Tuesday, November 17, 2020

Two Tells

Two blogs at at AmThinker this morning that deserve to be read together. Because together they strongly suggest--even if it's not statistically conclusive--that the Dems KNOW that there was actually a Red Wave. 

The first blog presents some amazing numbers from the election: The numbers prove voter fraud. The author doesn't engage in any fancy numerical juggling--he simply presents the total votes for the past 4 elections (counting this one). It's stunning. 

Now, before you say anything, yes, I understand that mail-in vote could arguably have changed things. My counter argument is--not as much as you're gonna see. Because extremely low Dem enthusiasm was a documentable factor--until the Dems started counting their votes. And, on the other hand, 

So here are those numbers:

2008: 129,500,000.

2012: 127,000,000.

2016: 129,000,000. 

2020: 151,890,753 ... SO FAR!


Now think about this sensible observation:

How did we suddenly get 18 million more votes?

To date, Biden has scored 78,764,266 votes and Trump 73,126,487.

Note that Trump scored 10 million more votes this year than he did four years ago.

Nobody has accused Trump of massive vote theft ...

We get it about Trump's increase--all the polls showed tremendous enthusiasm for Trump among his supporters. And, as the author points out, nobody is claiming the GOP or Trump cheated to get that huge increase. Moreover, even if Trump got most of those 10 million new votes from people who usually don't vote, you know that he most likely got a not insignificant number from former Dems--for example, we know that that happened with Hispanics and with Black men. That's fact, and it points to a real Red Wave--as also reflected in the House elections.

But that means that Biden supposedly got a huge number of new votes--despite the lack of enthusiasm and despite Trump making major inroads in the Dem core demographics. I'm sorry, lack of enthusiasm will affect mail-in voting, too. None of this adds up. It just doesn't.

And what this suggests is election fraud on a scale that we used to associate with what we dismissively called the Third World--but which is now home to us. We're Numero Uno--Mundo Primero! 

Monica Showalter offers us the second tell, quoting the New York Post. Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer are reported to be urging House Dems NOT TO TAKE JOBS IN A PUTATIVE BIDEN WHITE HOUSE. Yes, you read that right. Showalter is undoubtedly right about this:

Pelosi knows that a red wave happened, and the fact that she now has the most tenuous of majorities, ever shrinking as late-arriving vote counts come in, with 12 new GOP pickups so far, means it will be easier and easier to see the Democrats swept out in any special election. And if it doesn't happen soon, it will definitely happen in 2022 ...

Because the Dem agenda is multifariously unpopular. Not only that, but the Dem brand is now linked to three deeply unpopular things:

1. Antifa/BLM--and don't think their violence is going to end. Defunding the police, new Soros DA's (think Los Angeles, which had its problems already)--the Left want their agenda adopted and they'll use violence to get it. And House Dems know that that agenda is poison to their electoral chances.

2. A major part of the public are already aware that this was a stolen election. That awareness is sure to be reinforced in coming months--in spite of the Deep State Big Media/Tech Complex's worst efforts. Blatant and shameless election fraud is NOT a good look in America.

3. More Covid lockdowns. More schools shut down. Sooner or later parents will ask: Whose side are the teachers unions on? Oh, and Fauci telling the populace to shut up and cancel Thanksgiving and Christmas?

If this weren't true, there's no way that we'd be seeing a 12 seat GOP pickup, and Pelosi knows it. That 12 seat pickup is a very direct indication of just how unpopular that Dem brand has become. And if that doesn't convince, go back to square one--Trump's 10 million vote pickup.

One more indicator of all the above. House Dems are openly calling for Pelosi's head, with much of the blame for the disastrous electoral results being placed on Pelosi's embrace of street violence. In this climate, getting anything through the House--much less through the Senate--will be problematic at best.

Meanwhile in LaLa Land:

Joe Biden (if he is seated as president) says he plans to govern by executive order. No persuading, no debates, no compromise, no need to answer to the voters or raise funds, as happens in the hard legislative work of the House, just Joe and his pen and his phone.

There won't be any court packing anytime soon. And there will be court challenges to any Biden executive orders as well as to other issues dear to the heart of the totalitarian Left. While the SCOTUS can never be taken for granted, I believe that Justice Amy will make a BIG difference.

I can't see this ending well. I weep for our country. But maybe this will lead to a Great Awakening that will counter the Great Wokening.


  1. Anyone care to speculate why commie-la hasn’t resigned from the Senate yet either?

  2. Early on I saw reports that Wisconsin voter participation was on the order of 90%. I believe the previous high was 73% in '84.

    Unbelievable. Fishy. Unbelievably fishy.

  3. Also, the above numbers, rounded:

    2020: 152 million
    2016: 129 million
    difference: 23 million. Not 18 million.

    1. Yeah, difference: 23 million, thus 10 million more for DJT, and 13 million more for Biden over Hillary, but negative coattails down-ballot (esp. compared to 2018)?

  4. To those more knowledgeable -
    Can the Supreme Court demand a nationwide recount?

    1. I don't think the Supreme Court can "demand" anything.

  5. This guy, Matt Braynard is doing some interesting work on the absentee voting in various states. The data so far, if you believe his telephone results, indicate a massive fraud was perpetrated in Pennsylvania at the ballot mailing stage and at the counting stage:

    "- Unreturned ABS Analysis for PA

    Among 1706 respondents we reached whom the state said were sent an absentee ballot, 556 said they never requested it.

    And of the 1137 who did request the ballot, 453 said they mailed back yet the state did not receive or count them.
    10:25 PM · Nov 16, 2020·Twitter Web App"

    This is just from survey data of Republicans to whom the state of Pennsylvania claims to have mailed an absentee ballot according the State Elections Board. One third of those surveyed claimed they never requested the ballot, and of the two thirds that did request it, 25% of the entire sample of 1706 claimed they returned it, but according to the state, they did not.

    Now, such survey data isn't completely reliable, but I don't think that many people would lie on even the second question in which the answer of, "No, I didn't return it," would make them look bad in the present moment.

    What it suggests to me is that certain places in Pennsylvania were sending out ballots without them being requested by anyone- already illegal behavior. It will be interesting to where exactly the people in the survey lived.

    A more interesting question, and not one I think Braynard has asked though, would be to survey the Republicans the state did claimed returned a ballot. Who wants to bet that a lot of them will deny they sent a ballot back?

    1. It would be a great way to sample for non-voters. So the way this works, fabricate absentee requests. Anyone who doesn't show up on election day becomes a pool of ballots that can be stuffed for the candidate of your choice up to the numbers you require.

      In order to do this, you have to count all the ballots on election day first. Then in the middle of the night, you generate your list of unreturned absentee ballots and stuff the ballot box until your guy is ahead.

      What I really want to know is how many ballots were cast from the population of individuals who did not request one. This data analyzed those non-reponses. What about those votes that were cast? Did any of those absentee ballots come from people who never requested them?

    2. Are there accurate records about how many ballots were sent to each address?

      The mind boggles at how many ways the mail ballot system can be compromised.

      Some (not all) Dems are mailed 5 ballots instead of just one (are there records that could prove or disprove that possibility?).

      Dems intercept all the mailed ballots to apartment buildings and mark them for Biden.

      Dems simply take hundreds of thousands of ballots meant to be mailed and ship them to a central location for marking and then put them into a USPS mail truck for return.

      Dems harvest the ballots from voters and alter them en route to the ballot counting depot.

      Automatic signature matching for mail ballots is disabled or the acceptance thresholds are turned down. Or signature matching simply isn't done.

    3. "25% of the entire sample of 1706 claimed they returned [ballot], but according to the state, they did not."

      I wonder how many of them were recorded as having voted in-person for Biden ... at 3am.

    4. In PA the State Supreme Court suddenly ended signature match and postal stamp for mail ins, days before the election. Were they reading dems internal polls?

  6. Trump has the upper hand. Incredible to say I know. There is no way for them to keep this coup together. If they would have taken it by force that would be one thing, a different world perhaps,but they could arguably hold the coup together with force. But clandestinely? A LOT of people on the left are going to have a hard time if they lose deniability of the fraudcoup. What are the chances there (I'm talking to you johnny boombots, as Bongino calls you), that President Trump won't utterly obliterate that particular overton window? The odds are ZERO. Get ready for the national addressed to end all national addresses. Not even hard. He steps down for Pence to reassure everyone that he isn't in this for himself and he exposed the whole goddamn thing. They can lie, they can spin, but they can't make it unseen.

    1. I second that motion !!!

    2. You underestimate the willingness of the left to deny the blatantly obvious.

    3. Willingness? More like reflex.

  7. Mark, I read the first blog with some skepticism because it started with Obama's historic election, so I researched back to the 1988 election (the first election for which I could find a published report by the Federal Election Commission).

    This is not the best format, but here's what I found:

    Votes Cast: 91,594,809
    Turnout: 50.15%

    Votes Cast: 104,426,659
    Turnout: 55.24%

    Votes Cast: 96,277,223
    Turnout: 48.99%

    Votes Cast: 105,396,641
    Turnout: 51.21%

    Votes Cast: 122,295,345
    Turnout: 56.70%

    Votes Cast: 131,313,820
    Turnout: 58.23%

    Votes Cast: 129,085,410
    Turnout: 54.87%

    Votes Cast: 136,669,276
    Turnout: 55.67%

    Votes Cast: 151,000,000
    Turnout: 59.04%

    *For 2020 I used round numbers and extrapolated Census population projection from prior years. The 151M does not factor other candidates.

    From this I find that this dataset by itself is inconclusive. We have seen 5% jumps in turnout in 1992 and 2004. In ’92 Clinton was a rock star and there was vigorous national debate injected by Perot’s candidacy. In 2004 there may have been heightened interest due to the stealing accusations of 2000, the Iraq war, and the constant demonizing of Bush.

    We have also seen >58% turnout in 2008, when Obama captured the imagination of the nation with his hopeful rhetoric and the historic opportunity to break the color barrier.

    So what about this year? The 59% turnout is tremendous, as is the 3.5% turnout increase from 2016. I don’t think we can say they are unexplainable by themselves. We know that Trump was drawing new voters to his rallies, and it’s reasonable to assume that new voters were drawn out to oppose Trump.

    Instead, these numbers need to be combined with what we know from other data, namely the middling turnout in every other city except the four that executed the counting pause. I would begin by statistically smoothing those four cities’ numbers to arrive at a more accurate view of the electorate’s turnout, but I don’t think that cuts out 18M votes. Instead, the focus needs to be on the systemic fraud of vote switching that we’ve been discussing.

    1. Nationwide vote totals are meaningless, as you know.
      Also meaningless are "votes" entered into Smartmatic computers which then change the "votes" into whatever the computer operators want.

    2. yes, of course it's meaningless. But I was responding to the article that used the 18M jump as proof of fraud.

    3. Why not BOTH? Milwaukee reported 90+% turnout in several wards AND had a "pause." There's no reason to think that the machine "glitches" and massive mail-in fraud are mutually exclusive, is there?

      Powell's working on the machine problem; Rudy's on the PA (mail-in) problem.

      Frankly, if the Russkis wanted to screw around with this country, this is an excellent plan. But I think it's the Chinese Commies.

  8. It is the brazenness in which these democrats have tried to steal this election - right out in the open - with a disgraceful national media covering for them, which, with their past four year track record was a given. If this act of outright treachery is not reversed, then we as a nation are done for.


    1. Yeah, this act of outright treachery, and the apparent sabotage (or whatever) of the Durham probe.

  9. "I believe that Justice Amy will make a BIG difference."
    As long as she, and the other 4 Righty Justices, are still on the Court.
    A Biden/ Harris run DS should have no trouble ginning-up False Flag Ops, to incapacitate some of these justices, once the Durham probe (such as it is) is buried.

    Your list of "three deeply unpopular things" had a striking omission, that of busts from Durham.
    Have you given up on that hope, now that Housley's hope on that score failed to become reality last week?

  10. Joe and his pen and his phone.
    He doesn't need to worry about debate or even convincing the populist. Even if he lives that long, the Dems will never lose another election if this one stands.

  11. For your information-Pa. court hearing today at 1:30. Giuliani allowed to join case since other attorneys dropping out. If he has the goods we have been discussing they were not revealed today-per Bloomberg anyway. I assume first legal step of many. Giuliani was in court today.

    1. From Giuliani's description, it seemed like this is just a vehicle to get to the Supreme Court. But I would think the SC would only consider evidence that was material to this case....I hope the recent decision by the PA supreme court hasn't closed off bringing the case to the US SC. I would assume the legal team has a good handle on that, though.

  12. None of the 453 mailed in ballots from a very small sample were received or counted?

    I would like to see if they were scanned by the USPS.

    My guess is that this is just a very small part of the fire hose of evidence the Trump lawyers are collecting.

    Biden was blown out by such a large margin that the Democrats resorted to actions that are easily uncovered with just a little bit of time. It's still early.

    1. I've had a gut feeling about this since Biden's election night improbable miracle comeback in the wee hours. My theory is that what they were seeing was absolutely devastating. The numbers show it just before counting was inexplicably halted. And the gap was still widening. I suspect that Trump was absolutely anihilating Biden across the board in what was going to be an historic crushing defeat. I suspect they panicked and did everything they thought they could get away with.

      Why are they so determined now to limit republican monitors and keep them too far away from the counting to see anything?

  13. A republican radio host and nbc commentator said today, if there was election fraud, why did it only show up at the top of the ticket? why didnt they give democrats the senate and expand the house?

    1. To affect the House races, you have to have broad Democratic control of the counties involved. Where the absentee ballot fraud occurred, the Democrats already controlled the House seats in those areas. In the case of the Senate, there were no Senate races in WI and PA, for example. Yet the Democrats did win the Senate races in AZ and MI, and will likely win the two in GA in early January.

      This, by the way, though, is why I don't believe the electronic vote fraud story- in that case, the question about why it was only the top of the ticket is then relevant again.

    2. Good2CU -- much harder to commit fraud in a local state race and not raise red flags. Orange Man Bad was their cover for why the NATION would vote against Trump but much harder to switcheroo a lot of votes in a smaller localized race. Senate I don't know but if you think they're not going to try something in Georgia if they're not stopped now ....

    3. If there was electronic fraud, and I suspect there was, then they may have avoided down ballot for three reasons.

      1. The electronic fraud was in conjunction with mail fraud, which due to physical constraints was aimed at top of ballot only.

      2. It creates more defendants. If an R Rep. feels they were cheated, they'll fight (like John James). But if they win, they can be selfish and sacrifice the POTUS.

      3. It's a Uniparty, remember? The Deep State don't like waves of either color.

    4. "I don't believe the electronic vote fraud story...."
      Yancey, please clarify whose story you're referring to.

    5. aNanyMouse,

      I believe the ballots for Biden physcially exist in all the counties. I think the fraud was purely physical in nature- the Democrats, where they could, saturated the regions with a vast oversupply of mail-in ballots, collected them up, filled them in, and mailed them back. I think in states like GA, PA, MI, and WI, the operation added more than a million votes for Biden alone. I think they did the same thing in Arizona, North Carolina, and even Texas, but in the latter two states, they just couldn't get enough fraud ballots mailed back to overcome Trump's advantage.

      I think the electronic stuff may well be a disinformation campaign to get Trump's attorneys distracted from the actual fraud.

      What Trump actually needs is a court order to recanvass all the mail in vote to get the counters to actually do the their jobs with regards to signature matching. Every single one of these states have large counties that ignored the state law to push through any ballot no matter who signed it, and in Georgia, they even broke the law in allowing the Democrats to take the ballots to the voters to fix things like no signature at all- I guarantee you that they only did this for Biden voters.

    6. Because they thought they had the Senate and an increase in the House locked up before the election.

  14. maybe this will lead to a Great Awakening

    Huh. Just got a note from one of my chilluns who relayed a message from a WI priest hinting at exactly that--an Awakening.


  15. The essential salience of this story had nothing to do with election fraud or even the overt, in-your-face theft of a presidential election. This is because of context. We have already seen that the Obama era DOJ/FBI/CIA forthrightly, and with malice afore thought, conducted a covert conspiracy to undermine the Trump candidacy in 2016, and then followed that up an attempted coup to remove him from office by any means necessary. They even doubled down on that effort with the appointment of a Special Prosecutor that spent 2 years and $30 million in a continuation of that attempted coup. Because they were unsuccessful in forcing Trump from office, they chose instead to persecute General Mike Flynn in the most egregious abuse of prosecutorial and judicial process in modern history (a crime which continues to this very day). And all of this is just the tip of the iceberg.

    Why is it OK to persecute Mike Flynn for a manufactured crime and let Hunter Biden skate on treason, corruption, and pedophilia? Why has no one be indicted or prosecuted for the tsunami of DC based criminality that has been washing over the country for the past 4 years?

    1. Hon. Anonymous:

      Your legal experience combined with your astute assessment is commonsensical. A full complete hand recount -- all ballots to be vetted for legitimacy and signatures. Irregular ballots discarded. Every disputed questionable state to undergo a hand recount with observer witnesses.

  16. Looks like electronic hackery was done....

    DNA-LEVEL" STATISTICAL PROOF: "Smartmatic" Vote-Counting System Was Manipulated in PA and GA to Overturn Trump's Victory

    Via instapundit.

    1. Yikes! The author ends with, “p.s., can someone who knows Sidney Powell or Joe DiGenova get this info to them?” Can this investigation really be that ad hoc?

    2. Can someone provide some insight on how this evidence that Wood and Powell assure us will have people in handcuffs gets introduced into a courtroom and when? Hand recount in Georgia will check for software fraud how? We seem to be operating in alternate realities here. Thx.

    3. Every bit of evidence helps the public case for voiding the fraudulent election numbers.
      The final decision on accepting or rejecting the election numbers is a political decision by the state legislatures. Public outrage influences that final decision.

  17. I had heard about this, but I lacked details...

    The Real Presidential Election was Rigged in 2018
    Every state but one that had a Democrat acting as Secretary of State was called for Biden.

    Wed Nov 18, 2020 Daniel Greenfield

    1. Yes, I was aware of this, as also the DA initiative. And LA County just voted in another Soros DA. Soros DA's may be good news, in a way, as they'll likely make all big cities unliveable. But we really need to regain control of elections.

    2. “Soros DA's may be good news, in a way, as they'll likely make all big cities unliveable.”

      ...and poison the Democratic brand among normies for a generation or more!

    3. "...and poison the Democratic brand among normies for a generation or more!"

      The downside to that is, if Harris/Biden are sworn in, then they, meaning Davos-Man, need not concern themselves with the opinions of those pesky Deplorables ever again.
      Tom S.

  18. Here's a link to the final Trafalgar Group projection on November 3. Note caveat re Pennsylvania:

    I wouldn't be surprised if this projection wasn't actually accurate...before election fraud...

    Note his caveat re Pennsylvania.

    Interestingly, Trafalgar and Cahaly have been silent on twitter since the election...