Election Truth Alliance
electiontruthalliance.org
  • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    71·
    13 小时前

    The issue I have is that there is an incredibly corrupt, absolutely vile, but completely legal explanation for the massive difference in down-ballot participation; Musk and other billionaires flooded social media platforms with heavy pro-Trump propoganda. Easily influenced people were pushed to vote for Trump, but given no directions for how to vote locally, so they didn’t.

    Should these votes be counted is another question entirely. I personally don’t view it any differently than vote buying, as these voters are essentially agents fulfilling their orders, but there’s nothing on the books that bars anyone from manipulating low-intelligence people from voting how they’re told.

    • EndRedStateSubsidiesOPEnglish
      41·
      12 小时前

      Look at the scatter plots more closely.

      Every dot (pair) is one precinct reporting.

      Up and down is % of the vote.

      Left to right is time in order of report.

      Every dot is a unique data point. There should be no link in the results between precincts, right? Everyone should just be a total of votes for Trump or Harris.

      That’s exactly what was seen for the results of early voting ballots. Normal.

      However, there’s an obvious bias for Trump in the other reporting that increases in an obvious, consistent trend increasingly for Trump that’s basically impossible to have organically.

      Even if what you said were true, it couldn’t account for the clean trend line working toward a goal.

      The more densely populated an area is, the bluer it votes. The areas with the most people and lean blue should take longer to report. The smaller the precinct , the more red it usually goes but also faster to report. However, the most Trump leaning result came in last including large blue areas.

      Analysing the data raises a lot of red flags that Democrats are all Helen Keller about.