Hello everyone,
Since Trump has been indicted again, he will have to prove the frauds during the 2020 election to defend himself, and I am pretty sure he will.
I want to share an analysis I conducted regarding the deviations of bellwether counties in the 2020 presidential election. For context, a bellwether county is a county that has historically voted for the candidate who became the President. There are 19 such counties in the United States.
In the 2020 presidential election, 18 out of these 19 counties voted for the candidate who did not win the election. This is a highly improbable event, and I wanted to calculate the exact probability of this occurrence.
To do this, I used historical data from the presidential elections from 1980 to 2016. Here are the deviations for each electoral cycle from 1980 to 2016:
1980: 1 deviation (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_United_States_presidential_election)
1984: 1 deviation (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_United_States_presidential_election)
1988: 2 deviations (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_United_States_presidential_election)
1992: 6 deviations (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presidential_election)
1996: 1 deviation (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_presidential_election)
2000: 1 deviation (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election)
2004: 3 deviations (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_presidential_election)
2008: 1 deviation (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_presidential_election)
2012: 1 deviation (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election)
2016: 3 deviations (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election)
By adding up the total number of deviations (20) and dividing it by the total number of counties over all cycles (190), we get an average probability of deviation per county per electoral cycle of 0.105.
The probability that 18 out of 19 counties deviate in an electoral cycle is therefore calculated using the formula for the binomial distribution:
P(k; n, p) = C(n, k) * (p^k) * ((1 - p)^(n - k))
where:
P is the probability, C is the binomial coefficient (the number of ways to choose k successes from n trials), p is the probability of success of a trial, k is the number of successes, n is the total number of trials. By replacing n with 19 (the total number of bellwether counties), k with 18 (the number of counties that voted for the losing candidate), and p with 0.105 (the probability of deviation for a bellwether county), we get a probability of about 4.09e-17. The detailed calculation is as follows:
P(18; 19, 0.105) = C(19, 18) * (0.105^18) * ((1 - 0.105)^(19 - 18))
This means that the probability that 18 out of 19 bellwether counties vote for the losing candidate in the 2020 presidential election is one in 24,449,877,506,112,469 (twenty-four quadrillion four hundred forty-nine trillion eight hundred seventy-seven billion five hundred six million one hundred twelve thousand four hundred sixty-nine). To put this in perspective, the probability of winning the Powerball lottery in the United States is 1 in 292,201,338 (two hundred ninety-two million two hundred one thousand three hundred thirty-eight) (source: https://www.powerball.com/powerball-prize-chart). To reach a probability of 4.09e-17, you would have to win the Powerball lottery about twice in a row (2.07).
Share that with your normies friends and family, and if that does not wake them up, it means they just don't want to do so. These are not opinions, testimonies or documents, this is math, hard math.
I invite you to check these calculations for yourself and share your thoughts.
Liberals will be like, "see, you just proved it's possible for Trump to have lost..."
“So you’re saying there’s a chance.”
I'm dumb enough to know there is NO chance, sadly liberals are dumber and think this is proof.
Actually there is a higher probability that Trump lost than Mike Obamba birthing children from his penis or rectum. Just saying.
Penis AND rectum simultaneously
This when you hear “who’s they”?
Yeah right?
🤣 so true!
Sticky please! This is awesome!
To request a sticky press "deport>Other" and use Sticky Request as the reason
It’s downright Hilary deplorable that that’s still the process lol
Math is rayciss!!! You stinking white supremacist nazi antisemite transphobe bigot Trumptard
As a data and statistics freak, I just love this sort of analysis.
Impressive anon, thanks for doing this.
We have the best mathfags
Actually i checked your math. I found 1 problem. I have no idea what you just did…. 😂😂. 💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻🎉🎉🎉
Get a Statistics Book or Schaum's Outline...
I don't think that's taught in Common Core math for the following reasons:
The teachers aren't smart enough
The students are therefore not smart enough
If somehow it was taught people might actually question things like elections, wars in Ukraine, Clinton Foundation tax returns, etc. which is not permitted.
When "trust the science" meets "there is no evidence".
I personally will be roflmao if any of Trumps witnesses are the military personnel with the absolute proof they rigged it. And I wouldn't be surprised if some of those brain dead on the left STILL refuse to see it.
I think Trump waits his trial to show this kind of anomalies on tv, in front of tens of millions (maybe 100 millions). This is what I would do in his position. Keep the most powerful weapons for the end of the information war.
OP, as a math retard. I would like to thank you for this. We all have our strong suits, this is not mine. Saved for further red pilling against certain hopeless fools.
Jesus f'n Christ
If that doesn't wake them up, they just don't understand the maths. ;o)
Vote tally lines should be more easier to understand than the data mining science stuff 😜
What I'm getting out of this is I have a higher chance of effecting change by playing a rigged lotto vs a rigged election.
I can't math like this but it does give me a boner. God DAMN!
The calculation itself is fine, but I don't think the interpretation is correct.
One issue is that you're treating the county results as coming from a random process when they don't. There are trends that underlie these counties' voting results, including the way voting behavior correlates with ethnicity and education levels. These counties tend to be whiter and have lower education levels than the nation as a whole. Groups like that used to vote in line with the whole country, but now they don't. See this article for details..
Another issue is that the set of bellwether counties itself is a result of selection effects. In 2016, there were 35 such counties (according to the article I linked). Nearly half of them (16) voted for Clinton and lost their status as bellwethers. So the 19 counties you're looking at are the ones that made it through a filtering process that only let through counties that like Trump. It shouldn't be that surprising that those counties liked Trump again four years later.
Almost not fair to include 1980 & 1984. Reagan won everythingeverywhereallatonce.
I'm not sure I agree with you 100% on your police work there
https://youtu.be/MDxEvdICKnw
You're much better at math than me, but I think there's a mistaken assumption going here.
This is political science not hard science.
A bellweather county is a bellweather county based on it's track record, not based on any unerring scientific law. There's nothing that says track records don't change. This can't be calculated like the flipping of a coin.
Why? People. People can change.
Here's some facts to ground our assumptions.
*Elliot County, Kentucky voted for Democrats in every presidential election since the county’s founding, in 1869.
*In 2016, Trump won 70% of the vote there. People changed.
*There were even more "bell weather counties" before the 2016 election. Using your definition
Using the timeframe you chose, if you did this exercise in 2016 and counties that voted for the winner from 1980 to 2012, there would have been 35 such counties up for grabs in 2016.
So what would the odds be that only 19 of these 35 voted for the winner? Would it be mathematically impossible for this result? Or did people change?
There's lots of Demographic factors that could contribute to why these counties voted the way they did.
Which is this can't be used the way you're using it.
Next you will also tell us you have a video of big mike having a child through his penis?