How many democrats/lefties believe the huge lie that there’s gonna be another “January 6?” if Trump doesn’t win in 2024.

[XponentialChaos]

So are you going to man up and admit that all I'm doing is doing back to you what you kept doing to me, so when you say things like that, you're slamming yourself and admitting that you should think about that before you do it again in the future. You're not going to man up, are you? That's my prediction. So you tell me, am I right or wrong? Saying I'm wrong then not manning up would be so you

No. I've been trying to discuss the topic and you've just been whining about me for days.

So much for that mathematical evidence you claimed to have. You ran away from backing that up.

 

[scruffy]

You can make up whatever you want, but I'll give you one serious answer. If you want me to engage you in a real discussion on this, you have to convince me of two things:

1) You understand the math

2) You aren't just a Democrat zombie who will automatically reject whatever I say because you actually care about the truth, not just blowing Democrats.

I'd love to have a real discussion, but I've wasted way too much effort on leftists who would have failed both those tests

Fuck you.

YOU failed to answer a simple industry standard question that would have shown YOU understand anything.

As it stands, YOU are the ignoramus because YOU were unable to answer the simple question that any practicing statistician would have know right off the top of his head.

The onus is on YOU, asswipe.

Here s a hint you: there's more math in my pinky finger than there is inside your whole rotten brain.

You're just another lying political hack and you don't know JACK SHIT about math, otherwise you would have answered the question.

Fuck you, hack.

Go away.

 

[kaz]

No. I've been trying to discuss the topic and you've just been whining about me for days.

So much for that mathematical evidence you claimed to have. You ran away from backing that up.

LOL, you realize that old posts are on the site and I can show you that you're a liar and you did say that by quoting your old posts. I did that to Coyote and she's a mod, I can sure as fuck do it to you

 

[scruffy]

No. I've been trying to discuss the topic and you've just been whining about me for days.

So much for that mathematical evidence you claimed to have. You ran away from backing that up.

Amazing.

Mark this day on your calendar, we agree on something.

Kaz is a bleating political hack who can't back up his bullshit.

 

[XponentialChaos]

LOL, you realize that old posts are on the site and I can show you that you're a liar and you did say that by quoting your old posts. I did that to Coyote and she's a mod, I can sure as fuck do it to you

Which still has nothing to do with you backing up the mathematical evidence that you claimed to have.

 

[Blaster]

Democrats are the scum of the earth.

 

[kaz]

Fuck you.

YOU failed to answer a simple industry standard question that would have shown YOU understand anything.

As it stands, YOU are the ignoramus because YOU were unable to answer the simple question that any practicing statistician would have know right off the top of his head.

The onus is on YOU, asswipe.

Here s a hint you: there's more math in my pinky finger than there is inside your whole rotten brain.

You're just another lying political hack and you don't know JACK SHIT about math, otherwise you would have answered the question.

Fuck you, hack.

Go away.

I don't give a shit, girl friend. I don't believe you. I believe you don't understand the math, I believe you're a Democrat bitch and you'll never acknowledge any argument that Nancy Pelosi wouldn't have said to you. So throw whatever tantrum you want, it won't change anything. But obviously I made the right call to not waste my time

 

[kaz]

Which still has nothing to do with you backing up the mathematical evidence that you claimed to have.

Damn, this is the most angry I've seen you, you have tears in your eyes, they're real, aren't they? Crap, it's pretty funny, but you're going to hurt yourself throwing things like that. LOL, stupid bitch

 

[scruffy]

I don't give a shit, girl friend. I don't believe you. I believe you don't understand the math, I believe you're a Democrat bitch and you'll never acknowledge any argument that Nancy Pelosi wouldn't have said to you. So throw whatever tantrum you want, it won't change anything. But obviously I made the right call to not waste my time

You've been exposed as a liar, hack.

Your legacy will follow you. Anything you can do to others can be done to you as well

 

[scruffy]

I don't give a shit, girl friend. I don't believe you. I believe you don't understand the math, I believe you're a Democrat bitch and you'll never acknowledge any argument that Nancy Pelosi wouldn't have said to you. So throw whatever tantrum you want, it won't change anything. But obviously I made the right call to not waste my time

^^^

Now hackie boy here thinks I'm a Democrat.

You see how fucked up these hacks are?

These are the same fucking assholes who accuse OTHERS of being in a cult.

These fucking asswipes have their heads buried so far up their own assholes they can't smell fresh air anymore.

Go ask anyone on the board RIGHT NOW, go ask them right this very second if I'm a Democrat, a leftard, a pelosi-lover, or any of the other things this idiot just accused me of. Go ahead, ask around. Ask anyone. Ask em if I have any.leftatd credentials. lol lmao

No one on either side wants to hear the truth. They'd rather keep clubbing each other with bullshit.

 

[Coyote]

LOL, you realize that old posts are on the site and I can show you that you're a liar and you did say that by quoting your old posts. I did that to Coyote and she's a mod, I can sure as fuck do it to you

You did?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Damn, this is the most angry I've seen you, you have tears in your eyes, they're real, aren't they? Crap, it's pretty funny, but you're going to hurt yourself throwing things like that. LOL, stupid bitch

And this is what you resort to when you can’t back up your bullshit.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Firstly, because the January 6 protesters shot nobody…. practically every American knows the difference between January 6 compared to the hundreds of different Black Lives Matter riots in 2020.

The Black Lives Matter rioters kill 25 people causing billions of dollars of damage setting government buildings on fire, including burning down a police station. Trump supporters never did anything like that not even close to it.

What percentage of democrats believe this type of propaganda that there’s going to be another “January 6” if trumps not elected in 2024? ….I’d say it’s under 10%.

Many of us lack confidence in the elections and I don’t think most Democrats buy into the racist propaganda we see on CNN and MSNBC and from practically every Democrat in Congress and the Senate.

The sincere question is what type of drugs do far left Democrats use to get to the type of insane points that they get to?

The Mob of Jan. 6, 2021 sought to murder the VP and the Speaker of the House as the President of the United States watched for several hours destroying parts of the Capitol Building, harming Law Enforcement and violating our Constitution.

Your OP is filled with damn lies!

 

[scruffy]

You did?

I detect the odor of powerlessness in the air.

People don't like feeling powerless.

That's one of the good things about the left, the emphasis on mob rule gives everyone a feeling of participation.

Apparently it doesn't register so much, participation in "what". Humans are pack animals too, we call em societies but sometimes we get packs within packs and stuff like that.

This is my opinion: the parties, left and right, to be credible, need a national goal. A vision, a destination. The left wants social justice, the right wants to be rewarded for hard work. I don't see why those two goals are necessarily incompatible.

Both parties are lost in space right now. No goals, not even any plans for how to get from point A to point B. For sure the deterioration of cities is entirely unacceptable and has to stop. It prevents people from raising families and making a living. The drive to the lowest common denominator is also unacceptable, and has to stop. It is causing enormous damage, and if the parties can't stop it the ugly reality is that the People will. No one in their right mind is going to sit idly by while gangsters take over their neighborhoods.

Hey man, I'm a resource. I cut my teeth kicking drug dealers out of abandoned buildings in NYC. We can use the SAME methods to kick the leftards out of education. I'm sorry but it's a public health issue.

 

[Coyote]

I detect the odor of powerlessness in the air.

Nah..that’s USMB’s new air freshener.

People don't like feeling powerless.

That's one of the good things about the left, the emphasis on mob rule gives everyone a feeling of participation.

Apparently it doesn't register so much, participation in "what". Humans are pack animals too, we call em societies but sometimes we get packs within packs and stuff like that.

True.

This is my opinion: the parties, left and right, to be credible, need a national goal. A vision, a destination. The left wants social justice, the right wants to be rewarded for hard work. I don't see why those two goals are necessarily incompatible.

Damn Scruffy….I’m agreeing with you! Stop it!

Both parties are lost in space right now. No goals, not even any plans for how to get from point A to point B. For sure the deterioration of cities is entirely unacceptable and has to stop. It prevents people from raising families and making a living. The drive to the lowest common denominator is also unacceptable, and has to stop. It is causing enormous damage, and if the parties can't stop it the ugly reality is that the People will. No one in their right mind is going to sit idly by while gangsters take over their neighborhoods.

Sadly true though not a new problem.

Hey man, I'm a resource. I cut my teeth kicking drug dealers out of abandoned buildings in NYC. We can use the SAME methods to kick the leftards out of education. I'm sorry but it's a public health issue.

Umh…I think we need to boot the rightards and their indoctrunation as well and depoliticized education. Yes?

You were a New Yorker? Ok, bonus points to you for booting tbe drug dealers!

 

[scruffy]

If we don't want another J6, how about we give Americans CONFIDENCE in our electoral process?

We are the laughing stock of the WORLD right now. The Iraqis with their purple fingers have better election security than we do.

Do you realize, the very FIRST thing that happens with our elections results is they're given to a foreign company with foreign ownership? Scytl in Spain, look it up. There is no chain of custody after that, from there the numbers go to Edison Research and from there to the news media. Every news channel gets the same feed, they're all the same.

The central issue is CAUSALITY. We would like to know if the anomalies in the various voting curves are sufficient to be causal to the outcome. This is quantifiable, we can quantify "how" causal with how much confidence.

Taking apart datasets is not easy. One must be open minded, and relentlessly pursue the truth. In this particular case the dataset has been WELL studied.

To verify the integrity of the electoral PROCESS, the very first thing we can do is correlate the submission ticks with the registration information from each location. This way we generate additional data: fraction of registered voters voting and etc. But we don't stop there, we verify that the model we have is correct, by running a factor analysis on all the submissions. We curve fit the submission spectra to power series, that way we can extract regularity and long range interactions. We look for fractal structure, and evidence of criticality.

Then, returning to the original dataset with our newfound structural information, we start looking INSIDE each individual submission. Every marketing firm has software that shows data points against geography. (I have it, I use it every day).

The problem with our data is, we are not confident that the data is correct. No one can ascertain with confidence that the person submitting the ballot is the same person who registered. Therefore, we test two hypotheses: they are the same, or they aren't the same.

The way we actually test this, requires some cleverness on our part. Because if data points are created together, there are correlations between them - and these correlations can be made visible, with the right kind of analysis.

But here is the deeper point, moving forward - anyone who actually needs to perform forensic analysis, knows that the data has to be structured a certain way IN THE FIRST PLACE, to make it work, to make it possible. And ours, is not. Recounts are of no value whatsoever, the problem is in an entirely different place.

What we have to, is PARAMETRIZE the statistics, to make the underlying generators visible. If all data points are independent then the spectra look one way, and if they're not then they look different. The "batching" of results is not a problem, Wall Street does the exact same thing with stock tickers. That's why we use neural networks, cause there's no faster way of adjusting the mesh size.

Once you can parametrize the moments you're home free, them you can run Monte Carlo's to generate examples of representative outcomes, and you can VERIFY that the predicted 6-7 standard deviations actually occurs. Without this kind of analysis you can't tell, there's too much data and it's too confusing. With the proper analysis it becomes not only tractable but you can visualize it as well.

Okay, so, the statistics say that "one" event is not all that unlikely. It's "pretty likely" that if you have 50 experiments (50 states), something wierd will happen in at least one of them. However the NEXT question tells us a lot: simultaneity. If you have TWO events in two different states, how likely is it that they will be "simultaneous", or occur within a certain interval of each other? If ticks deviate from poisson statistics it tells us a lot.

Then ultimately, how likely is it that discontinuities will occur in FIVE states simultaneously, all of which happen to be important swing states?

Intuitively, if you have 5 pennies and you flip them all at the same time, how likely is it that they'll ALL end up heads? And if you keep flipping them at random intervals (which is like a stream of votes), how likely is it that you'll ever see 5 simultaneous heads?

 

[XponentialChaos]

If we don't want another J6, how about we give Americans CONFIDENCE in our electoral process?

We are the laughing stock of the WORLD right now. The Iraqis with their purple fingers have better election security than we do.

Do you realize, the very FIRST thing that happens with our elections results is they're given to a foreign company with foreign ownership? Scytl in Spain, look it up. There is no chain of custody after that, from there the numbers go to Edison Research and from there to the news media. Every news channel gets the same feed, they're all the same.

The central issue is CAUSALITY. We would like to know if the anomalies in the various voting curves are sufficient to be causal to the outcome. This is quantifiable, we can quantify "how" causal with how much confidence.

Taking apart datasets is not easy. One must be open minded, and relentlessly pursue the truth. In this particular case the dataset has been WELL studied.

To verify the integrity of the electoral PROCESS, the very first thing we can do is correlate the submission ticks with the registration information from each location. This way we generate additional data: fraction of registered voters voting and etc. But we don't stop there, we verify that the model we have is correct, by running a factor analysis on all the submissions. We curve fit the submission spectra to power series, that way we can extract regularity and long range interactions. We look for fractal structure, and evidence of criticality.

Then, returning to the original dataset with our newfound structural information, we start looking INSIDE each individual submission. Every marketing firm has software that shows data points against geography. (I have it, I use it every day).

The problem with our data is, we are not confident that the data is correct. No one can ascertain with confidence that the person submitting the ballot is the same person who registered. Therefore, we test two hypotheses: they are the same, or they aren't the same.

The way we actually test this, requires some cleverness on our part. Because if data points are created together, there are correlations between them - and these correlations can be made visible, with the right kind of analysis.

But here is the deeper point, moving forward - anyone who actually needs to perform forensic analysis, knows that the data has to be structured a certain way IN THE FIRST PLACE, to make it work, to make it possible. And ours, is not. Recounts are of no value whatsoever, the problem is in an entirely different place.

What we have to, is PARAMETRIZE the statistics, to make the underlying generators visible. If all data points are independent then the spectra look one way, and if they're not then they look different. The "batching" of results is not a problem, Wall Street does the exact same thing with stock tickers. That's why we use neural networks, cause there's no faster way of adjusting the mesh size.

Once you can parametrize the moments you're home free, them you can run Monte Carlo's to generate examples of representative outcomes, and you can VERIFY that the predicted 6-7 standard deviations actually occurs. Without this kind of analysis you can't tell, there's too much data and it's too confusing. With the proper analysis it becomes not only tractable but you can visualize it as well.

Okay, so, the statistics say that "one" event is not all that unlikely. It's "pretty likely" that if you have 50 experiments (50 states), something wierd will happen in at least one of them. However the NEXT question tells us a lot: simultaneity. If you have TWO events in two different states, how likely is it that they will be "simultaneous", or occur within a certain interval of each other? If ticks deviate from poisson statistics it tells us a lot.

Then ultimately, how likely is it that discontinuities will occur in FIVE states simultaneously, all of which happen to be important swing states?

Intuitively, if you have 5 pennies and you flip them all at the same time, how likely is it that they'll ALL end up heads? And if you keep flipping them at random intervals (which is like a stream of votes), how likely is it that you'll ever see 5 simultaneous heads?

You're always going to have people whining that the election was stolen, regardless of any changes done, simply because their candidate lost.

 

[bdtex]

"How many democrats/lefties believe the huge lie that there’s gonna be another “January 6?” if Trump doesn’t win in 2024."​

Doubtful. No chance for a pardon for at least 4 years and the MAGAts can see how Trump left the J6ers hanging. He's just using them now to try to get re-elected.

 

[bdtex]

We are the laughing stock of the WORLD right now.

Republicans are the laughingstock.

 

[scruffy]

Republicans are the laughingstock.

They are?

I was in Europe recently, they didn't say a word about Republicans.

They wanted to know how we look at the sex thing. They wanted to know about drugs. They asked about corruption, but only in passing.

Remember the history of Europe is ten times as long as ours. They've already BEEN through all this. Several times.

Europe perceives us as the same crazy cowboys they always have, only now they perceive that the craziness has turned inward. Which happened to them too. Several times, in the past. They are conscious of these types of social dis-eases.

Europeans don't much distinguish between R and D. They know Hillary from Benghazi but they don't know about all the other evil shit she's done. If I explain to a European that Trump got elected because Hillary was worse, they just look at me speechless cause anything else they can say is gonna be offensive.