So let me reframe the question. If ballots were illegally counted, and the court doesn’t acknowledge this, is it possible that ballots were illegally counted?

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire, you just advanced to level 3!

Gn

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire no I said what is technically illegal, for example the PA lawsuit that got thrown out over a constitutional technicality is not proof or evidence of fraud. It’s proof that the GOP never completed administrative process

Yes, ive watched many claim te same. This is way more in depth though and tackles the debunkers claims

you cant just debunk a mathematical law after an election when our own officials had been using it to identify fraud before our own election

Let me know if you debunk this guy. I will happily change my view

It's not debunking the math law its showing how it was poorly applied

Which this guy talks about.

Ok, I’m simply asking what specially you would have to see to be convinced that ballots were illegally counted. It could be a witness testimony, mathematical evidence, etc. you name it.

Nobody said benfords law doesnt work when it should work. They said the claims going around Republican social media are not sets of numbers or should work and heres why

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Yes. It is also possible that aliens counted them, regardless of whether anyone makes that claim. It isn't 'Everything allegation is true until proven wrong.' Not for me. You asked. I answered.

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire again that’s for the people making the allegation. Come up with something that can’t be explained away

they cant and wont, they dont understand fundamentals of math and law, and all they can do is accuse people with a different viewpoint of being brainwashed and propagandized. people to the right of them have an astounding level of burden of proof, and eveyr time you reach it more expectations are put on to you to prove your point. there is no use trying to reason with these people. their lack of self awareness is enough for the politically moderate to see how biased and wrong they are.

I'll check out the video though

This guy tackles that and uses state data nor city data

AZ hearing boring and copy of PA hearing

Thabks! I dont like being lied to, so if that guy is... ill def change my view

Feel free to pm me if you watched it

If you can’t define what it would take to change your mind, then there’s no point in trying to change it because it is not based in fact, it’s based on ideology.

Debate aside, does this woman sound credible in any way?

People who think benfords law don’t understand it’s not proof of anything and a weak indicator for elections

The slides in the AZ testimony though are local not statewide

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire I'm fine with that.

bro it isn't a mathematical law

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire the same would apply for accusations of fraud if you can’t prove it you are just hoping to convince people it exists with explanations that can easily be explained away

it is an empirical observation that was observed that appeared to be true in many cases

https://discord.com/channels/760945067107680286/771201221145919499/776149567175524352

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Rather, I'm fine with you thinking that but I disagree that you have any basis to claim ideological bias. Wanted to clarify.

I literally made a test

you can play with the distribution and see when Benford's law applies and when it doesn't

I would say for me, what I would need to be convinced that there was widespread election fraud would be sworn witness testimony that HAS to be in line with the observed vote counting data. Further, there should be a pattern across several states in which the witness testimony and voting data all coincide with each other.

if you try to apply Benford's law to any narrow distribution, it won't work

also, it requires more than "69 samples" to work

I'll give this guy a watch when I have time

so american prosecutors and other LEO agencies branded this as a mathematical law to justify building cases against corporations and dictating foreign policy? then suddenly after nov3 2020 it was no longer a reasonable or valid indicator ?

wouldnt surprise me honestly

no

It people coming up with excuses after the fact. Again affidavits mean nothing If they can’t be proven true or false. You don’t get in trouble for something than can’t be observed or verified. So far that is all what the affidavits claim. @AdvanceManExtraordinaire

Thabks! And let me know because you do seem knowledgeable.

But this vid goes into what you vring as counter

it is called "law" colloquially, it isn't an actual mathematical law