Reply #47: I'm not interested in the less than meaningful analysis

[mgr]

The number tells you it is likely, but not overwhelming.

The odds require a bit more finagling before they will impress me. Since, for the binomial distribution (or any statistical analysis) to be applied requires the samples be independent of each other, both in time and space. They cluster (especially spatially and possibly temporally) therefore the reports are only indicative of select precincts and select times where the switches occurred, they cannot be extrapolated to apply to all precincts with touchscreens, or to have occurred throughout the day. When you map the reports the geographic tendency you see that most (if not all) incidents occurred in battleground states, and interestingly correlate to BOEs that also reported long lines. I see a link between the two, do you?

Now if you can show me where I am wrong on the spatial distribution of these events, and show that it does have a bearing on stealing the popular vote, then you are on to something. Otherwise it further cements the position I have staked out since December, that the fraud was specific to battleground states, and its full intent was voter suppression that did not require computers. Evidence that we have had for months.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me in what time zone the CNN screen shots were saved? Was it 2400 GMT? That spatio-temporal problem bites, doesn't it?

Did you catch the thread where it appears that it's rather difficult to hack the central tabulators--that they may just be stand alones?

Mike