was that drastic.
They did, the early versions of the first ones anyway. They’re adjusted afterwards and weighted to match the alleged vote counts as they come out.
Exit Polls were spot on for all down ballot races, but were wildly off base with Trump.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/11/05/politics/how-exit-polls-work-election