Posts Tagged ‘Benford’s Law’

Benford’s Law Shows Biden Vote Fraud

Sunday, November 8th, 2020

I was just going to include this in Monday’s state-of-play voting fraud roundup, but since I found out that Facebook is blocking access to one of the source articles, literally preventing you from posting a link to it (I tested), saying that it “this link goes against our community standards.” So I decided to do this post to let you have something you can share on Facebook.

The first link I saw on the topic was this GitHub piece forwarded to me by reader Brandon Byers, who noted “the Wikipedia entry for Benford’s Law was edited 11/5 in order to downplay its usefulness in detecting election fraud.” It appears that a lengthy edit war is still going on there. The author is one “cjph8914”; no idea who it is; GtHub is a code repository system that anyone can sign up for and use.

Benford’s Law, also called the Newcomb–Benford law, the law of anomalous numbers, or the first-digit law, is an observation about the frequency distribution of leading digits in many real-life sets of numerical data. The law states that in many naturally occurring collections of numbers, the leading digit is likely to be small. For example, in sets that obey the law, the number 1 appears as the leading significant digit about 30% of the time, while 9 appears as the leading significant digit less than 5% of the time. If the digits were distributed uniformly, they would each occur about 11.1% of the time. Benford’s law also makes predictions about the distribution of second digits, third digits, digit combinations, and so on.

This GNews piece by “Himalaya Australia” makes much the same argument, and is the one that Facebook is blocking: “As the vote counting for the 2020 Presidential Election continues, various facts suggest rampant frauds in Joe Biden’s votes. So does mathematics in terms of the votes from precincts.”

Wikipedia description snipped.

However, in the Milwaukee County of Wisconsin, which is in one of the key swing states, Joe Biden’s votes violate Benford’s Law while other candidates’ don’t. (Joe Biden 69.4%, Donald Trump 29.4%, Jo Jorgensen 0.9%. Source: theguardian.com)

Here’s a YouTube video that explains the basic concepts of Benford’s Law:

Here’s a YouTube video that basically covers the GitHub piece, which covers other urban areas where it appears Biden’s vote total violates Benford’s Law:

I am not a statistician or a mathematician, but this does seem to make a good case for pro-Biden vote fraud in some urban areas.

Try posting this to Facebook. I wonder how many hits I’ll have to get before someone there tries to block it…