One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
The T***h is slowly coming out!
Page 1 of 2 next>
Mar 18, 2021 21:15:00   #
ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa
 
Trump Vindicated: New Study Shows Suspicious E******n Anomalies
The MSM has made it a social taboo to talk about the anomalies in the recent p**********l e******n. They refuse to look at the evidence or even entertain the idea that there was fraud. But at least half of us feel the e******n results were off. An Independent study just revealed that there are even more oddities than we were aware of in an e******n Dems claims was the most secure yet.

"...In California, Biden beat Trump by 5± million v**es (2020), whereas Clinton beat Trump by 4± million (2016). Doing the arithmetic, the contrast is 833,843 v**es. (Statisticians call this the Difference of the Differences, or DoD.) Note that Trump increased his California v**e total [from 2016 to 2020] by 1.5± million v**es. However, Biden increased the Democrat candidate’s v**e total by 2.3± million [from 2016]. Where did California find 3.8± million more v**es in 2020 than in 2016? Easy, you say: California’s population has increased.

That’s a good thought, but between 2016 and 2020, the Census Bureau says that the population of California increase by less than 700,000 people. (Note that this includes children not old enough to v**e, non-citizens, non-registered citizens, etc.). However, as mentioned above, the 2020 v**e total for the Democrat candidate increased by 2.3± million v**es. On the face of it, that significant v**e increase does not appear to be logically explainable."

"A statistical contrast is not proof of v****g fraud, but a large contrast does point to situations that
might merit closer examination.

"A 2020 vs 2016 v****g results contrast can be computed for each US State, each county within a
State, of each precinct within a county. This report does the first two. If a State’s results look unusual, the next step would be to then look at county results, and identify the specific counties with the most irregular results."

The courts refused to even look at the evidence Trump's lawyers provided. The numbers in this e******n were more than a little off and should be investigated. An unprecedented number of people came out to v**e for this e******n and some places had more v**es than they had people. But Dems don't seem to have a problem with these anomalies. They lack the foresight to understand that they have ruined our e*******l process by being ok with these questionable results.

Written by Randy Stevens -

Reply
Mar 18, 2021 21:27:37   #
Gatsby
 
ldsuttonjr wrote:
Trump Vindicated: New Study Shows Suspicious E******n Anomalies
The MSM has made it a social taboo to talk about the anomalies in the recent p**********l e******n. They refuse to look at the evidence or even entertain the idea that there was fraud. But at least half of us feel the e******n results were off. An Independent study just revealed that there are even more oddities than we were aware of in an e******n Dems claims was the most secure yet.

"...In California, Biden beat Trump by 5± million v**es (2020), whereas Clinton beat Trump by 4± million (2016). Doing the arithmetic, the contrast is 833,843 v**es. (Statisticians call this the Difference of the Differences, or DoD.) Note that Trump increased his California v**e total [from 2016 to 2020] by 1.5± million v**es. However, Biden increased the Democrat candidate’s v**e total by 2.3± million [from 2016]. Where did California find 3.8± million more v**es in 2020 than in 2016? Easy, you say: California’s population has increased.

That’s a good thought, but between 2016 and 2020, the Census Bureau says that the population of California increase by less than 700,000 people. (Note that this includes children not old enough to v**e, non-citizens, non-registered citizens, etc.). However, as mentioned above, the 2020 v**e total for the Democrat candidate increased by 2.3± million v**es. On the face of it, that significant v**e increase does not appear to be logically explainable."

"A statistical contrast is not proof of v****g fraud, but a large contrast does point to situations that
might merit closer examination.

"A 2020 vs 2016 v****g results contrast can be computed for each US State, each county within a
State, of each precinct within a county. This report does the first two. If a State’s results look unusual, the next step would be to then look at county results, and identify the specific counties with the most irregular results."

The courts refused to even look at the evidence Trump's lawyers provided. The numbers in this e******n were more than a little off and should be investigated. An unprecedented number of people came out to v**e for this e******n and some places had more v**es than they had people. But Dems don't seem to have a problem with these anomalies. They lack the foresight to understand that they have ruined our e*******l process by being ok with these questionable results.

Written by Randy Stevens -
Trump Vindicated: New Study Shows Suspicious E****... (show quote)


Here's another rather large anomaly:

2008:  131,406,895 v**es recorded. 

2012:  129,139,997 v**es recorded.

2016:  136,787,187 v**es  recorded.

2020:  158,394,605 v**es recorded.

Reply
Mar 18, 2021 21:37:12   #
federally indicted mattoid
 
Gatsby wrote:
Here's another rather large anomaly:

2008:  131,406,895 v**es recorded. 

2012:  129,139,997 v**es recorded.

2016:  136,787,187 v**es  recorded.

2020:  158,394,605 v**es recorded.


Yes, I can believe 22 million or so new folks v**ed for the first time.

It was likely because they couldn't stand to see the orange anus in the oval office anymore.

Reply
 
 
Mar 18, 2021 22:03:27   #
Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.
 
The ease of mail in v****g can explain the increase in v****g, however, the lack of integrity and chain of custody of those b****ts is the real problem.

Reply
Mar 18, 2021 22:05:11   #
Liberty Tree
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Yes, I can believe 22 million or so new folks v**ed for the first time.

It was likely because they couldn't stand to see the orange anus in the oval office anymore.


You represent everything that is a danger to America.

Reply
Mar 18, 2021 23:02:01   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Yes, I can believe 22 million or so new folks v**ed for the first time.

It was likely because they couldn't stand to see the orange anus in the oval office anymore.


Or, another possibility could be that there are now 19-20 million i*****l i*******ts in the USA based on the latest census results. And more are coming because the Democrats need the v**ers. It is the only way they can win.
However, we are stuck with the dumbest president ever.

Reply
Mar 18, 2021 23:13:30   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Yes, I can believe 22 million or so new folks v**ed for the first time.

It was likely because they couldn't stand to see the orange anus in the oval office anymore.


SOS NWR NWR

Reply
 
 
Mar 19, 2021 00:27:50   #
federally indicted mattoid
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
You represent everything that is a danger to America.


Boo!~

Reply
Mar 19, 2021 00:28:42   #
federally indicted mattoid
 
dtucker300 wrote:
Or, another possibility could be that there are now 19-20 million i*****l i*******ts in the USA based on the latest census results. And more are coming because the Democrats need the v**ers. It is the only way they can win.
However, we are stuck with the dumbest president ever.


Oh will you just please shut up. Your talking points are stale and proven incorrect.

Reply
Mar 19, 2021 00:35:56   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Oh will you just please shut up. Your talking points are stale and proven incorrect.


The t***h hurts, doesn't it?! Why do you h**e America? It really sucks to be you!

Here is another one of Biden's i***ts for you to read about.
https://libertyonenews.com/vanita-gupta-supports-15-minimum-wage-while-family-business-pays-mexicans-1-30-an-hour/

Reply
Mar 19, 2021 00:36:37   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
dtucker300 wrote:
The t***h hurts you, doesn't it? Why do you h**e America? It really sucks to be you.

Here's another one of Biden's i***ts you can real about.
https://libertyonenews.com/vanita-gupta-supports-15-minimum-wage-while-family-business-pays-mexicans-1-30-an-hour/

Reply
 
 
Mar 19, 2021 00:41:48   #
DaWg44
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Oh will you just please shut up. Your talking points are stale and proven incorrect.


Nothing has been proven incorrect. That is why so many people are mad. The Supreme Court was in on the s**m. Harvard, the bastion of l*****t//liberal/c*******m, estimated ideals ar 27-33 million 10 years ago. That 11 million number is 20-25 years old.

Reply
Mar 19, 2021 00:59:04   #
dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA
 
DaWg44 wrote:
Nothing has been proven incorrect. That is why so many people are mad. The Supreme Court was in on the s**m. Harvard, the bastion of l*****t//liberal/c*******m, estimated ideals ar 27-33 million 10 years ago. That 11 million number is 20-25 years old.


Yes, the 19-20 million number was a current minimum estimate. More likely to be much higher.

Reply
Mar 19, 2021 01:20:08   #
ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Yes, I can believe 22 million or so new folks v**ed for the first time.

It was likely because they couldn't stand to see the orange anus in the oval office anymore.


mattoid: Please put down the Hostess cupcakes & the double-latte douchachino you’re probably drinking & stop humiliating yourself in public this way. You’re a wuss & I can’t help that your family is embarrassed by you & that you h**e yourself. I hope you get the meds you need. As long a Biden is your king your kingdom is doomed! 2022 will give you a needed colonoscopy!

Reply
Mar 19, 2021 01:21:08   #
ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa
 
useful mattoid 45 wrote:
Boo!~


Durp!

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.