Nov 12, 2020

One, that's some nice editorializing on the paper title.

Two, Walter R. Mebane, an expert on election fraud, had a response to that paper: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-analysis/a...

And three, Mebane also released a short paper reviewing the 2020 results: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf

tl;dr: There are very minor anomalies in some numbers but either way we have to wait till we get the final numbers in before we can do real analysis.

Nov 10, 2020

>I know zero about Benford's law, there is at least one argument that the available data is not sufficient or does not lead one to believe voter fraud occurred:

Well you made the argument that I have been widely debunked.

>http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf

Very interesting to have a paper written up already. I don't actually see the rebuttals other than 'everyone knows that's not useful'. Also interesting how he has discovered problems when republicans won. I'm not seeing the content to tackle myself.

>Poll watchers weren't let in to the Michigan facility because Republicans (and Democrats) had already exceeded the maximum number of allowed poll watchers.

Not how the rules are set. Michigan threw out all republican challengers(yes wearing a white halloween mask is probably inappropriate, but did every single one of the other republican poll watchers have mask violations or say racist terms. Not likely.) and then locked out all watchers. There are no limits as per the rules. Now let's say it was just limits, why block up the windows? Let the people record through the windows?

The problem is the perception.

>Biden didn't receive 138k votes to Trump's zero. That was a typo which was immediately corrected.

While I understand Vox or NYTimes outright assert that this never happened; yet NYtimes had graphs which showed the bump that was not removed. NYTtimes took down the graphs. The bump did happen, they are walking it back as 'typo'

How about the other 'software glitches' that benefitted Biden. Counties which have voted heavily Republican throughout history supposedly voted heavily biden. I guess it's certainly possible there was that much swing.

But now circle back. Poll watchers, of which there are no limits on numbers or qualifications, were not allowed in that building.

The problem is the perception. An awful lot of reasons to distrust the results.

>Poll workers do transcribe votes from damaged ballots. One poll worker reads votes from the damaged ballots, another fills in the new ballot. Of this team of two, one is a Democrat, one is a Republican. The videos of this process that some people shared crops out poll watchers.

That's not at all what happened is the point being made and there were no observers. You have a pretty precarious situation here.

>I agree that if poll watchers were not allowed to adequately perform their functions in any state that is not acceptable. It is not evidence of fraud.

That's the new thing by the news. "Trump has provided no evidence" how exactly can you provide evidence when the observers were removed from the process? The observers are the people who provide the evidence. That's why both sides agree there should be practically no limits on observers.

That's the fraud. Interesting also how we went from my points being mostly debunked to basically be all correct.

Nov 10, 2020

I know zero about Benford's law, there is at least one argument that the available data is not sufficient or does not lead one to believe voter fraud occurred:

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf

I will be watching for more information on this subject.

Poll watchers weren't let in to the Michigan facility because Republicans (and Democrats) had already exceeded the maximum number of allowed poll watchers.

Biden didn't receive 138k votes to Trump's zero. That was a typo which was immediately corrected.

Poll workers do transcribe votes from damaged ballots. One poll worker reads votes from the damaged ballots, another fills in the new ballot. Of this team of two, one is a Democrat, one is a Republican. The videos of this process that some people shared crops out poll watchers.

I agree that if poll watchers were not allowed to adequately perform their functions in any state that is not acceptable. It is not evidence of fraud.

Nov 09, 2020

Here's a new paper from Walter Mebane (University of Michigan Political Science and Statistics) on inappropriate applications of Benford's Law to the 2020 election: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf

Nov 09, 2020

Here's a new paper from Walter Mebane (University of Michigan Political Science and Statistics) on inappropriate applications of Benford's Law to the 2020 election: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf

Nov 09, 2020

Here's a new paper from Walter Mebane (University of Michigan Political Science and Statistics) on inappropriate applications of Benford's Law to the 2020 election: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf

Nov 09, 2020

Here's a new paper from Walter Mebane (University of Michigan Political Science and Statistics) on inappropriate applications of Benford's Law to the 2020 election: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf