‘Look at the evidence and decide for yourself’
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is urging Americans to take a close look at the early morning hours after Election Day when vote dumps in four states put Joe Biden ahead of President Trump.
“Statistical anomaly? Fraud?” Paul wrote on Twitter. “Look at the evidence and decide for yourself. (That is, if Big Tech allows u to read this).”
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
In fact, Twitter allowed the post but slapped on an editorial comment: “This claim about election fraud is disputed.”
But Paul only raised the question of fraud, asking readers to look at the detailed information from researchers and judge for themselves.
Interesting . . . Trump margin of “defeat” in 4 states occurred in 4 data dumps between 1:34-6:31 AM. Statistical anomaly? Fraud? Look at the evidence and decide for yourself.(That is, if Big Tech allows u to read this)
Anomalies in Vote Counts; https://t.co/DgBlYj9zUP
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) November 29, 2020
BizPacReview noted Paul was questioning the “statistical anomaly,” linking to an article on “vote spikes” favoring Biden that occurred in the early hours of Nov. 4.
The analysis by Vote Pattern Analysis explained the spikes decisively improved Biden’s position in Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia.
“Much skepticism and uncertainty surrounds these ‘vote spikes.’ Critics point to suspicious vote counting practices, extreme differences between the two major candidates’ vote counts, and the timing of the vote updates, among other factors, to cast doubt on the legitimacy of some of these spikes. While data analysis cannot on its own demonstrate fraud or systemic issues, it can point us to statistically anomalous cases that invite further scrutiny.”
The spikes in question were in competitive states and were “unusually large in size and had an unusually high Biden-to-Trump ratio.”
“We demonstrate the results differ enough from expected results to be cause for concern.”
Advertisement – story continues below
The analysis took its numbers from the New York Times, reviewing nearly 9,000 “vote updates.”
“We discover a remarkably consistent mathematical property: there is a clear inverse relationship between difference in candidates’ vote counts and the ratio of the vote counts. (In other words, it’s not surprising to see vote updates with large margins, and it’s not surprising to see vote updates with very large ratios of support between the candidates, but it is surprising to see vote updates which are both).”
The report continued: “Nearly every vote update, across states of all sizes and political leanings follow this statistical pattern. A very small number, however, are especially aberrant. Of the seven vote updates which follow the pattern the least, four individual vote updates — two in Michigan, one in Wisconsin, and one in Georgia — were particularly anomalous and influential with respect to this property and all occurred within the same five hour window.”
The batch updates that raise concerns include, the report said: