238 votes

DP Peer Review: Evidence of Algorithm Vote Flipping in GOP Primary Elections Layman's Executive Summary



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

examples

first, as mentioned, the hypothesis is dependent upon all candidates having fairly uniform support across the rural/suburban/city (ie, precinct size) demographic. This is probably a fair assumption for establishment/non-controversial candidates.

Second, with in those locational demographics you need to consider are their personal demographics which could be in play? For example (and I do not have data to support this either way), could it be that the % of older voters is higher in the larger precincts? If so, that could certainly explain much of this as RP does very poorly in that group. Off the cuff, it does not sound unreasonable to think that older voters may live near larger areas as services/stores they require will be closer. You could take a stab at this historically by looking at BOE voter data and when available, for this cycle.

gedankenexperiment.dk views on finance, politics and science

Which is "probably a fair assumption"?

Romney, by your own argument (first paragraph) is an "establishment/non-controversial candidate" hence he should have consistent support across "rural/suburban/city" precincts hence a flat distribution by size of precinct.

Romney, by your own argument (second paragraph) is going to be getting a larger percent of the vote as the size of precinct.

We're supposed to consider the first argument "probably a fair assumption".

But it directly contradicts the second paragraph's argument. Is that also "probably a fair assumption"? If not, why did you posit a correlation that you think is probably NOT a fair assumption? If so, are you willing to admit and/or explain the contradiction?

If you read nothing else, read this: A Contract Between Americans

Again, it is a direct 1 to 1 correlation

Maybe there are more older people in larger precincts, but that still wouldn't explain such a perfect correlation. If demographics explained the higher % of the vote for Romney in larger precincts, the correlation would be .5, .6, even .7, but never that close to 1.0. Llook at the correlation from Iowa, it is almost a direct 1 to 1. If you wanted to explain that by saying Romney's larger % of the vote in bigger precincts came from different demographics in those precincts, the correlation wouldn't be that close to 1. Even if your theory were true, there would have to be random large precincts where the demographics didn't favor Romney more than other smaller precincts, unless you think it is possible for almost every large precinct to give Romney a higher % of the vote compared to the rest of the state based on natural "demographics." I would argue that the odds of that occurring are literally 1 in 1 trillion.

I would also argue that there is no explanation for such a direct, 1 to 1 correlation other than an algorhythm changing naturally collected data.

Not just by precinct size

In the latest report, it sorts precincts randomly and alphabetically, and it does not appreciably change the graph for normal situations.

I think you did not read the report closely enough. The original example given a couple of months ago is nowhere near the level of sophistication shown in this report.

I am literally begging here.

For the love of God and all that is left holy in this corrupt world, PLEASE PURSUE THIS OPERATION TO EXPOSE THE FRAUD! Whoever composed this information and analysis, I sincerely thank you for the time and effort you put forth. DO NOT STOP HERE. Do whatever you have to do. Take it straight to the top! This has to be stopped NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW! After I finished reading the complete analysis, I don't think I have ever felt so many emotions swell over me at once. It was raw frustration, anger, sadness, and complete disgust. This has to be stopped NOW or it will never be stopped. WE FINALLY HAVE EVIDENCE!! All we have to do is get it looked over by a person with a PhD in Math and we've got it! PLEASE DO NOT STOP HERE! If I can do ANYTHING to help, I am pleading with you to please let me know! For Liberty and the slipping security of this nation, let's end this!

has anyone made a youtube

has anyone made a youtube data walkthrough/explanation video that puts this great info into layman's terms? i'm trying to prepare a youtube playlist that includes our cream-of-the-crop proof of election fraud and would love to have this included in that playlist.

we're going to try to plaster this playlist all across the internet via advertisement to help awaken the masses to what's going on and hopefully drive it to the point the msm cannot ignore it.

just a dude that wants to be free...

itsallaboutbalance's picture

Double post sorry.

.

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

itsallaboutbalance's picture

Ben Swann Wants To Know The Author!

So if anyone know who is behind putting these together, pls email Ben Swann

bswann@fox19.com

Lets start blowing the lid on the fraud that is going rampant!!

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

Yes

We need to know this. Ask around please.

I believe

the author has already messaged Ben Swann

This thread contains further evidence:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?363915-We-NEED-m....

bump.

bump.

BUMP

for truth!

Wow

Just Wow....

Just wondering

Noting the problems with Alabama - regarding differences in "delegate votes" vs. "candidate votes"... Has anyone thought of doing the analysis to see if the supposed algorithm would yield the "candidate" results when applied to the "delegate" numbers?... if that makes sense. Take the reported "delegate" results, apply the algorithm that is suspected from other states, and see if the "candidate" vote comes out.

Its really pathetic & disgusting to watch the fraudulent

activity from the GOP, & then, there counterparts in the MSM chime in, & smugly say to Ron Paul "hey Ron, why do you think your not getting a win?" or "It looks like your strategy & all your hard work aren't working, why?". Perhaps the reason he is not getting a "win" is because their is fraudulent activity you counterfeits in the GOP & MSM! You are as fake as the paper money the Federal Reserve forces us to use! You that take bribes & go along to get along! You, who subvert the truth, & then perpetuate the lies as if they are true! You who have no dignity or spine, or morals! So many of my family members & friends who see Ron Pauls support at the rallies & then see the obvious fudging of the numbers in the primaries, have had their eyes opened to the systematic corruption with in the media & GOP! America's "free & open" election process is a mirage. We may just be one of the most politically corrupted countries in the world...yet with billions spent on marketing propaganda to convince the public that this is the land of the free. The slaves believe they are free. Anyone with eyes open, can see the lie.

james williams

None are more hopelessly

None are more hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

These results do not need an Algorithm just some Figuring

Just imagine you are some sort of central vote counting captain or maybe group of captains that have a simple goal of having your guy win. Or at all costs keeping that radical Paul out. You just rob from Paul's vote total and add to your candidates total. If you are clever you might even add to your candidate and your second best candidate. Also I can see where if there are voting machines that are not working as they are supposed to that instead of actually trying to hand count the paper votes you get out your calculator, pencil and paper and do some figuring.
They seem to have done something like this over in Russia recently. People will be people. People in power are corruptible. They also think they are doing us a favor. They know better than we do.

Creator?

Does anyone know who created these to begin with? Where did they originate?

These are great

times people! Just fantastic work (well beyond my comphrension and knowledge level)! It's wonderful to see so many educated Ron Paul supporters come together and work this out logically and soundly. I'm really excited for you guys - we are waking people up LEFT AND RIGHT!

Keep up the good work and the good fight!

Cheers!

Please Bump.

Thank you, whoever did this! This evidence compiled is mounting, stay vigilant folks :^)

Dr. Iris Mack

At the end it asks for a phd level mathematician to verify this work. Anyone able to contact Dr. Iris Mack? The woman is a math genius and supports the doctor. Think she'd do it?

I have a PhD in math. How

I have a PhD in math.

How do I get the raw data? send me an email at

foontala@gmail.com

Thanks! I'm looking for a

Thanks! I'm looking for a file of the raw data by state which has a table of the precinct size and vote totals for each candidate for each precinct.

I haven't found that in the document yet, so I'm hoping there is a raw file around here somewhere that is correct....

I just need to import all of this into Matlab and write some analysis so I can try to reproduce and run some statistics on the data.

wouldn't these be recoreded at the Secretary of State's office?

They are in my state. We haven't voted yet. (or at least at the Town Halls? Town Clerk Board of Elections?)

I just found Iowa

I just found Iowa here:

http://bradblog.com/Docs/IowaCaucus2012PrecinctResults_01051...

But if anyone knows where the rest of the raw data is, please let me know! I will compile it all into one place so we can do both single and multi-state stats if we want....

It's history making time!

Go get em Foontala!!!

minnesota

but dont understand what the numbers reperesent
http://caucusresults.sos.state.mn.us/media.asp