Bleeping Election Fraud in the Primaries

See website: https://tdmsresearch.com/

Let me explain what this is all about and I can already hear the skeptics on here. But first listen and go to the above website before you pop off your vitriol.

This site uses statistical methods to show that the results of the primaries are questionable. It is based on comparing the discrepancies between exit polls and final tallies (final vote counts). The exit poll company is Edison Research, which is contracted by CNN to do it. According to the science of exit polling -- it's not just a random approach -- the margin of error is about 4 percent. In fact, exit polling was used as a tool by UN task forces who were brought in to monitor elections in countries that had been plagued by dishonest elections. If it was over 5 percent, it was a signal that there was probable malfeasance. So far, all of the primaries have shown discrepancies in favor of Biden. In Massachusetts, for example, it was 15.7 percent. For the exact numbers, go to the website and see for yourself.

The primaries have shown other irregularities like voter suppression, insufficient ballots, destruction of ballots, and in California, where according to the polls prior to the voting Sanders had a big lead, at last count that I heard tonight, more than 3 million ballots have yet to be counted.

Depending on the method used to cast and count votes, yes there are a number of ways the results can be tampered with, from simple to sophisticated.

I for one am shocked that a Berner is convinced that they could only lose due to a massive wide ranging conspiracy.

Besides the fact that exit polling responses are entirely voluntary and non-verifiable, and therefore a VERY poor dataset to work from, I'm going to guess that the author's statistical acumen is roughly equal to his legal work

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/vt-supreme-court/1577940.html

Bernie supporter here.

I don't deny the fact that Sanders has been losing votes. A lot of cases can be made for how things shifted that don't seem fair, this isn't near the top of them.

That being said, all of us should hope and strive for a system that is of the utmost solvency and inclusivity and this country has a LONG way to go. The litmus is turnout, and we have pathetic turnout in this country and it shows.

Lastly, @Eenie-Meenie doesn't represent the movement.

Bernie, like trump, is allllwasayyysss the victim.

State-capitalist bots for Biden are all as corrupt as Biden. Sanders is an outsider in the Dems, like Trump is in the Rs, not to say plenty of folks won't roll with a winner if he wins.

The Dems put the lock on for Biden just ahead of the SC vote, and everyone but Sanders and the little lady rolled, collecting points for good behavior from the bigs. The establishment dems are thoroughly corrupt, worse than even the establishment RINOs.

Anyone who can vote for Biden and complain about Trump is a lost cause as a sentient conversational discussion-friendly human. I think Obama is trying to be a BIG. Let's call it Big Bot Fascist, or BBF for short. He set up his pad near Washington and has been pulling the strings on all his bots in foggy bottom since Trump was elected, but he's really just a shoeshine boy for Rockefeller. Not a real commie. A State-Capitalist phony commie. Just like Hillary. And Biden.

A lot of people in here don't do their own thinking, just repost daily talking point sheets from their little leader of whatever little activist group they're feeding off of,.

Eenie-Meenie said:

See website: https://tdmsresearch.com/

Let me explain what this is all about and I can already hear the skeptics on here. But first listen and go to the above website before you pop off your vitriol.

This site uses statistical methods to show that the results of the primaries are questionable. It is based on comparing the discrepancies between exit polls and final tallies (final vote counts). The exit poll company is Edison Research, which is contracted by CNN to do it. According to the science of exit polling -- it's not just a random approach -- the margin of error is about 4 percent. In fact, exit polling was used as a tool by UN task forces who were brought in to monitor elections in countries that had been plagued by dishonest elections. If it was over 5 percent, it was a signal that there was probable malfeasance. So far, all of the primaries have shown discrepancies in favor of Biden. In Massachusetts, for example, it was 15.7 percent. For the exact numbers, go to the website and see for yourself.

The primaries have shown other irregularities like voter suppression, insufficient ballots, destruction of ballots, and in California, where according to the polls prior to the voting Sanders had a big lead, at last count that I heard tonight, more than 3 million ballots have yet to be counted.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your effort here.

Of course the D bigs will cheat to edge Bernie out. No question about that. They always cheat, they always lie, they always do whatever it takes for their power.

Most Dems are very progressive, some sort of modern Marxist believer of the sort that sincerely hope to use the "cause" for personal benefit. I think even Sanders, as an old Red ideologue, does that too. But most Dems still wanna soften their public policy goals to win elections, whatever lies it takes to do that. Bernie is just more honest. More of an actual believer.

The fundamental lie of socialism is the policy of gradualism, always understating the true goals and purposes, always pretending to be "moderate".

Fundamentally, if you believe in human rights at all, or envision any future of justice, or equality in human society, you have to go to the basic truth that government must be hog-tied, restricted, and prevented, by every means possible, from being hijacked by special interests, by little cliques, or totally false ideological wonks who bamboozle the public with their false ideals while asserting more and more effective insider control.

State capitalists are the ultimate fascists, whether they pretend to be commies or populists.

I am finding Trump is way too inclined to concentrate power, and doesn't stick to the idea that we should follow the rules of a Republic, where significant power should preferably b e local power.

sirkickyass said:

I for one am shocked that a Berner is convinced that they could only lose due to a massive wide ranging conspiracy.

Besides the fact that exit polling responses are entirely voluntary and non-verifiable, and therefore a VERY poor dataset to work from, I'm going to guess that the author's statistical acumen is roughly equal to his legal work

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/vt-supreme-court/1577940.html

Click to expand...

This is a really dumb comment. If you know anything about exit polls, they are not random samples, and are gathered and analysed according to a sophisticated process that reduces the margin of error. This process has been developed and refined over many years.

And as a lawyer, you should realize your answer violated one of the logical fallacies. If you don't know what it is, look it up. I'll let you know tomorrow which one if you don't give me the correct answer.

I'll give you a hint: "What does that have to do with the price of tomatoes?"

babe said:

State-capitalist bots for Biden are all as corrupt as Biden.

Click to expand...

Every vote counts!! We don't need proof that you are eligible. That is just down right racist!!!

sirkickyass said:

I for one am shocked that a Berner is convinced that they could only lose due to a massive wide ranging conspiracy.

Besides the fact that exit polling responses are entirely voluntary and non-verifiable, and therefore a VERY poor dataset to work from, I'm going to guess that the author's statistical acumen is roughly equal to his legal work

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/vt-supreme-court/1577940.html

Click to expand...

As I said, what does the price of tomatoes have to do with Ted Soares statistical acumen? Just because he failed to argue successfully in a court case doesn't mean he isn't a good statistician. The two are mutually exclusive. You are engaging in the fallacy known as the Red Herring. Overruled.

Furthermore, as the judge in this case, I ask counsel to please refrain from Ad Hominem attacks as you made in your Red Herring argument.

Yeah... this isn’t a sign of election fraud. It’s called being a ****** candidate.