# A Matter of Probabilities

Was it Michigan that had a big chunk of votes, 136,000, that came in where every. single. one. was for Biden and none for Trump or any of the other candidates on that ballot? An excuse I heard given was they were mail in ballots and Democrats were more likely to vote by mail than Republicans.

Really? That’s the excuse?

Well, as a physicist I do know a thing or two about numbers and probability. Let’s say that about 40 percent of the electorate were Trump voters (steel man argument–assume that he really, truly would lose that race without shenanigans). Now, let’s further say that Trump voters are 1000 times less likely than Biden voters to vote by mail. And let’s just discount the minor party candidates, again, steelmanning as including them would actually weaken the explanation for the big bolus of Biden (only) ballots. That means that any random mail ballot would be 99,96% likely to be a Biden vote and only 0.04% likely to be a Trump vote.

Probabilities multiply. The odds of a fair flip of a fair coin coming up heads two times in a row is 1/4 ((1/2)*(1/2)). Three times in a row 1/8 ((1/2)*(1/2)*(1/2)). And so on. So we can do the same with chances of Biden votes in a row. One vote for Biden: 99.96% Two in a row: 99.92% Three 99.88%. Ten: 99.60% (See, the “explainer” says, “it’s not at all unlikely”)

But we go on. 100? 96.08% 500? 81.87% 1000? 67.03% (Um, things are getting a little bit shakier here, but still more likely than not).

5000? 13.53% (Okay, it could happen.)
10,000? 1.83% (Well, longshots _do_ come in sometimes.)
20,000? 0.03% (Um, well, surely something like that could happen _once_ in the history of voting. Right?)
50,000? .000000205% (It’s a big universe. Somewhere, sometime, a longshot like that just _has_ to come in.)
100,000? 4.21E-16% (Anyone want to try defending this one?)
136,000? 2.34E-22%

To give you an idea of just how preposterous that number is, there are only about 1E21 stars in the Universe.

If they had bothered to actually mix it up a bit they might have been able to claim these were real results. But, no, every single ballot for their preferred candidate in a chunk big enough as to produce utterly ridiculous results. But they didn’t bother to disquise it because they figured nobody would hold them accountable for it.

But, in this case, people did. There was a lot of “whoa! Are you kidding me” at the jump in the count for Biden with no increase for anyone else. And so we got “Oh, it was a data entry error. Our bad. Here. Fixed.”

Do they actually think that makes it better? Seriously? First off, how does a “data entry error” record 136,000 votes for one candidate and none for any others? How does a person “fat finger” such a number? Especially when counting was supposed to be close for the night anyway? But, okay, data entry error (remember: steelmanning). So, if it’s possible to enter 136,000 votes for one candidate by “accident” in a situation where no other votes were being recorded, how can we trust that other “errors” weren’t and aren’t being made where they are not so obvious, where other, real votes are going in so that a bunch of votes entered by “accident” for one candidate is not so clearly spurious? How many of the other votes recorded were also “data entry errors”?

How can we trust the results when they can make that kind of “mistake”? And is Michigan uniquely bad? Can someone explain why Michigan would be so very much worse than all of the remaining 49 States? Because if there isn’t some reason to demonstrate that Michigan is uniquely bad then we can’t trust any of the others either.

And isn’t it strange that these errors all go one way. The probability equation is a bit more complicated than that used up at the beginning of this post, but the general gist is the same. The probability that these “errors” going one way by a large preponderance happens by chance becomes vanishingly small.

There’s an old saw: Once is chance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action. And we’re well, well past “enemy action.

Are We the People going to let them get away with it?

## 34 thoughts on “A Matter of Probabilities”

1. River Song says:

There’s either a video or a whistle blower or some other freakish math or list of dead voters coming out every half hour. This is election fraud on a scale that’s terrifying. This might be one of the biggest crisis this country has ever faced. You could point at wars and terrorism, but this time the enemy is our own supposed countrymen.

They took the soap box from us, and now they took the ballot box. You know which box is next.

The Democrats are insane. Years of media manipulation have brainwashed them completely. They are living entirely in cartoon universes in their heads where Trump is Hitler^2. The media is just a gigantic propaganda industrial complex for the left. I was on a forum where a lot of leftists hang out two years ago. A lot of them literally thought Trump was rounding up minorities and sending them to camps. Every lie the media told about Trump was instantly believed, and they even amplified them further on their own.

In the meantime Trump is forging more Middle East peace than the last 10 presidents, and the Israelis named a town after him. He’s not a very good Hitler.

We can’t live with people like this. It’s impossible. They completely lack of moral agency. Look at Olberman and Reich calling for Trump supporters to be rounded up and “re-educated”, and nothing happens to them. I don’t see how this doesn’t ends anything but civil war. They are evil, and that’s not a word an agnostic like me uses lightly. The left in this country have expose them selves this week as pure, undiluted evil.

Like

2. Interesting calculation. But the argument would be more compelling if you were confident in the state. (I think it was Wisconsin.)
And elsewhere I have heard that it was only 98.4% Biden (unless I am confusing my fraud stories.)

Like

1. People who make up shit tend to be extremely confident about what they make up. People reporting what they saw and heard can often be less certain. The state did not stick in my head. The numbers, however, did. I’m a numbers guy, after all. And that they number was entirely for Biden and none for Trump or any of the other candidates.

This wasn’t the only place where there was an issue, just one of several, and indeed, I may have misremembered which one of the several had the specific number. But also, note that it gets ridiculous long before we get to the 136,000 figure. I mean, the premise I _started_ with was ridiculous: Trump voters a thousand times less likely than Biden voters to vote by mail? But it was “ridiculous” in the direction of justifying the claim. Steel man argument: take the strongest version of the opponent’s argument and refute that, thereby refuting all weaker versions at the same time.

The conclusion remains: There are shenanigans afoot.

Liked by 1 person

3. JohnTyler says:

You are making this way to complicated.

In a heavily pro-Biden voting area – say Manhattan or San Francisco, you can expect about 85% to 95% of votes to be for Biden.
So, if 200,000 votes are cast, mailed in or in person, 30,000 to 10,000 votes would NOT be for Biden.
There is simply no voting district anywhere in the USA that will vote 100% for a given candidate.
So when 100,000+ votes are cast, ALL for the same candidate, you know it is a rigged / illegal / fraudulent.

Like

1. We would expect such, on average, yes. Just like you would expect about half of coin flips to come up heads. However, just like if you flip a coin enough times you can get a string of three, four, or even more “heads” in a row occasionally you can also get a string of votes all in a row all for one candidate. Add in the claim that it’s “more likely” that folk will vote for one particular candidate vs. another in the block being counted and the likelihood of such a string increases. And indeed, that argument was made early on (before “data entry error” became the new narrative). What I do above is show that that excuse only goes so far even with bending over completely backwards giving every allowance to the claim it still proves to be utterly risible.

So your gut instinct of it being ridiculous is correct. I simply show how ridiculous it is.

Like

4. Caleb Standafer says:

I observed vote counting in Ventura County, California. Votes are counted by high speed scanners connected to computers. The count is automated. A data entry error makes no sense. It appears to be a lie.

Like

1. Eh. Different states do things differently. I’m willing to accept the possibility that they way they do things in the state in question allows for data entry error.

But, as noted in the OP, that just makes matters worse.

Like

5. Reblogged this on Head Noises and commented:
Quote:
Do they actually think that makes it better? Seriously? First off, how does a “data entry error” record 136,000 votes for one candidate and none for any others? How does a person “fat finger” such a number? Especially when counting was supposed to be close for the night anyway? But, okay, data entry error (remember: steelmanning). So, if it’s possible to enter 136,000 votes for one candidate by “accident” in a situation where no other votes were being recorded, how can we trust that other “errors” weren’t and aren’t being made where they are not so obvious, where other, real votes are going in so that a bunch of votes entered by “accident” for one candidate is not so clearly spurious? How many of the other votes recorded were also “data entry errors”?

Like

6. Henry says:

Thank you for explaining why we should be concern.

Like

7. Melissa says:

Damn right there’s been MASSIVE voter fraud! ALL of us need to call and email our rep’s to ensure this doesn’t get ignored! If we have to riot, SO BE IT!

Like

8. Faye says:

Hi from Down Under. There are a lot of Aussies upset with the way the Democrats, some RINOs and the media have stolen the election (to be fought). Feeling very despondent about the whole awful mess. It seems the untouchable big boys told the dog bodies out in the ballot counting circus arena to go for it and shove up Biden’s count. And this is where they came asunder, it has to be done with the expertise of a professional, not blundered through by amateurs. Mathematical laws will catch out the enablers of this illegal act.

Like

9. Michigan has 88 counties. Using the current vote counts, the lowest county-level vote for Trump is Washtenaw county – about 26%. Not every absentee vote is for Biden. If it was in We-Hate-Trump-Ville and all 48 people voted for Biden, I’m good with that. But even in Ann Arbor (Washtenaw County; functionally equivalent to We-Hate-Trump-Ville) 56,000 people voted for Trump. We all have our cross to bear but 136,000 for Biden in one lump? Uh, no dude. Something like 48% of Michiganders voted for Trump. Your math is glorious AND it makes no sense on the ground either.

Like

10. Heresolong says:

Cruise on over to Larry Correia’s site for more “red flag” analysis.

Also there’s another story about a county in where the software completely screwed up the vote (again in Biden’s favor since that is how it always works) but it turns out multiple counties use the same software. So they’ll supposedly be going back to look at all those as well.

One of the flags that always gets me is that is seems to be 100% of the time that these situations run in the favor the D party. I can’t remember off the top of my head one single major election result where the D won but then later it turned out that the R actually won. I’m sure they must be out there, but I can’t come up with a single one. It would be interesting, but probably pointless, to actually put together those statistics.

Like

1. “I can’t remember off the top of my head one single major election result where the D won but then later it turned out that the R actually won” —->> Bush-Gore – 2000.

Like

1. Not quite. Bush was ahead by a razor thin margin: 547 votes (out of 6 million). Gore demanded a recount and rightfully so given how thin that margin was, however they kept changing the conditions of the demanded recount (where the whole “hanging chad” thing came from) and the Florida Supreme Court finally called a halt to the galloping goal posts.

So, no Bush-Gore is not, in fact, a case of a Democrat being in the lead then having a bunch of “lost votes” found which reversed it for the Republican since Bush was, in fact, in the lead before recounts and “new votes” (cf. “hanging chad”) came into play.

Like

1. DonM says:

I think you have it backwards. Florida Supreme court initially agreed with Gore, to recount only in Democratic counties. Bush v. Gore at the SCOTUS directed that all votes in the state must be recounted, if any are recounted. The Florida Supreme Court again held, in violation of SCOTUS order, that recount be only democrat countys. SCOTUS then held that not only was Florida Court ruling wrong, that Bush had in fact, won the election. Subsequent review by independent counters confirmed SCOTUS.

Like

1. Again, Gore’s people were trying to pull an 11th hour reversal. They were the ones demanding a recount because Bush was ahead and they hoped they could change that in the recount (honestly or un I leave to the reader to decide).

Gore was never ahead, thus it is not an example of a D being ahead then last minute ballots turning it to an R winning.

Like

2. Jim Beard says:

The years-later conclusion, after all the studies and analysis, was that Bush actually won.
Gore lost.

Like

11. Bob says:

What are the odds 77,000 people or so only voted for Biden and not other candidates downballot? The vote discrepency between Biden/Peters and Trump/James is somewhere in that 77,000 number Biden verses a few thousand Trump. I have heard it explained as another symptom of fraud because if you vote for others, those others may have a challenge that makes it more likely you will get caught.

Like

1. I’m a numbers guy, not a politics guy (physics being my field). I don’t know how often folk vote for just President and nothing downticket. The equations for a mixed bag are quite a bit more challenging when you have really large numbers (they involve factorials which soon exceed even high precision floating point numbers so you’re left with estimating means which I’d have to look up since it’s been a long time since I’ve needed that). But first I’d need some kind of estimate of the base probability, out of the general population of voters, that a person will vote only for President and not for downticket candidates and referenda.

But a string where they are all one way is a really easy bit of plug-in-the-numbers.

Like

1. Mike H. says:

“I’m a numbers guy, not a politics guy”

Well your OP certainly fooled me! It seemed like it was all about politics.

Voting fraud, irregularities, etc. have been just as widespread this election as any other (prove me wrong, please, or stop pretending this one is special). They were present when Bush Jr. won twice, they were present when Trump won the first time. So I don’t understand why RIGHT NOW it’s imperative we solve it. Why not earlier?

Instead of all this nonsense, we just throw out all the results and go best 3 out of 5? Or 5 out of 7? Or until Trump just wins…that’s the idea right?

Like

1. By “not a politics guy” I mean I don’t have the information available to make an assessment on the question raised. Given that data I could run the numbers easily enough (as I have done here).

Why not earlier? Elsewhere I have made the argument that the worst thing Nixon did (worse than even the things he was accused of, whether or not he actually did them) was failing to challenge the 1960 election “to spare the country” when fraud tipped the scales in favor of Kennedy. That, there, set the stage for a never-ending escalation of fraud by the Democrats (and, yes, it’s Democrats–can you name three races at the State or National level, where you had 1) a precinct with voting irregularities, 2) where the Democrat was in the lead in a close race, and 3) where a whole bunch of ballots “found” after the polls closed that reversed it, giving the victory to the Republican?) becoming every more brazen in their frauding their way to victory. Would have been better to nip it in the bud. But…can’t do anything about the past.

What makes this one different is how very brazen they’ve been. Gaslighting attempts aside, they aren’t even trying to hide it. 138,000 ballots all for one Candidate? That’s “never happen in the history of the Universe” unlikely. Oh, wait, “data entry error”. Well, an error of that size isn’t going to occur in isolation. Nope, that means that nothing from that location can be trusted. And unless there’s reason to believe that the location in question is uniquely bad (nobody has brought forth any such thing), then that means you can’t trust anything put out by anybody.

And this is just one of quite a few “red flags” going on. I talk about another in a post that went up Yesterday. https://thewriterinblack.com/2020/11/09/benfords-law/

My friend Larry Correia–former forensic accountant among many other things, noted a long list of “red flags” that scream for the need of audit:

The problem isn’t just the fraud, it’s how obvious they are being about it. Previously, the need to stay within “spitting distance” of “plausible deniability” put a limit into how far they could go. They couldn’t just arbitrarily make up whatever numbers they wanted. So, while folk would joke about not just having to beat the democrats but also the “margin of fraud”, there were still limits, one could still develop support sufficient to overcome fraud that had to remain clandestine. If fraud as obvious as this is allowed to pass unchecked then those limits are gone.

And that’s leaving aside that sitting members of Congress are already organizing lists of “enemies of the people”(ironic quotes) who “supported Trump” (literal quotes) to “be held accountable.” Yep, they’re looking at criminalizing political opposition. Which means, they don’t dare, ever, relinquish power lest the tables be turned on them, which means doubling down on the fraud.

We are at a cusp right here that has been repeated a number of times throughout history, usually leading to large body counts and horror. That makes this election uniquely critical in the history of the United States. If the fraud is allowed to stand and if the Democrats implement even a moderate fraction of their stated intentions, three of the four “boxes of Freedom”(soap, ballot, jury) will be neutered. I really, really, really don’t want to rely on that fourth box because even the best results once you go there are terrible.

Like

2. opxnv says:

How about this Mike. The people on the Trump side say there is a problem, we want to investigate. The people on the Biden side say, you have shown me no evidence so, its all sour grapes, you’re lying, etc. How long did the democrats investigate “Russian Influence in the election”? Seems to me that it was more than a week. Y’all started before the election and you still didn’t find anything.

For what it’s worth, I want results available by 8 am Wednesday morning or earlier but I’m not getting what I want because “somebody” just demanded that we have massive mail in voting when our system was not prepared for it. So now we have to go back and do the work that we needed to do before the election. I can hear you thinking. You want to say, “That’s Trumps fault!”. Trump and the Federal Government don’t run elections. That is done at the precinct, county and state level and they weren’t ready for what happened.

The evidence shows up because you investigate. Showing up with evidence in order to justify a circus is not how it was supposed to be done.

Like

12. Well said, are we supporters of Trump a man who has done so much for us just going to crawl back under our rocks or are we going to fight for this greatest President of our lifetimes?

Like

1. Mike H says:

“has done so much for us”

What exactly has he done for us (or even the US)? Do you have a list of that stuff anywhere I can reference?

Like

1. I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016, figuring he was just another New York Liberal masquerading as a Republican and would likely be as bad as Hillary. And while he has done some things I strongly disapprove of (*cough* bump stocks *cough*) on balance, I was wrong. Here’s a start at why.

– Long, sustained economic growth (until shutdowns imposed mostly by Democrat governors ate that up).
– Lowest black unemployment in history (ditto)
– Lowest Hispanic unemployment in history (also ditto)
– Actual peace treaty in Korea (replacing a “cease fire”)
– Actual normalizing of diplomatic relations between Israel and several nations in the middle east.
– Actual energy independence.
– Largest reduction in government regulation in history (that “repeal two in order to pass one” had a big impact)
– More equitable trade with a number of foreign nations (while I tend to be death on tariffs, the threat of tariffs causing other nations to fold is another matter).
– Three Supreme Court Justices that are closer to “original constructionist” than the Justices they replaced (perhaps similar in the case of Scalia’s replacement–and how in Hel’s Misty Halls did the idea that judges should follow the law and the Constitution as written and according to the public meaning of the words therein at the time they were written, passed, and ratified become an “extremist position”? By all rights it should be the default).

I know, the media either ignores, downplays, or outright lies about those things but they’re there.

Like

1. Ferrum says:

Very well put. Love the article in general and this comment in specific.

I’m always amazed at how little the libs know about the Trump Achievements. Heck, strike that, how little most people know about the Trump Achievements. If they read the lib media, everything good that’s happened is because of obama or it’s simply not reported at all.

These last four years have not only been the best for America since Reagan’s day, but they show that the “norm” for politicians of both persuasions has been leading us down a path of ruin. Can you imagine how good things could have been for all of us if the deep state had actually worked WITH Trump instead of fighting him tooth and nail? Or, god forbid, if politicians these last 30 years had acted more like Trump than the cowardly, traitorous bastards they are?

Like

13. JustSayin says:

This happened in BOTH Michigan AND Wisconsin… at about the same time very early in the morning, after poll watchers had been sent out. Two massive vote dumps. 100% for Biden. So what’s the probability of that happening randomly?

Like

1. We’re already well into “never happen in all the history of the Universe” territory with the one so two? Yeah, I don’t think so.

Of course they’re probably also going with “data entry error” on the the second one too. Which just means there are two sets of results where we can’t trust anything they reported.

Like