Background: The US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published a paper in 2012 titled “Statistical detection of systematic election irregularities.” [1] The paper asked the question, “How can it be distinguished whether an election outcome represents the will of the people or the will of the counters?” The study reviewed the results from elections in …
Election Fingerprint for Dallas, TX polling places – All Vote Types: Conclusions: The results have a rotated and elongated orientation, and looks like a number of distinct “hot-spots” within the larger cluster. Vote share near or over 100% is highly irregular and indicates a strong potential for fraud in any election. In the image above, …
Hat tip to Ed Solomon for collating the data on this one. There’s a bunch more coming as Ed’s done the heavy lifting on a bunch of localities, and I’m working through them. Election Fingerprint for Atlanta, GA polling places – All Vote Types: Conclusions: The results do not form a normal Gaussian distribution, and …
USAID pulled two of their recent publications sometime after Nov 8 2020 on election integrity from their website. Specifically two publications that discuss election integrity forensics, including referencing the same National Academy of sciences paper that describes the Election Fingerprinting process that I’ve been using as a basis for my work. Luckily … there’s the …
After getting a pointer to the higher fidelity per-ward WI data and redoing that analysis (here), which was not only able to produce the election fingerprints but also a statistical model for each county that could identify statistically outlying wards for further scrutiny, I wanted to go back to the VA data and see if …
Yes. I’ve been watching the Mike Lindell cyber symposium. I was invited to attend (thank you again to Amanda Freeman Chase), but due to timing, my day job, and my understanding of the event format … I thought I could be more effective watching from home with the ability multi-task and to research things I …
Note: As of Update 2021-08-13 (see below) the discrepancy is now 382176 Votes. This needs to be explained. I hope this is just a mistake on my part or it can be attributed to a documented clerical or reporting error. I’ve gone over this a number of times now and triple checked my data sources …
Shortly after posting some updated WI data analysis (here) I got pointed to an even better set of data to use for generating the fingerprints. This updated dataset uses the registration numbers as of Nov 3 and the per ward vote tallies provided on the https://elections.wi.gov/ site. I also made some code modifications in order …
Previously (see here, and here) I built a set of Election Fingerprints including WI that was based on the County data that I extracted from the NYT/Edison research election tracker, which was the best data that I had available at the time. While the results did have some interesting features, there wasn’t really enough data …
In answering some questions and messages I’ve been getting on my election analysis work, I took a minute and simply plotted the log-log plot of all of the absolute vote counts for Biden Vs. Trump for all precincts in the state. Real physical precincts are colored blue. Central absentee counting precincts are colored red. The …
Read more “(Another) Interesting View of VA 2020 Election Data”