PA Hearing: 604,000 votes for Biden and 3,200 for Trump in 90 minutes

This is just the beginning.

The snowball will continue to roll downhill until it is a D5 avalanche.
 
GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged said:
If 600,000 ballots can be processed in 90 minutes, why did it take so long to do the initial count or so long for recounts?
Click to expand...

I'm still more fascinated by how MI, GA, and WI all seemed to quit counting ballots after Fox News declared AZ for Biden shortly after polls closed.
And then to have some "ballot dumps" in the wee hours of the morning on 11/4...


I think it also needs to be said that many (most?) of us on here have never been big fans of Trump. But you have to admit, he really did piss off the Deep State, didn't he? I mean, all of 2016-2020 was the Deep State and their little fingers in the MSM trying to drown the dude and he refused to give in. He gained my respect, even though I'm still not a big fan of his. And honestly, I hope he pulls through all of this somehow because Biden/Xiden as a lot of folks are referring to him and his vicious little VP are 100% DS/NWO/UN lackeys. With Trump at the helm, it's possible we delay their plans a little bit longer.
 
Last edited:
Give me physical access to the system and I can do it in a few minutes.

UPDATE VoteTotals SET BidenVotes = BidenVotes + 600000
 
JoshLowry said:
Click to expand...


I claim no particular expertise in statistical modeling, but I am trained in statistics, have taught undergraduate-level probabilistic modeling (computer science), and have a wickedly refined sense of the statistical nature things.

That said, if what the witness has testified is in fact the truth, I must agree with his assessment that the observation is strong indication of something very rotten in Denmark.

The larger a sample, the closer to the mean will be its character. Six hundred thousand is a very large sample. If the mean separation between the candidates in the original official ballot count was even as high as twenty percent, indicating an extraordinary landslide, there is basically no statistically valid chance that one would see so freakishly lopsided a batch tally as that reported. Simply put, it is statistically not possible to see so vast a variance from the mean in a sample representing nearly 10% of the whole.

The actual stated numbers lead to a non-credible proportion that runs wildly from the mean. 1 - (3200/604000) = 0.99947. That Biden held 99.947% over so large a block of counts is simply not credible in any way or degree. It is statistically impossible. Even if the batch were taken from inner-city über-ghetto parasite-infested Philly, so absurd a skew from the mean is not possible. It wouldn't even be possible in NYC, which almost certainly runs farther left and parasite-skewed.

A single such variance in tallying would be close enough to impossible, but there is something else that would have had to have happened that was not mentioned in the video. If Biden had truly won as per the official story, then there would perforce have had to have been at least one equally anomalous instance of a batch as violently skewed in Trump's favor in order to put the final result at the thin final margin. A single such anomaly would make the overall probability at zero, which is to say there is no possible way that an "organic" process would yield two huge seismic waves of variance from the mean during counting. It is simply not possible, PERIOD.

Equally unlikely, even if it appear otherwise to an untrained observer, would be a larger number of less-skewed batch entries, all in Trump's favor, to drag the final result back to the percent or two final result difference. That, too, is vanishingly small in terms of possibility and when coupled with the single enormous variance once again constitutes a practical impossibility.

The actual numbers, taken from Wikipedia (I know, but it's 4 AM) are as follow:
Trump 3378263 votes, Biden 3459923. Biden won by just over one percent - nowhere nearly a landslide. Yet, in nearly nine percent of the total tally of 6838186 votes - the batch in question in the OP - he won by 99.947%. Ç'est impossible.​

What we typically find in elections in terms of overall result v. time is an initial period with large spikes (proportionally speaking, with the absolute numbers being LOW) where the variance is large - this happens ALL THE TIME. But as more precincts report, the variances become proportionally ever smaller in relation to the total tally, which is why the curve normalizes with time, becoming smoother as the percent-reported grows. To have so violent a spike at any time during the counting demands equal compensation in the other direction, i.e. in Trump's favor. So if Trump lost by, say, one percent, he will have had to have done freakishly well in other quarters of the state in order to regain the devastating losses purportedly sustained in the precinct(s) that added up to 99.947%. This is pure fiction of the Twilight Zone variety.

Now, if we toss all those anomalous votes, which is the solution least injurious to the "dignity" and credibility of the state of Pennsylvania, the numbers come thusly:

Trump: 3375063, Biden: 2851923 -> Trump takes PA by between 16% and 19%, depending on how you calculate the ratio. That, my friends, is a landslide.​

Anyone denying fraud in such a case would be prima facie either a liar, blitheringly ignorant of statistics, non-trivially brain-damaged, or some combination of all three.

Accepting the PA result, again assuming the witness speaks truthfully and accurately, would be analogous to believing a claim that they saw a 300 year old anvil in controlled flight from NYC to Los Angeles without the benefit of any aeronautical means whatsoever. Not possible under normal terrestrial conditions.

So either there was in fact massive fraud in PA, or the witness is a liar and should be imprisoned for life. My vote leans toward the former.
 
Last edited:
osan said:
I claim no particular expertise in statistical modeling, but I am trained in statistics, have taught undergraduate-level probabilistic modeling (computer science), and have a wickedly refined sense of the statistical nature things.

That said, if what the witness has testified is in fact the truth, I must agree with his assessment that the observation is strong indication of something very rotten in Denmark.

The larger a sample, the closer to the mean will be its character. Six hundred thousand is a very large sample. If the mean separation between the candidates in the original official ballot count was even as high as twenty percent, indicating an extraordinary landslide, there is basically no statistically valid chance that one would see so freakishly lopsided a batch tally as that reported. Simply put, it is statistically not possible to see so vast a variance from the mean in a sample representing nearly 10% of the whole.

The actual stated numbers lead to a non-credible proportion that runs wildly from the mean. 1 - (3200/604000) = 0.99947. That Biden held 99.947% over so large a block of counts is simply not credible in any way or degree. It is statistically impossible. Even if the batch were taken from inner-city über-ghetto parasite-infested Philly, so absurd a skew from the mean is not possible. It wouldn't even be possible in NYC, which almost certainly runs farther left and parasite-skewed.

A single such variance in tallying would be close enough to impossible, but there is something else that would have had to have happened that was not mentioned in the video. If Biden had truly won as per the official story, then there would perforce have had to have been at least one equally anomalous instance of a batch as violently skewed in Trump's favor in order to put the final result at the thin final margin. A single such anomaly would make the overall probability at zero, which is to say there is no possible way that an "organic" process would yield two huge seismic waves of variance from the mean during counting. It is simply not possible, PERIOD.

Equally unlikely, even if it appear otherwise to an untrained observer, would be a larger number of less-skewed batch entries, all in Trump's favor, to drag the final result back to the percent or two final result difference. That, too, is vanishingly small in terms of possibility and when coupled with the single enormous variance once again constitutes a practical impossibility.

The actual numbers, taken from Wikipedia (I know, but it's 4 AM) are as follow:
Trump 3378263 votes, Biden 3459923. Biden won by just over one percent - nowhere nearly a landslide. Yet, in nearly nine percent of the total tally of 6838186 votes - the batch in question in the OP - he won by 99.947%. Ç'est impossible.​

What we typically find in elections in terms of overall result v. time is an initial period with large spikes (proportionally speaking, with the absolute numbers being LOW) where the variance is large - this happens ALL THE TIME. But as more precincts report, the variances become proportionally ever smaller in relation to the total tally, which is why the curve normalizes with time, becoming smoother as the percent-reported grows. To have so violent a spike at any time during the counting demands equal compensation in the other direction, i.e. in Trump's favor. So if Trump lost by, say, one percent, he will have had to have done freakishly well in other quarters of the state in order to regain the devastating losses purportedly sustained in the precinct(s) that added up to 99.947%. This is pure fiction of the Twilight Zone variety.

Now, if we toss all those anomalous votes, which is the solution least injurious to the "dignity" and credibility of the state of Pennsylvania, the numbers come thusly:

Trump: 3375063, Biden: 2851923 -> Trump takes PA by between 16% and 19%, depending on how you calculate the ratio. That, my friends, is a landslide.​

Anyone denying fraud in such a case would be prima facie either a liar, blitheringly ignorant of statistics, non-trivially brain-damaged, or some combination of all three.

Accepting the PA result, again assuming the witness speaks truthfully and accurately, would be analogous to believing a claim that they saw a 300 year old anvil in controlled flight from NYC to Los Angeles without the benefit of any aeronautical means whatsoever. Not possible under normal terrestrial conditions.

So either there was in fact massive fraud in PA, or the witness is a liar and should be imprisoned for life. My vote leans toward the former.
Click to expand...
Get out your notebook. Soon [MENTION=58229]TheCount[/MENTION] will be giving you a lesson.
 
osan said:
The actual numbers, taken from Wikipedia (I know, but it's 4 AM) are as follow:
Trump 3378263 votes, Biden 3459923. Biden won by just over one percent - nowhere nearly a landslide. Yet, in nearly nine percent of the total tally of 6838186 votes - the batch in question in the OP - he won by 99.947%. Ç'est impossible.​
Click to expand...
The mail in votes are not a random sample of the state, nor are they a random sample of even a single precinct. They're self-selected Biden voters, because one party said to vote mail in and the other said not to.

For the comparison that you're making, you'd need the dem/gop split of mail in votes specifically rather than total votes. I haven't seen that number released anywhere.
 
TheCount said:
The mail in votes are not a random sample of the state, nor are they a random sample of even a single precinct. They're self-selected Biden voters, because one party said to vote mail in and the other said not to.

For the comparison that you're making, you'd need the dem/gop split of mail in votes specifically rather than total votes. I haven't seen that number released anywhere.
Click to expand...
The mail in votes are most certainly random. They get mixed in. It skews the numbers a bit. It doesn't change it overwhelmingly.
 
tebowlives said:
The mail in votes are most certainly random. They get mixed in. It skews the numbers a bit. It doesn't change it overwhelmingly.
Click to expand...

PA wasn't allowed to count their ballots until after polls closed on election day, they were not mixed in, they were counted separately. The mail in ballots made up all the late-counted votes that night and the following days.

Mail in ballots skewed so far left that even in the reddest counties, mail in ballots were generally for Biden.
 
TheCount said:
PA wasn't allowed to count their ballots until after polls closed on election day, they were not mixed in, they were counted separately. The mail in ballots made up all the late-counted votes that night and the following days.

Mail in ballots skewed so far left that even in the reddest counties, mail in ballots were generally for Biden.
Click to expand...
lol The mail ins are mixed in during the mailing out of the ballots and the mailing in of the ballots. You didn't respond to anything I said except to say hardly any republicans voted by mail when we know that's not true.
 
TheCount said:
PA wasn't allowed to count their ballots until after polls closed on election day, they were not mixed in, they were counted separately. The mail in ballots made up all the late-counted votes that night and the following days.

Mail in ballots skewed so far left that even in the reddest counties, mail in ballots were generally for Biden.
Click to expand...

Who called those votes and was there an Republican or independent observer? The answer is "No" there wasn't. Without observation the whole process is bullshit. That's why the military vets in Athens, Tenn. used force of arms in McMinn county to stop the Democrat machine's steal. 74 years later the Democrat machine is STILL playing the same game.
 
tebowlives said:
The mail ins are mixed in during the mailing out of the ballots and the mailing in of the ballots. You didn't respond to anything I said except to say hardly any republicans voted by mail when we know that's not true.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean. They're not mixed across precincts because they're sent back to the local election clerk. My absentee ballot came from and went back to my township clerk, for example.

Also not sure how you "know that's not true." Do you have anything besides gut feeling to know that mail in ballots were not so heavily democratic?


phill4paul said:
Who called those votes and was there an Republican or independent observer? The answer is "No" there wasn't.
Click to expand...

Yes, there were Republican and independent observers.
 
TheCount said:
I'm not sure what you mean. They're not mixed across precincts because they're sent back to the local election clerk. My absentee ballot came from and went back to my township clerk, for example.

Also not sure how you "know that's not true." Do you have anything besides gut feeling to know that mail in ballots were not so heavily democratic?
Click to expand...
No the mail ins are not counted by every precinct. There are sent to specific locations. Maybe there are some places that have precincts count mailins. Or maybe you made it up.
 
I'm just going by Wikipedia, so feel free to pull numbers elsewhere but I feel this is a good baseline.

2016's "popular vote" numbers -

Trump = 62,984,828
Clinton = 65,853,514

2020's "popular vote" numbers -

Trump = 73,918,712
Biden = 80,104,118


I fully believe Trump organically increased his numbers by this much. That was the silent majority pundits and others were talking about. An 11 million vote increase during a pandemic year and 4 years of Russia... Actually, pretty impressive. But enough of that, I don't want to sound like some Trump apologist.

You're telling me Biden secured 15 million more votes than Clinton? I know Clinton wasn't liked outside of the Democratic party, but come on... That many Americans voted for a senile chickenhawk pervert?

But yet it's the gulags and re-education camps for Trump voters: https://summit.news/2020/11/19/left...dio-to-deprogram-75-million-trump-supporters/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Swordsmyth
Trump DOJ moves to dismiss Biden-era case against Idaho’s total ban on abortions
Replies
0
Views
36
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
Trump undoes stack of 'harmful' Biden executive orders, shrinks multiple agencies
Replies
0
Views
31
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
Trump Halts All Aid to the Palestinian Authority Security Forces
Replies
4
Views
70
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
Anti Federalist
Biden pre-emptively pardons Fauci, Milley and all 6 Jan witnesses and committee
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
5K
Brian4Liberty
Brian4Liberty
Snowball
My research now indicates Trump will win PA and another term in office.
2 3 4
Replies
74
Views
7K
Snowball
Snowball
Back
Top