Counties with more suspicious birthdays were more likely to vote for Biden
When people picked fake dates for fake voters they didn’t spread them in a normal pattern through the year. Instead of having more birthdays in the summer months (which is normal in the US) there were more births than expected in December and January. There were also more birthdays on the nice round numbered days like the 10th, 20th and 30th days of the month.
In a layered and detailed study Carl Bell uncovers how wildly unlikely these birthdays are. Not only are the days suspicious, the months are too, and then there is the red hot flag that the counties with the oddest birthday patterns are usually Biden supporters. And furthermore, they are counties that differed the most from their past voting behaviour and also counties with higher votes for third parties too (like the libertarians). It’s almost like fake voters wanted Joe Biden to win, but not win by too much, so they had to add in some votes for “others” as well.
The “birthday” tool could not only to be used to spot suspicious counties in the first place, it was so detailed it could give an estimate of what votes might have been if those outlier counties had had a more normal distribution.
As usual, when they take out the fakes, Trump won.
This looks like something that would be useful in a court of law. “Beyond reasonable doubt”.
It’s a sign of the caliber of the Trump supporters, and another weapon in the game. Studies like this motivate the good guys and must surely make some people more nervous.
Lawyers will be watching.
h/t Scott of the Pacific.
Statistician Reveals How Pennsylvania Democrats Used Fake Voter Registration “Birthdays” to Commit Voter Fraud
By Carl Bell at Revolver
We construct a new metric of potential voter fraud using suspicious distributions of birthdays in Pennsylvania voter registration data. The basic idea is that people picking fake birthdays will make predictable non-random choices, like picking round numbers for days of the month, and not knowing what true birth month distributions look like.
Under this metric, a number of counties in Pennsylvania have extremely unlikely distributions of voter birthdays. Seven counties representing almost 1.4 million votes total (Northumberland, Delaware, Montgomery, Lawrence, Dauphin, LeHigh, and Luzerne) have suspicious birthdays above the 99.5th percentile of plausible distributions, even when using conservative assumptions about what these distributions should look like.
….
These suspicious birthdays also matter significantly for election outcomes. While there are suspicious counties that vote Republican overall, in general more suspicious birthdays in a county are strongly associated with a larger Biden vote share, and a higher Biden vote share relative to all Democrat presidential candidates since 2000. More suspicious birthdays are also associated with a higher vote share for Jorgensen relative to Trump (consistent with a fraud scheme aiming to get Biden high but not “too high”, while simultaneously giving as few votes to Trump as possible).
Finally, we quantify the magnitude of how this potential fraud may have impacted the election. Even a small reduction in the amount of suspicious birthdays (to the 98th percentile of the conservative distribution) would be predicted to have resulted in Trump winning the state by 71,500 votes. This suggests that whatever is driving the anomalous patterns in birthdays is sufficiently important to affect the statewide election result.
In Mongomery there were an awful lot of births in the colder months — see how far the red line is outside the normal curve?
….
First, they must explain why the distribution looks so anomalous in the first place. That is to say, the level of the distribution looks wrong. And even if this is accomplished, they must also explain why these deviations should predict so many aspects of vote outcomes – not just Democrat performance, not just Democrat performance relative to all recent elections, but also the relative preference for Libertarians and Republicans.
…
…. Third, more suspicious birthdays are also associated with higher vote shares for Jorgensen relative to Trump. This is an additional likely consequence of fraud – if a perpetrator wants to maximize the overall contribution to Biden over Trump in the statewide race, and doesn’t want to report an implausibly high overall vote for Biden, the only alternative is to add votes to Jorgensen.
Read the whole post at Revolver. It’s impressive work with all sources cited and methods explained. There’s a lot more to it that one might think, and the authors appeared to have considered it all.
Good article
Data based
Reliable source
No conspiracy theory
Useful to reduce the expected fraud in January 2021 Georgia election for Senators.
100
Why isn’t widespread faking of voter registration a conspiracy?
30
Analitik
If it was a conspiracy, the goal would have been to select birth dates at random. Assuming the data are true, I don’t know what can be done with them in court.
11
A major element of the month of birth anomaly would be due to random distribution
00
You’re assuming those who commit fraud are always smart.
10
–If conspiracy, birth dates would have been selected at random–
Why? It is simpler to say that the those filling out the forms used their own imagination for this kind of question rather than having a central chief conspirator for all details.
00
“Why isn’t widespread faking of voter registration a conspiracy?”
First, establish the problem,
then determine if it broke any law,
then seek legal redress.
This may the type of crime where a problem at a general level is proven, there may be tighter requirements in order to take it to a court.
10
This lady, Melissa Carone, will be liable for conspiracy to commit fraud if her detailed testimony on the voting tabulation process in Detroit is shown to be false
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOwbJqPlXHI&feature=youtu.be
20
The magnitude of this scheme indicates a systematic approach to subverting the voter registration process. Meaning that many of these “registered voters” are likely to have been placed on the voter rolls well before this election.
Sleepers activated when needed.
120
It’s a shame we have to get to this level, but a tell all on it’s own, that we can get a thousand “no fraud found Here” bleatings,
and not a single explanation.
“Who” is not permitted.
One would think we have discovered several new forms of parthenogenesis of ballots, tallies and news releases!
I still want to know who reported to all the national media that there was a water main break in Fulton County. That story
must have had a single, identifiable source to have been broadcast to over 70 million people in real time by many different media outlets.
Who are now, as in almost anything of real interest, totally incurious.
201
Here is the latest update on US Elections
https://thedonald.win/p/11Ql6NYPd1/dec-2-update-evidence-appears-ov/c/
Spoiler alert: Still a great many States in dispute. Nobody is close to 270 majority yet.
110
Great link. Trump makes a speech about fraud.
20
Sorry, meant to add…see under the “HOT” header,
10
He was obviously talking about himself
00
You think this is “the latest update on the US elections” Many states still in dispute?
For goodness sake, the site you quote is called ‘The Donald’ ! Hardly an objective source. Almost desperate.
No states are in dispute. Not one. He’s just grifting for cash now.
24
The left has been able to control the narrative by making the contra narrative disappear. Basically when someone witnesses a murder and says so , they just report that there is no evidence. No attempt to refute that evidence or use a counter argument to explain that evidence. They do it with Climate change, with the Biden lap top, with the election. Even if the person who commits the murder like Biden’s partner makes damning admissions they just carry on as if by saying nothing, people will eventually forget about them.
In Victoria the same happened with the hotel quarantine until Credlin forensically took apart the information to put some of the players into a corner till some of them cracked ( although Andrews personally has remained protected.
I’m hoping that all this forensic analysis which is pointing clearly not just to fraud , but fraud of a magnitude to change the result will see the emergence not of a witness to the crime ( we have plenty of those) but a statement from a participant in the crime. Someone ( or a lot of people) has filled out literally hundreds of thousands of forms which have been used to swing the election and this has been clearly evidenced by the forensics.
A proper judicial enquiry would flush at least one them out and the question is not whether there was fraud committed and not whether it was committed on a scale that reversed the true result but whether the usual stonewalling “ nothing to see here “ tactic of the left will prevent the truth coming out in time to prevent Joe Biden’s appointment in January.
What I want to know is what happens if in six months time they have incontrovertible proof ( not just evidence) that the election was indeed stolen and that the wrong person is in office.
Is there anything in the constitution or regulations that would enable charges to be laid , people put in jail and the proper result restored ?
Four years will be a long time to extract revenge and a lot of damage can be caused in that time.
200
Impeachment of the president is the only option but unfortunately that doesn’t remove the cheating Democrats.
20
Zig, these are sedition and may rise to treason. Very oddly the word sedition has been almost non existent in any media lately. The crime SEDITION is a very big thing.
30
This might be more germane down page but then people might not see it. Forgive me if this has already been posted:
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/new-jw-study-voter-registration/
20
“Beyond a reasonable doubt,” is mentioned in this article as the inferred requirement for acceptance of the evidence presented. However we are not looking at criminal law here where “beyond a reasonable doubt” would apply, but rather this is civil law where the rules governing evidence are simply “on the balance of probability,” or as Sidney Powell describes it, “the preponderance of evidence.”
On that basis, it would be nigh on impossible for any sensible, unbiased person to fail to see the obvious trends in the data and the behaviours of those involved, and not conclude that the ballot was corrupted to an enormous degree.
However that is exactly what seems to be happening in the lower courts in these battleground swing states, which leaves the way open for a Federal Supreme Court challenge to many of the findings so far. In which case the outcome of this election will almost certainly go Trump’s way.
181
The moral decline in Western culture is pretty much accepted as fact these days and certainly i have no argument with it, but that is another subject. However if it is true, then it follows that if fraud is possible it is almost certain that it occurred. The only issue is whether it happened extensively enough to determine the outcome. In the end proof of this will be difficult to achieve, especially given the lack of co-operation and the destruction of audit trails by vested interests.
In the end it is a sad state of affairs, where just about any rational and logical thinking must conclude that an election, conducted in an environment where fraud is both possible and likely is unacceptable and hopefully will be a wake-up call for democracies everywhere.
50
Standards of proof can vary according to type of legal matter presented to the court, from “beyond reasonable doubt” at the top of – let’s call it the Pyramid of Proof – to “reasonable suspicion” at the base.
The more serious the consequences, generally the higher is the standard of proof, with fewer cases that meet that level of proof.
When attorney Sidney Powell says all that is required in this case is “preponderance of evidence” or “more likely than not” (>50%)there must be a high probability she is right.
That said, presumably it is now up to the US Federal Supreme Court to make the call.
From USA Today:
President Trump’s attempt to overturn the presidential election results in the key state of Pennsylvania made its way to the Supreme Court on Tuesday (Wednesday AEDT).
Republican Mike Kelly and others contend officials had no right under the Pennsylvania Constitution to expand mail-in voting in 2019, and the state Supreme Court was wrong to uphold that statute. The group called it “an unconstitutional, no-excuse absentee voting scheme”.
“Pennsylvania’s General Assembly exceeded its powers by unconstitutionally allowing no-excuse absentee voting, including for federal offices, in the election,” the challengers argued in court papers. As a result, the election was “conducted illegally”.
The group is seeking an emergency injunction from the highest US court to block the completion of any remaining steps in the state’s certification of Pennsylvania’s 2020 election results, which took place last week.
The petition was submitted to Associate Justice Samuel Alito.
70
If this was a large-scale, orchestrated fraud then why would this be the case? Wouldn’t they use a simple random number generator?
22
Good point. And we still have no idea who is supposedly directing all these imaginary frauds and conspiracies. I mean, it can’t be Sleepy Joe, can it.
05
A large scale conspiracy would have email trails (not that that matters apparently, in the FBI’s hands).
More likely this is a culture war, where the means to an ends culture has rationalized and justified “helping the cause” and enlisted weak and young minds. In the organic culture war they don’t need to micromanage the details (like birthdates) they rely on gross censorship to cover the loose ends and the incredibly short timeframe.
80
Yes, coordination of the rigged election would have required communication. Where are they?
There is Theory that emails were recovered from the Frankfurt servers.
I still think something is having happening under the surface.
10
Seems you asked
Maybe its this lot https://www.cfr.org/bio/joseph-r-biden-jr after all Biden did say.
This short clip Biden tells who he works for https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZpRPRJzAEU
https://www.cfr.org/transition-2021 all the US media are members, including Rupert Murdoch
extra for you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnIPw_Who7E the state prosecutor he speaks of was investigating Hunter Biden.
10
I can think of several reasons that may have slipped by such a brilliant mind as yours. Perhaps these were rank amateurs with poor guidance (for example)?
20
According to Revolver (where this data comes from):
“Carl Bell [the author] holds a Ph.D. in a quantitative discipline and works in a field relevant to statistical analysis”
That doesn’t mean that he is a world-renowned statistician.
You could probably apply the above description to most climate scientists.
28
Smarty
Who said Carl Bell was “world-renowned” besides you?
Then you used your claim to imply he’s not a good enough source.
That is a logical fallacy called a red herring, diverting attention from the real issue.
52
Did you read the rest of the article?
The data used for comparison (Social Security Master Death File and National Center for Health Statistics for the state) against the voter registration birth dates isn’t cherry-picked the way Climate “Science” statistics are manufactured and I seriously doubt they have been subjected to the homogenization and adjustments the way that historical climate records often are.
110
How do you know the data hasn’t been cherry-picked? Where is the original data? What does it look like?
If you can’t answer the above, you can’t know if the statistical analysis is correct.
14
But we do know that you haven’t looked at the article yourself Slarty. The data and methods are all there, and if they cherry picked it’d be easy for you to show it.
Over to you Mr Herring.
100
Well, perhaps we should start with the second graph. It appears to claim that there were about 88,750 voters in Montgomery County with birthdays in low birth months (Nov-Feb). Yet, the proportion for the US as a whole is 32.0% (as measured from 1994-2003) rather than the 33.3% expected for an even distribution over all months, or the 32.9% expected for an even distribution over all days. So the 32.0% figure implies there should be 277,344 voters in Montgomery County in total. Yet the true number who voted in Montgomery County is about 510,000 , and the population of Montgomery County is 830,000 with 580,000 registered voters. So the numbers don’t appear to tally. What data is Carl Bell using?
10
The next point regarding the second graph is the difference between the true number of votes cast by low birth month voters and the simulated peak. This difference is about 2000 out of 87,750 (my previous comment should have read 87,750 not 88,750) while the difference in proportions required to cause this is 32.0% compared to 33.3%. This implies that 56% of all votes must be fraudulent, which is fantasy.
Why?
Well the total number of votes cast (according to Bell’s numbers) must be 85,750 ÷ 0.320 = 267,969
Yet the number of fraudulent votes needed to produce an anomaly of 2000 would have to be 150,000.
1/3 of 150,000 is 50,000.
32% of 150,000 is 48,000 (so 2000 less).
And 150,000 out of 267,969 is 56%. That is unrealistic and unbelievable.
15,000 may be more realistic (but still unbelievable). But then the difference would be only 200 votes, which is less than the standard deviation of 240. So it wouldn’t be detectable or statistically significant. So basically, this approach cannot work as far as I can see, based on the numbers presented.
10
And you can’t prove it isn’t
20
Trump has released a 45 minute video explaining the fraud, this does no bode well he has effectively readied the nation for what is about to unfold….15 days to enact EO 13848
130
It is fair to suggest that the statistical suggestion here correlating with fraud has a higher probability of truth than that accepted to “prove” anthropogenic global climate crisis.
But, as usual, there is science, and then there is “science”.
120
H/T Underminer Michael Smith News
There’s a lot to unpack in this affidavit, if it is correct it spells trouble for a lot of naughty people…
https://www.scribd.com/document/485933370/gov-uscourts-mied-350905-1-15#from_embed
30
One of many points-
ability to manipulate vote counting by machines and persons outside the US.
00
Mor efraud
https://twitter.com/i/status/1334312307963404289
We have more than enough evidence time to start drawing straws to see who gets the live round for the firing squads
30
More fraud
Arizona judge allows republivans to audit 100 dulicate ballot sample, the hard left moved heaven and earth to stop it and the judge asked why would you want to? Well now we know why, the sample shows one vote was taken from Trump and anther was switched to Biden meaning a 3% error (read fraud), the judge has allowed a much larger sample to be audited.
50
I wonder if this could be used in other battleground states and non battleground states. This should show that only some places were impacted, while most were not.
00