This is an involved look (about an hour) at statistical anomalies of the Presidential election in four counties in Michigan, examining how votes were subtracted from Trump and awarded to Biden. I’m not a statistician, engineer, or computer programmer so some of it which seemed natural and “easy” to the 3 presenters went over my head.
Their approach was non-partisan (neither democrat nor republican) and they looked for things that “made sense” or “didn’t make sense” according to their knowledge and expertise. They also asked good questions in making their query and proposed steps to take which would prevent election fraud in the future.
If any members have knowledge of statistics, pattern formation, computer programming, etc. I sincerely solicit your comments and reactions, especially regarding the validity of their methodology and conclusions.
3 replies on “Video: Statistical Analysis of Election Fraud in Michigan”
My degree is in Chemical Engineering. I programmed computers for a living for over 20 years. When programmed scanners or vote tabulators have no paper backup (in inputs only. Output from no paper input can be manipulated) fraud is easy to write. I could, even over 20 years removed from programming, in one line code that could rig the results in ways that are hard to detect unless you find the code or statistics show the result as very unlikely. Which has happened. If rhe machine prints the “paper” from electronic input, that can be manipulated. You need paper input that is keep. What they are saying is correct.
Thanks Harry for sharing your knowledge.
There is something called benfords law that is used to red flag statistical anomalies. Many of these battle grounds show these signs of possible numbers that are out of place. This doesn’t mean there is fraud, however it’s a place where forensic investigators first start.