Sunday, November 15, 2020

NY Times' Michigan Data: Massive Vote Dump at 6AM Wednesday (96% for Biden) Used To Overcome Huge Trump Lead

For the startling 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 Michigan's.

Below is a graph depicting the shifts in votes in Michigan 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 at about 6:30AM ET, a massive vote dump arrived for Biden, magically bringing Trump's huge lead to almost nil

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 massive 6:30am vote dump (141258 Biden votes to 5968 Trump votes), nearly all swings in the counts came in multiples of around 5,500 at a time to benefit Biden. So of this late vote dump representing nearly 150,000 votes, Biden "received" a statistically impossible 96 percent.

There was also an earlier (11/4/2020 8:50:00Z) dump of around 60,000 votes that went 92 percent for Biden, as well as a later (11/5/2020 13:34Z) one that was 99 percent.

It appears to me like bundles of around 5,500 votes were used to overcome any Trump lead. The correlation is uncanny.

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

In the mean time, your thoughts are appreciated.


As plausible as anything else in 2020, I guess.

Hat tip:
BadBlue Uncensored News.


Anonymous said...

Great work, keep it up. WI next?

Doom said...

I remember how anti-Trump you were... at least through to the election? No, nomination. Then you hiked your gumption and... got back to it? Somewhere and something like that. Glad to see... some made it to the correct side. Good show, on this as well. Cheers*.

(All I can use as a toast is a fatted coffee, but... Sometimes it is the thought.)

Anonymous said...

Covenant and American Founding:

Interceptpoint said...

You need to add 2 columns to your very valuable spreadsheet: The Total Vote and the Trump lead. Short term changes in the Trump lead are easy to spot and that is what really counts. But, in any case, nice job.

ml/nj said...

It's sort of ironic that the NY Times is documenting the fraud.

Anonymous said...

Let me draw your attention to something that I think you overlooked but it is obvious if you add an additional column that shows Trump's lead.

Look down at where Biden and Trump are actually exactly tied:

11/4/2020 13:59 2446908 2432018 7838 17635 -9797 69.2

11/4/2020 14:02 2471626 2471626 24718 39608 -14890 61.6

11/4/2020 14:04 2472694 2472694 1068 1068 0 50.0

They are exactly tied at 14:02 with 2471626 that means at the previous update Trump was 14,890 ahead. That's exactly the amount of the differential between Biden's increase and Trump's increase. What are the odds of that after a combined vote increase of 64,326? I think that proves an algorithm is at work. Guess what, the same exact thing happened in GA with Biden getting the exact number of votes he needed to pull in a tie.
Also notice that the next set of votes to come in are exactly split down the middle.

BigEdLB said...

Thank you for your analysis looking forward to other states. I took your numbers and am working through them further. when you get through the main six states, can you also look at Minnesota and Virginia?

ml/nj said...

If similar Michigan data is available from previous elections, it would be interesting compare the timing of percentages of the full vote received from those elections to this one.

I think it would also be interesting to make similar comparisons with data from other suspect States and compare with New York, Illinois, and California where the cheaters probably thought cheating wasn't necessary.

Anonymous said...

I know you're busy and not even sure if this is helping or adding to the fog.

directorblue said...

Anonymous 8:27... good idea, I added that column to the workbook.

ml/nj said...

Where can one download the New York Times' 2020 presidential datasets?

alanstorm said...

"You'll notice that after the massive 6:30am vote dump (141258 Biden votes to 5968 Trump votes)"

I'm not seeing anything like that at 6:30. Where is it?

Anonymous said...

Anom @8:27PM nailed it! One massive Biden dump to ‘tie’ it, a small, equal dump, then Biden from there on out! Complete sham! We just have to prove it so...devil in the details.

Keith said...

Outstanding work Doug. Thanks!

Geoff Bright said...

The worksheet does not match the graph ... the worksheet is missing any large dump on
Wednesday 11/6.

Anonymous said...

Do you have data on Georgia? I'm not able to find any of this information. BTW, please send this info to Trump's legal team. I'd be interested in knowing how many votes the other candidates (besides Trump and Biden) had during these statistically improbable vote dumps. Overall in Georgia, other candidates had about 1.5% of the vote. If these vote dumps were indeed just a bunch of illegal votes dumped in for Biden, then the percentage of votes for other candidates would have dropped off significantly, which would make for a stronger argument of fraud.