More on The American Spectator from Patrick Basham, Director of The Democracy Institute: Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling.
"To say out-loud that you find the results of the 2020 presidential election odd is to invite derision. You must be a crank or a conspiracy theorist. Mark me down as a crank, then. I am a pollster and I find this election to be deeply puzzling. I also think that the Trump campaign is still well within its rights to contest the tabulations. Something very strange happened in America’s democracy in the early hours of Wednesday November 4 and the days that followed. It’s reasonable for a lot of Americans to want to find out exactly what."It is an eye-opening read about many of the red flags; I have summarised, quoted, emphasised, edited slightly or paraphrased:
President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking re-election. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him. He earned the highest share of all minority votes for a Republican since 1960. Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. Bellwether states swung further in Trump’s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America’s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Only once since 1852 has a candidate lost after winning this trio (in 1960; John F. Kennedy's victory is still the subject of great suspicion).
Biden’s black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.
We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties…yet somehow outdid Obama in total votes.
The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a ‘red wave’ in the House, where they gained many seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests. Trump’s party did not lose a single state legislature and made gains at the state level.
Non-polling metrics: party registrations trends/ primary votes/ candidate enthusiasm/ social media followings/ broadcast and digital media ratings/ online searches/ the number of small donors/ the number of individuals betting on each candidate. These metrics have a 100% percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump’s re-election. For Trump… to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time…
In the article there follows a list of peculiarities, which also lack ‘compelling explanations’, including: many swing states stopped counting ballots and/or continued without the observers; statistically abnormal vote counts (spikes) were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio.
Late arriving ballots were counted/ impossible or extraordinary postal return dates (over 100k votes in PA alone in this category). The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, historically low absentee ballot rejection rates; missing votes/ voting machine USB cards. Non-resident voters: in Georgia alone, this category alone is larger than Biden’s winning vote margin. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases… Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch.
Yet the MSM both sides of the Atlantic play dumb, insist on calling Biden “President-elect”, erroneously, and just play on The Donald’s inability to accept defeat. This is sinsiter and evil.
[edit 11:51] From the Federalist link above and underlining one of the anomalies in the non-polling metrics: "In the past, primary vote totals have been remarkably accurate in predicting general election winners"... "no incumbent who has received 75 percent of the total primary vote has lost re-election"... President Trump "received 94 percent of the primary vote"... ... and at the same time "set a record for most primary votes received by an incumbent", in fact that was almost DOUBLE the previous high.
"For Biden to prevail in the general election, despite Trump’s historic support in the primaries, turns a century’s worth of prior election data on its head."Like I said, sinister and evil and yet most of the world's media is singing la-la-la with its collective hands over its ears.
No comments:
Post a Comment