# Final Prediction on Election

by minimus 131 Replies latest jw friends

• ##### LoveUniHateExams

any would-be electoral fraudster could have worked out how to smooth out a graph - how would they do that? I mean, the graph apparently shows the amount of votes coming in over time.

• ##### slimboyfat
any would-be electoral fraudster could have worked out how to smooth out a graph - how would they do that? I mean, the graph apparently shows the amount of votes coming in over time.

By releasing the fraudulent data more gradually? Mixing in some Trump votes? It doesn’t take a genius.

Let's just stop the belly-aching altogether...why not put the electoral vote to one side and go with the popular vote which puts Biden ahead by over 3.7 million votes. This way we can all still be friends! :) :)

• ##### slimboyfat
There may be a reasonable explanation for adding votes for one candidate all at once. As I understand it, in the UK votes for various candidates are separated into different bundles and then counted. Often candidates can tell if they have won the vote before the votes are counted because of the relative sizes of the bundles. (Hence the joke that they “weigh the votes rather than counting them” in some safe constituencies) So it certainly seems possible that a lot of bundles for one candidate arrives all at once. I don’t know if that’s the explanation here, but I don’t think that fraud is the only possible explanation for the bump in Biden support on the graph. It could be an explanation, but we would require more evidence and input from people who know how the system works.
• ##### glow

The jump in voters in Michigan was due to a simple technical glitch:

Trump by a significant margin, it is as simple as that.

• ##### Simon

Here's proof of fraud: they are not allowing observers in to watch the process, despite court orders.

Hard to think of any viable explanation for that other than "we a busy cheatin'"

• ##### minimus

To the person who asked if I’m American, yes I am.

Regarding Democrats cheating, why on earth would anyone ever think such a thing? These people have no history of dishonesty. 👌

• ##### MeanMrMustard
There may be a reasonable explanation for adding votes for one candidate all at once.

OK. What? In the U.S. the ballots can't be separated into parties, as it is in the UK. The ballot contains a vote for many different races, and it is possible to vote for different parties for different races.

Here is one explanation:

The jump in voters in Michigan was due to a simple technical glitch:
Trump by a significant margin, it is as simple as that.

A typo? So is this article saying that the news organizations are getting update files from the state, and that in the process of creating the file, there was a "typo" - as in someone finger-flubbed? As in... there is a human feeding these numbers? A human.... in the state government...

Or are they saying a computer dumped out a "0" into an automatically generated file? That is almost worse - because it implies some manual intervention into the computer systems generating the numbers. If the DB that is aggregating votes has votes for Trump, it won't dump "0". And if it is a bug, then the bug would happen more often.

If that is the explanation: OK, then recount.

Here's proof of fraud: they are not allowing observers in to watch the process, despite court orders.

Also, when inner city black districts suddenly have higher turnout for Biden than they had for Obama. And at the same time, comparable black districts in other non-contested cities have a Biden turnout much lower than Obama.

• ##### minimus

Only democrats vote. Not even one independent?? Sure, ok!💩

• ##### DesirousOfChange

Let's just stop the belly-aching altogether...why not put the electoral vote to one side and go with the popular vote which puts Biden ahead by over 3.7 million votes.

Why not?

Because that is NOT how the framers of the US Constitution set up the voting system. You may think that seems obvious, but when the 13 original colonies formed the basis of this new nation, the smaller colonies (States) did not want the larger and more populous States to have overwhelming control as they would have if decisions were based on (what we would today call) one-person-one-vote.

OTOH, the populous States did not think it fair that the less populous States have EQUAL say in matter as that would not be fair to their citizens.

Thus the framers did it neither way -- but BOTH ways -- as the Senate is EQUAL representation for each State. Regardless of population, each State has two senators and two votes on matters. Whereas the House of Representatives is weighted according to population. California with the most citizens has 55 US Representatives. The least populous States have only 1 US Representative.

To satisfy (by compromise -- something that used to happen in past politics) both sides pertaining to elections, the Electoral College was designed, where each State has the Electoral Votes equal to their Senators PLUS their US Representatives.

IF ELECTIONS WERE NOT BASED ON THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE, but rather on the "popular vote", then no politician would give any attention to any area of the US except Los Angeles County, CA and New York City and Chicago IL. To win the favor of those 3 areas would allow any candidate to win the election. F*CK OFF if you live in any smaller state or rural area.