Let me be clear that I agree fraud occurred on a large scale in both Fulton and Philadelphia. I just don't think Solomon proves it with his crazy, unbelievably long-winded analysis. You quote me and then say "That's not the point." but then your next words verify it is in fact the point. His ultimate argument is probabilistic, saying there is no way such ratio transfers could ever have occurred normally. That's a probability statement with a tacit reference to a uniform distribution. My claim is that uniform distribution assumption is flawed. Voting tallies and the ratios they produce with counting schemes like those in Fulton and Philly occur in batches, often size 50 and 100. This makes certain ratios much more likely than others simply by the counting process. Finally, I'd challenge you to actually write his algorithm in some kind of reasonable coding language with a clear, concise explanation and logic, not with endless attention-seeking hours on spreadsheets and Starcraft. Good luck!

Let me be clear that I agree fraud occurred on a large scale in both Fulton and Philadelphia. I just don't think Solomon proves it with his crazy, unbelievably long-winded analysis. You quote me and then say "That's not the point." but then your next words verify it is in fact the point. His ultimate argument is probabilistic, saying there is no way such ratio transfers could ever have occurred normally. That's a probability statement with a tacit reference to a uniform distribution. My claim is that uniform distribution assumption is flawed. Voting tallies and the ratios they produce with counting schemes like those in Fulton and Philly occur in batches, often size 50 and 100. This makes certain ratios much more likely than others simply by the counting process. Finally, I'd challenge you to actually write his algorithm in some kind of reasonable coding language with a clear explanation and logic, not with endless attention-seeking hours on spreadsheets and Starcraft. Good luck!

Let me be clear that I agree fraud occurred on a large scale in both Fulton and Philadelphia. I just don't think Solomon proves it with his crazy, unbelievably long-winded analysis. You quote me and then say "That's not the point." but then your next words verify it is in fact the point. His ultimate argument is probabilistic, saying there is no way such ratio transfers could ever have occurred normally. That's a probability statement with a tacit reference to a uniform distribution. My claim is that uniform distribution assumption is flawed. Voting tallies and the ratios they produce with counting schemes like those in Fulton and Philly occur in batches, often size 50 and 100. This makes certain ratios much more likely than others simply by the counting process. Finally, I'd challenge you to actually write his algorithm in some kind of reasonable language with a clear explanation, not with endless attention-seeking hours on spreadsheets and Starcraft. Good luck!

Let me be clear that I agree fraud occurred on a large scale in both Fulton and Philadelphia. I just don't think Solomon proves it with his crazy analysis. You quote me and then say "That's not the point." but then your next words verify it is in fact the point. His ultimate argument is probabilistic, saying there is no way such ratio transfers could ever have occurred normally. That's a probability statement with a tacit reference to a uniform distribution. My claim is that uniform distribution assumption is flawed. Voting tallies and the ratios they produce with counting schemes like those in Fulton and Philly occur in batches, often size 50 and 100. This makes certain ratios much more likely than others simply by the counting process. Finally, I'd challenge you to actually write his algorithm in some kind of reasonable language with a clear explanation, not with endless attention-seeking hours on spreadsheets and Starcraft. Good luck!

Let me be clear that I agree fraud occurred on a large scale in both Fulton and Philadelphia. I just don't think Solomon proves it with his crazy analysis. You quote me and then say "That's not the point." but then your next words verify it is in fact the point. His ultimate argument is probabilistic, saying there is no way such ratio transfers could ever have occurred normally. That's a probability statement with a tacit reference to a uniform distribution. My claim is that uniform distribution assumption is flawed. Voting tallies and the ratios they produce with counting schemes like those in Fulton and Philly occur in batches, often size 50 and 100. This makes certain ratios much more likely than others simply by the counting process. Finally, I'd challenge you to actually write his algorithm in some kind of reasonable language, not endless attention-seeking hours on spreadsheets and Starcraft. Good luck!

Let me be clear that I agree fraud occurred on a large scale in both Fulton and Philadelphia. I just don't think Solomon proves it with his crazy analysis. You quote me and then say "That's not the point." but then you next words verify it is in fact the point. HIs ultimate argument is probabilistic, saying there is no way such ratio transfers could ever have occurred normally. That's a probability statement with a tacit reference to a uniform distribution. My claim is that uniform distribution assumption is flawed. Voting tallies and the ratios they produce with counting schemes like those in Fulton and Philly occur in batches, often size 50 and 100. This makes certain ratios much more likely than others simply by the counting process. Finally, I'd challenge you to actually write his algorithm in some kind of reasonable language, not endless attention-seeking hours on spreadsheets and Starcraft. Good luck!