Flipping the vote against Ron Paul in South Carolina?

[Aden]

I think we need a South Carolina map by precinct, instead of by county, with the stars in place (like the map from earlier in the thread). That would be cool to see. I wonder if it is possible to have small precincts in an urban area. If there are precincts with a small amount of voters in a big city, then those numbers can be compared to the precincts with a large amount of voters in the same big city. If Liberty is correct, then we would see a big difference. This would further destroy the urban/rural demographic argument.

Like this

Source: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=147466.0

 

[milo10]

they wouldnt... notice the eixt polls matched the unflipped results? all media exit polls come from Edison Research...... no other company is used by the MSM

They would have to admit there exit polls were also rigged if vote flipping took place..... since they more or less created the monopoly.... they would be culpable (cnn's election crunchers were originally run by the founder of edison)

so.... it will be a court battle in the end

The Young Turks, Al Jazeera, RT, Alex Jones, Democracy Now, Counterpunch, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Lew Rockwell, and thousands of other channels, blogs, and news outlets here and abroad.

This is too big a scandal to ignore, but I agree they will try to sit on it for a while. As I mentioned in earlier posts, I think this might get bigger play abroad at first than it does here. In the world of international relations, illegitimate elections are a huge issue. I also think there will be a cascading effect where past American elections are looked at with similar or greater thoroughness. All of the past stories of voting irregularities will take on much greater importance and credibility.

What is unique about this compared to 99.999% of similar scandals, conspiracy theories, and so forth is that we have the main evidence to work with. It is all right there for anyone proficient in math.

It is also important for its timeliness. If Romney wins the nomination and loses the general, most people will simply not care that much about these charges a year from now. Foolish, but that is how people are wired. If we get this story out while the nomination process is still going on and it is all very much in the news, then its importance increases by a factor of 10 or more.

 

[bbwarfield]

The Young Turks, Al Jazeera, RT, Alex Jones, Democracy Now, Counterpunch, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Lew Rockwell, and thousands of other channels, blogs, and news outlets here and abroad.

This is too big a scandal to ignore, but I agree they will try to sit on it for a while. As I mentioned in earlier posts, I think this might get bigger play abroad at first than it does here. In the world of international relations, illegitimate elections are a huge issue. I also think there will be a cascading effect where past American elections are looked at with similar or greater thoroughness. All of the past stories of voting irregularities will take on much greater importance and credibility.

What is unique about this compared to 99.999% of similar scandals, conspiracy theories, and so forth is that we have the main evidence to work with. It is all right there for anyone proficient in math.

It is also important for its timeliness. If Romney wins the nomination and loses the general, most people will simply not care that much about these charges a year from now. Foolish, but that is how people are wired. If we get this story out while the nomination process is still going on and it is all very much in the news, then its importance increases by a factor of 10 or more.

i should clarify.... it would take a court battle for the average american to care... a big ass flashy court battle... the case of the century....

I dont care about people in uraguay knowing that it was rigged... I want the general american populace to know and be outraged! I want to see them streaming into the streets demanding justice!

 

[bbwarfield]

Michigan is a primary with electronic voting / tabulation...... think we got another stats hunt on our hands...lol

in all seriousness I think south carolina was a tough enough one.... i wouldnt put you stats guys through another state

 

[milo10]

i should clarify.... it would take a court battle for the average american to care... a big ass flashy court battle... the case of the century....

I dont care about people in uraguay knowing that it was rigged... I want the general american populace to know and be outraged! I want to see them streaming into the streets demanding justice!

If this is major news throughout the world and the alternative media, it can't be suppressed in the MSM. It is not 1995.

 

[Liberty1789]

Maybe the correction for a misunderstanding: when I said that I am done with what I have boldly called the absolute mathematical proof, I meant that I do expect to search for other "cheat" detectors. The oscillation detector is like mass spectroscopy. I do not need more or better. But I will publish more results obtained with them.

affa, you might want to add them to the beginning of your summary thread as EDITs, so that the substantive analysis remains frontloaded.

Ok, back to investigation in NH (honestly guys, if not debunked, this could become a book!).

A smart alec mentioned in a post that he wanted to see the table where I have shown the layman's probability of Romney's score to be "natural" in various SC counties for other candidates. Smart, fair and instructive, so wish granted.

Let's start with Coots, NH. On all my analysis, it has never exhibited any anomaly. Here is the oscillation doodle.

Remember, if the score of the candidate converges naturally towards the final score as you count more and more ballots, it will zig-zag above and under the 50% line all the time. Boy, Coots illustrates that very well: mad criss-crossing. Now nifty maths give me the following table:

The number in the table are a tabular form of the doodle chart. See how everyone's probability to reach his final score looks normal? Gingrich is drifting a bit low at 22%, but comes back immediately.

Now Merrimack, NH. Doodle chart: strong mathematical anomaly. Where are Romney and Paul's oscillations gone?

Are they gone a little, or are they entirely gone? Well the tabular form tells you the probality of that:

See the difference with Coots

Paul is vampirized by Romney here.

Possibly something funny going on in the last precinct in favour of Huntsman, but it's only 1 data point.

 

[bbwarfield]

never tought it would need this... but... bump

 

[Liberty1789]

New Hampshire Hypergeometric Doodles 1/2

For the sake of completeness and our NH friends.

The linearity analysis are weakish (statistically underpowered) in NH because od the small number of precincts.

However, there is a lot of votes to by. And that is good to answer this question: do cumulative votes behave according to the hypergeometric distribution or not? When Romney's green line does not oscillate and is a flat line at %, our theory is that the vote fliiper is on. The victim is the guy with a corresponding flat line stuck at 100%.

 

[Liberty1789]

New Hampshire Hypergeometric Doodles 2/2

Hillsborough, the Big Hollow... Oh Dear...

 

[Liberty1789]

The Anomaly across time

I have been asked, very relevently: is the anomaly visible across time?

Here is the county of Alachua, FL across time. Why this one? Well, it's what happens to you when you are the 1st by alphabetical order...

The data was OCRed from the PDFs of results from the website of the Supervisor of Elections of Alachua. There might be some news for you, officer...

http://elections.alachua.fl.us/index.php?id=33&spanish=N

So what do we get?

2000: Good old times. Every line does what it supposed to do. It oscillates around and converges rapidly towards the final result of the candidate in a flat, straightish line. The oscillation doodle is a zig-zag orgy. Well, gone are the good old times...

2004: Did not see it. Was Bush only, right?

2008: I have split the results in 2 charts to zoom the scale on the small guys. They are small and probably ignorant of the hypergeometric distribution law, but they tend to follow it pretty well. On the other hand, the big guys... Romney's surge alert... Paul bleeding. McCain is flat in the doodle chart for a while but the small waves along the lines suggest that his 0% is a big zero, like 0.05, not statistically impossible. Romney's zeros are the real stuff, the 0.00000000000000000000000000001 ones, the ones we are looking for. I know, I need a log scale on the chart...

2012: Well, what can I say... You get the... picture

Now I hear a question in the back:

- The chart title indicates "Rep.", presumably for Republican. Does it mean that you have...?
- Yes, Sir. And trust me, after across time, you want to see across the aisle!

 

[Liberty1789]

The Anomaly across the aisle

The Democrats are cool: they voted in 2004, so we get a full time series.

2000: Gore vs Bradley: good boys. Oscillation, quick convergence into a flat line. In a duel, when the % of one candidate goes up, the other one goes down. That symetry is reflected in the mirror image of the oscillation doodle. However, they still do oscillate, don't they? Perfect.

2004: Candidate galore! Kerry dominates everybody head-and-shoulders, so I have provided a zoom of the also-rans. The oscillation doodle is a glorious testament to a vibrant democracy. Halleluja!

2008: Vibrant democracy amongst the small guys in the 2nd of the two charts. See how hypergeometry, like gravity, applies to small things? Some guy here has 27 votes and seems to abide to the (mathematical) law religiously. Well, done. Compared it to the big guys' broken oscillators. No religion. Well, Edwards recovered his oscillator after beeing fleeced, sorry, after going anomalous in the first half of the ballot count, to the benefit of Obama. Then Obama goes anomalous and shares the loot with Clinton.

Ergo new hypothesis: the anomaly keeping us busy appeared between 2004 and 2008.

 

[Barrex]

Good work Liberty1789 (you are pretty old).

Are you following comments and people who try to debunk it on reddit?

Again small observation that is probably not necessary but in final document use same colors for candidates on every graph and post what is "x" and what is "y" axis. I know what is what because i followed this from start but most people are new and are getting lost.

Could you tell us what is next?
Any time-line when will this be ready?

 

[millercards]

I'm a lurker who's read a lot of this. I haven't kept up the last two days because of other life necessities, but I was curious if Michigan was being talked about yet. I realize there's a lot of work to be done in the other states... but from what I noticed about Michigan:

The early polls were something like:
Romney 38%
Santorum 36%
Paul 15%
Gingrich 11%

Closer to the election, in and around the debate, Santorum seemed to surge, and then fade a little, and it seemed like it was something close to:

Santorum 38%
Romney 36%
Paul 15%
Gingrich 11%

Final Results:

Romney 41% + 4 or 5
Santorum 38% even
Paul 11% - 4
Gingrich 7% - 4


Just seems from the percentages alone that Michigan could very well have had the same thing happened.

NOTE - I don't feel confident in my Gingrich numbers, but the other ones I remember well.

 

[The Man]

I just spoke with the Michigan Elections Commission who told me that they will not post precinct level results until mid March.

I'm a lurker who's read a lot of this. I haven't kept up the last two days because of other life necessities, but I was curious if Michigan was being talked about yet. I realize there's a lot of work to be done in the other states... but from what I noticed about Michigan:

The early polls were something like:
Romney 38%
Santorum 36%
Paul 15%
Gingrich 11%

Closer to the election, in and around the debate, Santorum seemed to surge, and then fade a little, and it seemed like it was something close to:

Santorum 38%
Romney 36%
Paul 15%
Gingrich 11%

Final Results:

Romney 41% + 4 or 5
Santorum 38% even
Paul 11% - 4
Gingrich 7% - 4


Just seems from the percentages alone that Michigan could very well have had the same thing happened.

NOTE - I don't feel confident in my Gingrich numbers, but the other ones I remember well.

 

[bbwarfield]

I just spoke with the Michigan Elections Commission who told me that they will not post precinct level results until mid March.

well.... thats convenient... reason given?.... "its so hard?"

 

[The Man]

She told me that they always do it like this. She said they wait until the results are "official" before the precinct data is posted.

well.... thats convenient... reason given?.... "its so hard?"

 

[mosquitobite]

How many people here following this thread have volunteered to work their precinct for the local elections?

Just wondering if we had real people working the polls and saw the numbers being spit out of the machines before being "official" if that would help?

 

[bbwarfield]

How many people here following this thread have volunteered to work their precinct for the local elections?

Just wondering if we had real people working the polls and saw the numbers being spit out of the machines before being "official" if that would help?

too late in my state.... but woudnt matter much here... the data is sent out electronically and then back to the precinct.... they have no idea what the numbers are just the amount of people who voted.

 

[mosquitobite]

Here in Indiana we use paper ballots with an electronic reader - so they could be wrong already - BUT we'd at least be able to confirm the numbers match what the final report is? Obviously, if the caucuses are not immune - anything could happen, anywhere in the pipeline!

 

[bcreps85]

Wow Liberty...even more convincing stuff than before. So it starts in '08...and I seem to recall lots of allegations of vote tampering to get Obama the win. Sounds like they might have been more than allegations...