58,000 ILLEGAL NON CITIZEN VOTES CAST?!?!

lmao, no, cap'n

we won't be "as a nation" soon enough

there will be no such thing as the fictional nation to which we were told we belonged soon enough

and who made sure that it will be the case? flimsy donnie t, that's who
 
Its really a sign of the times that someone would put out information that backs the opposing argument, but still try and spin it by playing to the mathematical illiteracy of the populace. I thought that was reserved for the left and their quintile statistics for wealth and income distribution.

60k records matched across databases containing tens to hundreds of millions of records? A 0.5% data entry error rate would completely wipe that out. So already we're dealing with the equivalent of what is statistical noise.

But let's say the data is perfect, and the matching methodology is 100% accurate. How many unique voters were there between 1996 to 2018? More than 8 million people voted in the midterms in Texas alone, so even if the data was perfect and all 60k of these people voted in the last election, you're still talking about less than 1% of the total vote.

"We found a relatively minuscule number of potential matches, going as far as using only partial SS number matches, across decades of records that demonstrates a completely insignificant impact on election outcomes!" But hey black is white up is down these days.

What is the point of even putting this out there? Is it just blatant contempt for the electorate?
 
Last edited:
Zlex said:
Its really a sign of the times that someone would put out information that backs the opposing argument, but still try and spin it by playing to the mathematical illiteracy of the populace. I thought that was reserved for the left and their quintile statistics for wealth and income distribution.

60k records matched across databases containing tens to hundreds of millions of records? A 0.5% data entry error rate would completely wipe that out. So already we're dealing with the equivalent of what is statistical noise.

But let's say the data is perfect, and the matching methodology is 100% accurate. How many unique voters were there between 1996 to 2018? More than 8 million people voted in the midterms in Texas alone, so even if the data was perfect and all 60k of these people voted in the last election, you're still talking about less than 1% of the total vote.

"We found a relatively minuscule number of potential matches, going as far as using only partial SS number matches, across decades of records that demonstrates a completely insignificant impact on election outcomes!" But hey black is white up is down these days.

What is the point of even putting this out there? Is it just blatant contempt for the electorate?
Click to expand...

I think you missed the entire point of the article...
 
SeVeReD said:
I mean
COMMON fucking sense
doesn't feelz good to them
Click to expand...

it sure doesn't


11K noncitizens illegally registered to vote in Pa.

Lawsuit: 100,000 noncitizens registered to vote in Pennsylvania - Washington Times

where:

2018 Pennsylvania's 18th congressional district special election - Wikipedia

Popular vote= 114,102 vs 113,347
Click to expand...

when 1k votes made up the difference in elections like this

and where is Zlex to apologize for just another drop in the bucket

more statistical white noise he calls it

until you realize that elections are won and lost by far less than this in most districts

and that when you add it up all over the country it is more than significant and substancial

no wonder blue states don't want anyone to inspect their voter data

imagine what Cali and NY look like if TX is this bad and now provable
 
Last edited:
Zlex said:
Its really a sign of the times that someone would put out information that backs the opposing argument, but still try and spin it by playing to the mathematical illiteracy of the populace. I thought that was reserved for the left and their quintile statistics for wealth and income distribution.

60k records matched across databases containing tens to hundreds of millions of records? A 0.5% data entry error rate would completely wipe that out. So already we're dealing with the equivalent of what is statistical noise.

But let's say the data is perfect, and the matching methodology is 100% accurate. How many unique voters were there between 1996 to 2018? More than 8 million people voted in the midterms in Texas alone, so even if the data was perfect and all 60k of these people voted in the last election, you're still talking about less than 1% of the total vote.

"We found a relatively minuscule number of potential matches, going as far as using only partial SS number matches, across decades of records that demonstrates a completely insignificant impact on election outcomes!" But hey black is white up is down these days.

What is the point of even putting this out there? Is it just blatant contempt for the electorate?
Click to expand...
There's lies, damned lies and statistics

-some guy
 
all i see are damned lies

liars

and jew tricks

but with Zlex that is like saying the same thing three times

where 58k known illegal votes, in just one state, is just statistical "noise" now

LMAO
 
Last edited:
Zlex said:
Its really a sign of the times that someone would put out information that backs the opposing argument, but still try and spin it by playing to the mathematical illiteracy of the populace. I thought that was reserved for the left and their quintile statistics for wealth and income distribution.

60k records matched across databases containing tens to hundreds of millions of records? A 0.5% data entry error rate would completely wipe that out. So already we're dealing with the equivalent of what is statistical noise.

But let's say the data is perfect, and the matching methodology is 100% accurate. How many unique voters were there between 1996 to 2018? More than 8 million people voted in the midterms in Texas alone, so even if the data was perfect and all 60k of these people voted in the last election, you're still talking about less than 1% of the total vote.

"We found a relatively minuscule number of potential matches, going as far as using only partial SS number matches, across decades of records that demonstrates a completely insignificant impact on election outcomes!" But hey black is white up is down these days.

What is the point of even putting this out there? Is it just blatant contempt for the electorate?
Click to expand...


Why is there a single one?
 
Captain Tele said:
all i see are damned lies

liars

and jew tricks

but with Zlex that is like saying the same thing three times

where 58k known illegal votes, in just one state, is just statistical "noise" now

LMAO
Click to expand...

Well there aren't 58k known illegal votes. That is the point, isn't it? The science of uncertainty analysis is well embraced and understood; it categorizes our total uncertainty into components, such as bias, precision, repeat-ability, and so on. So what is the uncertainty of these results? Did the government go out with a sample of their results and confirm any percentage of them? Did they perform any uncertainty analysis on the accuracy of the data model at all, or did they throw up their hands and say "This sounds like a big number to the mathematically illiterate."

I say this as someone who thinks this issue is flat out nutty; the 'barrier' to obtaining a proper photo ID is truly trivial. When there exists rights based on citizenship, is the requirement to prove citizenship really an unconstitutional 'barrier?' The sanction the left awards is their zealous belief that they are doing this deed on behalf of "the poor and blacks," who they believe require paternalistic protection from ...folks who progressives disagree with politically.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top