# Statistical Analysis and the 2020 Election

### 2020 Election, Benford's Law, Mathematics, Voter Fraud

————————

————————

Himalaya Australia was one of a number of sources applying Benford’s Law to the 2020 Election results.

Facebook has banned references to Benford’s Law.

As the vote counting for the 2020 Presidential Election continues, various facts suggest rampant frauds in Joe Bidenâ€™s votes. So does mathematics in terms of the votes from precincts.

Benfordâ€™s law or the first-digit law, is used to check if a set of numbers are naturally occurring or manually fabricated. It has been applied to detect the voting frauds in Iranian 2009 election and various other applications including forensic investigations.

This is what described by Wikipedia:

â€œBenfordâ€™s law, or the first-digit law, is an observation about the frequency distribution of leading digits in many real-life sets of numerical data. The law states that in many naturally occurring collections of numbers, the leading digit is likely to be small.

For example, in sets that obey the law, the number 1 appears as the leading significant digit about 30% of the time, while 9 appears as the leading significant digit less than 5% of the time. If the digits were distributed uniformly, they would each occur about 11.1% of the time. Benfordâ€™s law also makes predictions about the distribution of second digits, third digits, digit combinations, and so on.â€

…

Home

Joe Bidenâ€™s votes violate Benfordâ€™s Law (Mathematics)Joe Bidenâ€™s votes violate Benfordâ€™s Law (Mathematics)

2020 Presidential ElectionDonald TrumpJoe BidenVoter fraud

Himalaya Australia

Himalaya Australia Nov. 07

Source of image: TwitterAs the vote counting for the 2020 Presidential Election continues, various facts suggest rampant frauds in Joe Bidenâ€™s votes. So does mathematics in terms of the votes from precincts.

Benfordâ€™s law or the first-digit law, is used to check if a set of numbers are naturally occurring or manually fabricated. It has been applied to detect the voting frauds in Iranian 2009 election and various other applications including forensic investigations.

This is what described by Wikipedia:

â€œBenfordâ€™s law, or the first-digit law, is an observation about the frequency distribution of leading digits in many real-life sets of numerical data. The law states that in many naturally occurring collections of numbers, the leading digit is likely to be small.

For example, in sets that obey the law, the number 1 appears as the leading significant digit about 30% of the time, while 9 appears as the leading significant digit less than 5% of the time. If the digits were distributed uniformly, they would each occur about 11.1% of the time. Benfordâ€™s law also makes predictions about the distribution of second digits, third digits, digit combinations, and so on.â€

One of the examples is the population of the world, which are naturally occurring numbers.

Distribution of first-digit (in %) of population numbers in 237 countries in 2010.

Source: wikipedia.orgA number of people on the internet have checked the votes (precinct by precinct) of Joe Biden, Donald Trump as well as other candidates for their legitimacy in terms of the Benfordâ€™s Law.

According a Reddit user, r/dataisbeautifulâ€™s calculation, the â€˜normalâ€™ distribution of first digits for the different candidates based on Benfordâ€™s law is illustrated below.

Source of image: https://bit.ly/3l7mUE5Youtuber Nyar has shared the observations on a number of counties, concluding that Trump and othersâ€™ votes have natural distribution but not for Joe Bidenâ€™s.

In Fulton County, Georgia, which overlaps with the Atlantic metropolitan where Joe Biden is expected to win, all of the three candidates have normal distributions for their votes. (Joe Biden 72.6%, Donald Trump 26.2%, Jo Jorgensen 1.2%. Source: .theguardian.com)

In Miami-Dade County of Florida, which includes the Miami metropolitan where Joe Biden is expected to win, all candidatesâ€™ votes obey Benfordâ€™s Law. (Joe Biden 53.4%, Donald Trump 46.1%, Jo Jorgensen 0.3%. Source: theguardian.com)

However, in the Milwaukee County of Wisconsin, which is in one of the key swing states, Joe Bidenâ€™s votes violate Benfordâ€™s Law while other candidatesâ€™ donâ€™t. (Joe Biden 69.4%, Donald Trump 29.4%, Jo Jorgensen 0.9%. Source: theguardian.com)

Home

Joe Bidenâ€™s votes violate Benfordâ€™s Law (Mathematics)Joe Bidenâ€™s votes violate Benfordâ€™s Law (Mathematics)

2020 Presidential ElectionDonald TrumpJoe BidenVoter fraud

Himalaya Australia

Himalaya Australia Nov. 07

Source of image: TwitterAs the vote counting for the 2020 Presidential Election continues, various facts suggest rampant frauds in Joe Bidenâ€™s votes. So does mathematics in terms of the votes from precincts.

Benfordâ€™s law or the first-digit law, is used to check if a set of numbers are naturally occurring or manually fabricated. It has been applied to detect the voting frauds in Iranian 2009 election and various other applications including forensic investigations.

This is what described by Wikipedia:

â€œBenfordâ€™s law, or the first-digit law, is an observation about the frequency distribution of leading digits in many real-life sets of numerical data. The law states that in many naturally occurring collections of numbers, the leading digit is likely to be small.

For example, in sets that obey the law, the number 1 appears as the leading significant digit about 30% of the time, while 9 appears as the leading significant digit less than 5% of the time. If the digits were distributed uniformly, they would each occur about 11.1% of the time. Benfordâ€™s law also makes predictions about the distribution of second digits, third digits, digit combinations, and so on.â€

One of the examples is the population of the world, which are naturally occurring numbers.

Distribution of first-digit (in %) of population numbers in 237 countries in 2010.

Source: wikipedia.orgA number of people on the internet have checked the votes (precinct by precinct) of Joe Biden, Donald Trump as well as other candidates for their legitimacy in terms of the Benfordâ€™s Law.

According a Reddit user, r/dataisbeautifulâ€™s calculation, the â€˜normalâ€™ distribution of first digits for the different candidates based on Benfordâ€™s law is illustrated below.

Source of image: https://bit.ly/3l7mUE5Youtuber Nyar has shared the observations on a number of counties, concluding that Trump and othersâ€™ votes have natural distribution but not for Joe Bidenâ€™s.

In Fulton County, Georgia, which overlaps with the Atlantic metropolitan where Joe Biden is expected to win, all of the three candidates have normal distributions for their votes. (Joe Biden 72.6%, Donald Trump 26.2%, Jo Jorgensen 1.2%. Source: .theguardian.com)

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)In Miami-Dade County of Florida, which includes the Miami metropolitan where Joe Biden is expected to win, all candidatesâ€™ votes obey Benfordâ€™s Law. (Joe Biden 53.4%, Donald Trump 46.1%, Jo Jorgensen 0.3%. Source: theguardian.com)

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)However, in the Milwaukee County of Wisconsin, which is in one of the key swing states, Joe Bidenâ€™s votes violate Benfordâ€™s Law while other candidatesâ€™ donâ€™t. (Joe Biden 69.4%, Donald Trump 29.4%, Jo Jorgensen 0.9%. Source: theguardian.com)

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)And in Chicago of Illinois, Joe Bidenâ€™s votes are abnormal.

So does that of Allegheny of Pennsylvania which includes Pittsburg. (Joe Biden 59.0%, Donald Trump 39.9%, Jo Jorgensen 1.2%. Source: theguardian.com)

It looks like maybe Biden had lost big cities like Chicago and Pittsburgh, which is why the fraudulent votes need to be brought in, which skew his curve away from a normal looking one.

# It’s Not Over Yet

### 2020 Election, Larry Correia, Media Bias, Voter Fraud

Larry Correia writes:

Letâ€™s go back a bit to before election day to see why people would be suspicious that the game has been rigged.

Most of the mainstream polls were utter garbage, off by what I believe to be the largest amounts ever in all of American history. Of course, this thing that surely demoralized the right and helped the left raise funds was just an innocent sampling error rather than a purposeful sampling biasâ€¦ uh huh.

Then in the weeks leading up to the election, Big Tech and the media had a concentrated censorship effort to stop what was probably the juiciest October Surprise in modern history. But them silencing major newspapers and US Senators was just a mistake in their innocent efforts to â€œfact checkâ€.

Then on election day, states like Florida that were obviously swinging hard for Trump with no possible mathematical way for Biden to come back, the news wouldnâ€™t call for Trump. States where it was still clearly up in the air just based on even the most cursory of statistical analysis (Arizona) they called for Biden ASAP. But that was just innocent mistakes, and not an attempt to set the narrative of inevitable Biden victory by major media.

When Trump pulled ahead in the midwestern swing states by what were starting to appear to be insurmountable amounts, they suddenly threw the brakes on the counts. (my favorite part of this was when it looked like Trump was going to win, the Chinese Yaun crashed, which is pretty telling about just how shitty a candidate Joe Biden is) Okay, suddenly stopping all those counts seemed a little weird, but most of America went to bed thinking that this was a close race, with Trump in the lead in the EC.

Then we woke up in the morning, and everybody saw the 538 graphs showing a massive middle of the night spike for Joe Biden, with almost zilch in corresponding votes for Trump.

Now, one of those got walked back as â€œtypoâ€. (again, funny how all these â€œmistakesâ€ keep going in one direction) but the damage was already done, and all of a sudden most of America was paying a whole lot more attention to places like Wisconsin and Michigan than we usually do. Thatâ€™s how flags work. And it turned out that single six figure typo was only one of many statistically improbable Biden vote dumps to come.

Now, all of my liberal acquaintances were quick to dismiss these, with some gas lighting about how it was just deep blue inner cities votes coming in, and of obviously theyâ€™re going to vote for Joe Bidenâ€¦ Except that is them deliberately missing the point. It isnâ€™t that Biden won those, it is that he won them with statistically improbable amounts.

I donâ€™t know what the current numbers are now, but as of yesterday morning the Wisconsin Midnight Mystery Dump was something like 98.4% for Joe Biden. Thatâ€™s better than the bluest of blue cities manage. Thatâ€™s better than Biden did in DC. I saw one 28k dump yesterday (I want to say it was 538 talking about PA) that was listed as ALL for Biden. Thatâ€™s basically statistically impossible.

In a small populace, you can get 100% of the vote. However the larger the sample, the more likely there will be dissenting votes. Even in the bluest of blue areas or reddest of red areas, somebody is going to be a cranky dissident, or an old person is going to fill in the wrong circle. When you get into the hundreds or thousands yet maintain that kind of perfect ratio, basically impossible.

Plus we are supposed to believe that Joe Biden, the guy barely campaigned, who got like 12 sad looking people to his rallies, was more popular than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? This election was just that much more special? Uh huhâ€¦ Except that these few battleground state blue cities vote ratios donâ€™t match up with other blue cities around America, where it appears Trumpâ€™s support among every demographic group other than white males went UP.

Then people were quick to dismiss these statistically improbable spikes with â€œof course the mail in voting favors Biden, republicans vote in person.â€ Yes, but they donâ€™t favor Biden with these kind of ratios anywhere else in America. The ratios are more like 60-40 or 70-30. But 97-3? Oh fuck no. So either Biden is a better campaigner to the inner cities (though he rarely left his basement) than the eloquent messianic figure of Barack Obama, or thereâ€™s something fishy going on here.

Now, as a suspicious auditor type who spent a lot of hours looking for fuckery in complex systems, my gut tells me fake ballots were getting dumped into the system to make up the difference. And oh look, here is a giant pile of red flags indicating thatâ€™s the case.

# Dead Man Voting

### Michigan, Voter Fraud

Lol! He's right.

I used info via Social Security Death Index on "Your Voter Information" on the Michigan SoS website.

William was born in 1902, died in Detroit at age 82 in 1984.

He applied for an absentee ballot on 9/11, submitted it on 9/19.

They've been at it for months. https://t.co/jfpaVIFLhh pic.twitter.com/l4kCijui0g

— Peoples_Pundit (@Peoples_Pundit) November 5, 2020