Monday, November 16, 2020

BOOM: NY Times’ Real-Time Election Data Seems to Confirm Massive Georgia Vote Fraud, Eerily Similar to Pennsylvania’s

For the startling, and eerily similar, analysis of apparent Pennsylvania vote manipulation, please see this post.

I've retrieved all of The New York Times' 2020 presidential datasets, which have a time-series of voting data from a company called Edison Research. Here, for instance, is Georgia's.

What I found is pretty fascinating, especially because it mimics exactly what happened in Pennsylvania.

As just one example, here is a graph depicting the shifts in votes starting on election day. The X-axis is the date/time and the Y-axis represents the change in votes (positive values denote shifts for Trump, negative values represent shifts for Biden, in hundreds).

May I call your attention to the differences between the left and the right sides of the graph?

Please note that after about 0100 hours on 11/4/20 Zulu, virtually all vote swings went for Biden.

But you need to see the data. Below is a spreadsheet with the time-series.

Trump's running vote count is in column C, and Biden's is in column D. The change in Trump's vote total from the prior count is in column E and Biden's is in column F. Lastly, column G shows the difference in vote swings between columns E and F.

Do me a favor and click on the spreadsheet below. Then scroll down until you start seeing highlighted cells. Then continue to scroll and tell me if that looks legit.

You'll notice that after the 11/4/20 01:00Z cutoff time, only swings of Biden votes (in multiples of almost exactly 4,8000 at a time) seem to have been received.

Statistically, these changes make no sense. They're not just improbable, they are statistically impossible.

It looks to me like bundles of around 4,800 votes (in PA, it appears to be bundles of 6,000 votes) were used to slowly overcome any Trump lead. The correlation is uncanny.

I have a sneaking suspicion that all of the highlighted cells represent vote fraud.

I'll have more info from other states --- that show similar bizarre trends -- shortly.

In the mean time, your thoughts are appreciated.

Hat tip: BadBlue Uncensored News.


Jason said...

That makes a lot of sense- keep a box of ballots that are 100% Biden and re run them periodically until the deficit is made up.

If we could get granular data we should be able to see which jurisdiction the were against... would be pretty lumpy

fogblogger said...

Doug, nice graph and data sets. Thanks for sharing. Maybe it's best to get a clear understanding and interpretation directly from the election officials. Do you really think there was a huge group of conspirators rigging the election? Well, the President seems to think so. Why would the President Lie? He's our President. Our President would not make a bold-face lie like that, would he? He's not that kind of person, is he? I want to trust our President, don't you? It seem to me there are fail-safe methods in place to prevent that kind of fraud from happening (unless voting polls are rigged with thousands of criminals - anti-american conspirator election workers, all doing the work of the Devil). Maybe they are part of some "deep-state" nefarious activity? I don't keep up with all that, but I'm concerned. Because if this is the situation, if these polls were rigged and the election workers were in on this conspiracy, if they were lying and cheating, committing felony acts and treason, then we're all in deep weeds. If this is true, then our democracy is no longer whole. It's been breached. Trump cannot save us. It's over. Our country is simply in a steady decline. Our democracy has crumbled.

However, if it is not True, then we are still in pretty good shape. If the elections were not rigged, and indeed Biden got more legal votes than Trump, then our democracy is still working. Whoever gets the most votes wins the election. It's that simple. That's how it has always worked. It's messy, but that is the core of our democracy - It will still be in tact.

But, there's something still bugging me. Something I think is threating our democracy. I think it's misinformation. I think the most threatening thing to our democracy is the spread of misinformation via all media platforms. There are a lot of people out there (I mean a BUNCH of folks) who are not very good at sorting out the truth from the bullshit. Additionally, there are also a bunch of people who easily buy into unsubstantiated conspiracy theories (I mean a BUNCH). And, there are a bunch of people out there who tend to be fanatical (I mean a BUNCH). Imagine if some charismatic leader comes along (who does not have integrity, does not respect the rules of our democracy, doesn't blink an eye to spread lies, who has fanatical and prejudicial thinking) and taps into the vulnerability people - folks who are on the fringe of fanatical thinking - people who feel they are not being heard or represented by the mainstream or by their Government, imagine what might happen if a leader could manipulate millions of voters. We saw what happened when Hitler captured the minds of millions in Germany. I think this kind of leader could threaten our democracy.

Doug, what do you think? Is our democracy over, or is it still in tact?

Keith said...

Even Inspector Clouseau can see what appears to be a pattern of fraud. It got really obvious on 11/06 at around 22:00. Outstanding work Doug. Shared it to

The (Deplorable) MUSEman said...

Too good to be true...but, hoping it is:

"EXCLUSIVE: How a Philly mob boss stole the election — and why he may flip on Joe Biden" November 14, 2020

The source alleges that Merlino and a lean team of associates manufactured [300,000 ballots voting for Joe Biden] at a rate of $10 per ballot — a whopping $3 million for three days of work. They were then packaged into non-descript cardboard boxes and dropped off outside the Philadelphia Convention Center.

Might explain the Philly PA voting anomalies you've already published?

Just wondering.

The (Deplorable) MUSEman said...

RE: "Philly mob boss stole the election", here's the link:

Unknown said...

A couple questions:
Why is the first-row time stamp 11/4/20 09:23 UT, & the next row (11/4/20 00:14 UT) is earlier?
When you say Doug that "after about 0100 hours on 11/4/20 Zulu" don't you mean after 17:12 on 11/4/20 Zulu? That's when the first highlighted cells are.

elmo said...

No one wants to see the truth. They don't have any room left. In their propaganda filled minds. They are actually afraid of the truth.

Tracy said...

Coincidentally (I'm sure) you can fit 2,000 to 2,500 pieces of paper in a banker's box.

2,400 + 2,400 = 4,800.

If, say, boxes of ballots were dropped off.

JS said...

Your attempt to be sincere and concerned fell way short buddy. Let me help you out. It's called election fraud on a massive scale. The only question is whether or not the evidence is still available and can be compiled in a short period of time. These are statistical impossibilities. Clearly you have an acute case of TDS that needs to be checked out. Get some help my friend.

Anonymous said...

Look at the numerous inputs of exactly offsetting votes.
Are these communication "pings" to ensure that the mothership still had connection so that they could be sure they could whip up another batch of those "Sloppy Joes"?

BurritoJimmy said...

It's impossible for them to have remained tied in the vote total for so long as well. There's a long string of entries where the two candidates received the exact same # of votes.

Valor81 said...

You say you don't keep up much with this but then turn around and say you knkw a (Bunch) you mean a Bunch do this that yes this is a conspiracy, were you are wrong is ,biden wins our democracy is over because we the people dosnt elect him obviously, Trump who has won and will be officially declared the winner is in 0lace by an even greater conspiracy of God to save our republic praise God

Anonymous said...

Why do the change in votes sometimes go down. Sometimes it is for Trump, sometimes for Biden and sometimes for both. Are these error corrections being done. The fact that it varies on who it impacts creates question as I would expect it to be for a single candidate.

Also, while the amounts are close, they are not exactly multiples of 4800. If you use that value and a "close" multiple what range do you apply for the validity of that multiple that you highlight as a possible fraudulant action.

Is there more data in the data set that would allow us to understand why the change took place?

There is definitely fraud going on, but I'm having trouble validating the highlighted cells without more context.

If I am missing something please educate me as I really would like to see the clear concise proof in the data sets.

Anonymous said...

The "raw" data isn't giving us the actual vote counts for each candidate, only the total number of votes cast and the vote share for each candidate. As more votes get tallied, eventually the vote share percentage "solidifies" for each candidate.

That's why it looks like Trump and Biden got the same number of votes in most of the batches that occur late at night - there are only small numbers of votes coming in and they are so small compared to the number already counted that they don't really change the existing vote share percentage.

The weird 4800 batches that you're seeing (and they do stick out since they're in the middle of long stretches of even divisions) is due to rounding to the thousands place in the percentage.

It looks like you're calculating the Trump and Biden votes by multiplying the voter share by the total votes and the calculating the delta by comparing to the previous record.
As an example, at timestamp "2020-11-06T02:32:41Z", Biden's voter share jumps from .493 to .494. This means that his total votes jumps quite at bit (.1%) but Trumps voter share stays the same. So when you calculate the delta against the previous record, it looks like Biden gained a ton while Trump didn't.

It looks like every "4800 batch" showed up when Biden's voter share rounded up.

I do think some hokey things happened in this election, but this looks to be rounding errors, not fraud.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, but the pattern still fits with Trump supporters generally voting in person, and their votes were counted first, followed by absentee and mail-in ballots from Democrats. As for numbers staying relatively close for stretches of time, that also seems reasonable. If you've ever worked with a team on a highly repetitive task (like vote counting), the rate of output for the team over a unit of time tends to stay fairly consistent. Some counters go on break, the rate drops, new counters sit down, the rate increases, but rates will move in patterns which might seems suspicious.

A "sneaking suspicion" does not hold up in court.

Misinformation and conspiracy theories are a real threat to our democracy.

Anonymous said...

I think this guy is in on it!! Or the media has convinced him he is.

Desi said...


Anonymous said...

You said "The change in Trump's vote total from the prior count is in column E and Biden's is in column F. Lastly, column G shows the difference in vote swings between columns E and F."

I think you need to clarify this for the sake of presenting this in court.

Column E is Trump's lead
Column F is Delta Trump
Column G is Delta Biden
Column H is is the difference in vote swings between F and G

Otherwise, absolutely great work, Doug.

Fire4040 said...

I want to remind you we do not live in a democracy. It is not whoever wins the most votes who wins. The dems are trying to change this. We live in a democratic republic. We elect people who share our values and trust that they represent us with integrity and according to how they presented their own beliefs. Not all candidates were forthcoming in their beliefs and commitments. Trump is always up front and clear in what his values are.

Anonymous said...

From your data, I plotted Trumps lead over time. You can clearly see the massive loss 142K votes from his lead happen in 13 minutes. It's the inverse of the now famous MI and WI graphs. Your 4,600 vote theory shows up as an unnatural stair step pattern following this event.

More fun facts form GA sec state data. Biden outperformed Hillary by 594K votes. In counties where Trump WON in 2020, Biden picked up 190K votes, or a 37% improvement vs Hillary. In counties Biden won, he picked up 403K votes. BUT, that is only a 30% improvement over Hillary. Excuse me? He OUTPERFORMED her more in counties that went Trump?

Finally, look at the counties Cobb and Gwinnett. In 16 they went for Hillary 49/47 and 51/45 respectively. but in 2020 Biden wins 56/42 and 58/40? Those are 10 and 12 point swings in counties where Trump improved vs 16'.

Absentee voting was 5% of the total GA vote in 16. 26% in 20.

Forgive me if I remain a skeptic.

TinCup91 from Atlanta

Anonymous said...

It's more interesting to look at the delta for each candidate. There are a negative deltas for each but only negative for Trump near the end of the data. Why is there a negative delta for any candidate? Oops, the machine counted wrong and a poll worker corrected it? Or, machine counted data was entered manually into some computer system and someone made a mistake and then corrected it? Why would a person need to enter any data by hand with a computerized counting system? Or maybe someone was watching over the internet and made changes along the way to make it look real. With enough negative changes for Trump near the end so that Biden had more votes. I would think a fair hand count would show the truth, unless as others have said, ballots were switched and those for Trump thrown away. I don't know how to post a graph here so others will have to verify my findings.

Unknown said...

Looking at the Georgia vote leads, did you make the timestamps or import them? If you imported them as part of the datasets, it stands out that after "closing time" the timestamps shift into military time. That is different like someone else took over the data at that point, someone who uses military time. We don't usually.

Anonymous said...

Actually, we live in a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. Not a Democracy, and not a democratic republic. A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. If we can keep it ...

Unknown said...

The first timestamp was 9:23 on 11/4, presumably A.M., when candidates were tied 0 to 0. Noon's timestamp looks like midnight, and so on through the afternoon showing military A.M. hours. Then between 8:14 and 8:47, the timestamp corrects to proper military time, 20:47. Was the hacker's clock set correctly and the clock on site not? Why is the timestamp format changing?

Unknown said...

DeKalb Co Georgia caught an error before it went through on election night. It was a 9,626 addition to reported ballots for Biden. See article below.

Anonymous said...

Here is data for all 50 states, presented with a bit more info and some graphs:

Anonymous said...

Eff this. Get your guns lets go to war. Anti-Trumpers vs pro-Trumpers. Lets vote that way.

Anonymous said...


Great work here and thank you.

All things point to Trump winning 2020 resoundingly, a massive nationwide populist win, and yet we have to wade through this leftist electoral fraud. Here in this GA data, you can see the edict went out late at night, "we need to win by 10k" and they did it in two batches of 5k fake votes.


My worry is how we can work as a country going forward: now we have a huge demographic across America, not just GA but PA, Wi, MI, NZ and on and on, that have been blooded in election theft. They see nothing wrong, and treasonous, in disenfranchising others, instead they are just laughing at America they got away with it... and will keep getting away with it from now on. Elections, over.

2020 election should be waived, switch the our state legislatures voting as the Constitution says. And we have to find ways to PUNISH the vote stealers.

Cornstock said...

In regards to an earlier post on this board about an article listed at the Buffalo Chronicle claiming that “Skinny Joey” Merlino, a mob boss in PA, was hired to create fake ballots. His lawyer has come and denied the entire story. He says that his client has been in Florida since his release from prison. It appears the story began on social media and was picked up by that website.

Look into it a bit more if you want. It doesn't seem legit though.

Anonymous said...

Those counts of roughly 4800 seem to all be different total numbers of ballots. The difference between Trump and Biden ballots tends to fall in that small range, but the total number of ballots varies considerably. So it wasn't like the previous commenter suggested that it was always 2 large boxes of paper that hold roughly 2500 total ballots per box.

Anonymous said...

Constitutional Republic, Democratic Republic, and Democracy are not mutually exclusive. We can live in both a representative democracy and a constitutional republic without there being any contradiction. Stop with the semantic games.

Unknown said...

This is a question from someone who didn't do well in math and is struggling to understand the GA table.I counted over 70+ IDENTICALl numerical amounts (of votes?) entered for Trump and Biden around 2:32 on. How could that be? "0" difference" between the entry numbers? Did somebody grab the exact amount each time and ran them through a machine?
I have hand counted ballots in elections before in NC elections at my precinct, before we used machines (yes I am old). Our little former forner cotton mill town went 72% for the President. I just don't know what we should all do from there.
Former mayor
Cooleemee, NC

Unknown said...

What happened around 6:34am on 11/4? 107K vote dump for Biden. That's not suspicious at all.

Anonymous said...

For "Unknown @ 2:59AM":

It's a rounding error.

The data in this spreadsheet is an approximation from a dump to NY Times. He links to it in his post. It is NOT an actual count of ballots for each candidate as they came in.

That data only contains a timestamp, the total number of ballots cast, the current percentage of that total that are for Biden and the percentage that are for Trump. The percentage is rounded to the tenth place (49.5%).

The batches at the end of the night are evenly divided because by that point, their percentages were pretty evenly divided (49.5% to 49.4%).

If the percentage had been sent with more digits of precision (for example 49.567891023%) you would have clearly been able to see Biden's votes going up quicker than Trump's. But since everything after the 49.5% was ignored until it got all the way up to 49.6% you see the numbers evenly divided until all of a sudden Biden gets an extra .1% (which incidentally, is around 4800 ballots, explaining the mysterious 4800 batches)

Again, this example is a rounding error, not fraud.

Little Mac said...

You should highlight like all the cells that come after 1PM on 5 November as well in PA. Biden and Trump are getting essentially IDENTICAL numbers of votes at every single new update. IMPOSSIBLE.

Unknown said...

Between rows 53,54 (11/4 2:21-2:22) how do absolute numbers go down (413,597 / 268,417 -- Trump 880,219 / 463,630 Biden) respectively? Seems like another Anomaly.

Seymour Gomez said...

Doug, you screwed up on column numbers, as follows:

"Trump's running vote count is in column C, and Biden's is in column D. The change in Trump's vote total from the prior count is in column E and Biden's is in column F. Lastly, column G shows the difference in vote swings between columns E and F."

Column E holds different data than what you said. That and the rest are thus screwed up.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the "Anonymous" at 5:28 that the near numbers being nearly even are because of rounding error. You can see that as the overall number of votes goes up, the "4800" number tends to go up. It is the rounding that makes this look so suspicious . . . . I'm not saying that there wasn't fraud. I'm just saying that the rounding issue is what is showing up in what looks like fairly even numbers.


Seymour Gomez said...

Doug, that large spike of votes for Biden was 135,843 (22 bundles) in just 2 minutes! Someone would have had to manipulate Dominion to count that many in such a short time, don't you think? That amounted to 22 bundles of 4800 votes with some left over.

After that time 16 bundles of 4800 ( + or - .05 range) came in till the end of counting 6 days later. I didn't include any that were outside the +- range of .05. There were about 9 of those.