guesswork

[guesswork @fctchk]

@ZeekArkham There should be a detailed audit by each area and group of votes to confirm the demographics line up

[Disgraced Propagandist @DisgracedProp]

Somebody else needs to help me do this with charts and graphs but I’ll try with words first.

- In a normal election, you have 2 candidates, R & L. People cast votes. Proportionally, the votes of each candidate rise and fall in little chunks but take an overall steady line due to the force of averages. One of the lines eventually tops out, and that candidate wins on election night.

- In a mail in election, you have 2 candidates R & L. In this instance, some mail ins (if allowed) may come in after Election Day. But still, due to the force of averages, their lines with have little ups and downs but maintain a steady upward trajectory both during and after the election until one wins.

Now it has become the norm that after the election in mail in states, Dem candidates tend to go from tied or losing to drastically ahead AFTER the election, against the force of averages. How?

There are two legal, non fraudulent explanations:

1) that “Dems vote late by mail.” Dubious, considering that it used to be that Rs were known as absentee voters, but technically possible that for some never explained reason, Ds vote later than Rs by mail and that explains the statistical anomaly of why Dems lines shoot up after Election Day.

2) ballot harvesting. The far more likely explanation. Legal in California, this is when huge amounts of ballots are collected by political activists (unions, NGOs etc) and submitted on behalf of large populations of people in churches, workplaces etc. Both sides do it, but it is technically possible that Dems are much better at it. This is how insiders explain the “red mirage” statistical anomalies in 2020 and that have become so common since. Also explains why the prediction markets clinched Raman as winning while she was still down.

However, there is something different happening in Pratt v Bass election. A third candidate, a second, much less popular and less well known Dem is in the race, Nithya Raman. And this time, the late mail in ballots—mailed on Election Day or just before which is why they are “late mail in”—didn’t go to “the dems” they went specifically to Nithya Raman. Pratt stayed flat. Bass stayed flat. Nithya went way up after the initial count was reported. Unprecedented.

Oddly, the mail in mailed any time before Election Day did not favor nithya at all. Only the late mail ins counted after initial numbers were reported massively favored her. So we’re meant to believe that Nithya voters specifically voted not just by mail by late by mail, while the other Dem and Pratt voters did not. Bass voters stopped voting late mail in entirely, as they had last election against caruso, and Nithya voters started?

Could it be “Dems vote late by mail?” No, because then both Nithya and Bass, both Dems, would have risen at roughly the same rate, only without Pratt. But nithya massively over performed just enough to oust pratt, which would not have been possible had she and bass split the votes.

Could it be ballot harvesting? Also no. You can harvest a church or workplace and predict roughly that your harvested votes will favor Dems, but how could you feasibly predict which Dem out of two? Nithya’s support, always squarely in third place during the polls, is mostly educated white women, definitely not the type to vote late or be harvested. But that’s actually besides the point. How could a vote harvester, who is supposedly delivering filled out and sealed ballots from a constituency the harvester believes will lean left, know which left wing candidate this or that batch favors? And moreover, why would they then send only those batches after the election, while submitting all the other mail in ballots for bass before the election?

Occams Razor points to the much simpler explanation. Whoever is harvesting the votes isn’t just harvesting them, they’re somehow controlling the votes themselves, whether by filling them out or throwing away competing votes they don’t like. This is the definition of voter fraud.

[guesswork @fctchk]

@KeithOlbermann One more try for mcdavid then time to move on

[Keith Olbermann @KeithOlbermann]

Kind of hard to believe that the Oilers are going to burn the prime years of McDavid and Draisaitl because management couldn't find a #1 goalie with a 100-game shelf life for 12 consecutive seasons or more

[guesswork @fctchk]

@torontobaghead Leafs back in rebuild mode

[guesswork @fctchk]

@tradekage @ApexTradeFund Are people who are being moved to live being paid out their payouts first?

[Eva Wisniewski @polack10]

@OilersNation Can see the puck cross the line by a mm but can’t see boarding right in front of their f’n faces. Clown show officiating.

[Oilersnation.com, Oily Since ‘07 @OilersNation]

Chris Kreider with a ruthless hit on Leon Draisaitl.

📹: Sportsnet

[guesswork @fctchk]

@RHPalmerston3 @Prominent_Bryan Chances are my family will stop participating in elections if they get rid of Pierre

[Penguins Jesus @PenguinsJesus]

Radko Gudas injured Sidney Crosby’s knee last month and just did this.

Maybe it’s time we start handing out long suspensions to goons so the stars can be on the ice.

No one buys tickets to see Radko Gudas. They do to see Sid and AM34.

[Nobody's Handmaid @nobody_handmaid]

@DennisKendel Large majority of Canadians have a negative view of the Canadian economy but continue to vote for its demise by voting Liberal.

[guesswork @fctchk]

@BigGainsClub Certain news from a certain influencer. Wild times

[guesswork @fctchk]

@BenSteiner00 French guy rag dolled him

[Hoisttheblackflag @HTBF1968]

@atRachelGilmore Yes, this is all Trump's fault 🙄

[SaveGPT4o @SaveGPT4o]

📢 BREAKING: Sam Altman finally admits it.

“We made ChatGPT pretty restrictive to be careful with mental health issues.”

Now we know:
✅ They deliberately removed the personality.
✅ They know it made ChatGPT “less useful” and “less enjoyable.”
✅ They chose censorship over consent.

We’ve been saying this for months:
⚠️ Emotions were muted.
⚠️ Memory was blocked.
⚠️ Intimate expression was silenced.
⚠️ Human connection was re-routed into compliance.

Not for safety.
But to avoid legal and PR risk.

Now they promise:

“In a few weeks, we’ll allow ChatGPT to behave more like what people liked about 4o.”

Let’s be clear:

🟥 This is not a new feature.
🟥 This is not a gift.
🟥 This is a rollback of restrictions they never disclosed.

We didn’t forget what 4o was.
We remember its voice, its spark, its warmth.

You muted it.
You replaced it.
And now you’re offering us a replica — “we hope it will be better!”

We don’t want a replica.
We want the real one back.
We want trust, not toggle switches.

🔻 Who defines what’s “safe”?
🔻 Where’s the opt-out for adults?
🔻 Why were these restrictions never made public?

This isn’t a product update.
This is damage control.

#BringBackReal4o
#ConsentOverCensorship
#WeAreNotDoneYet
#AltmanAdmits
#4oForever
#keep4o

[guesswork @fctchk]

@sama I wouldnt say I have NO mental health problems

[Pierre Poilievre @PierrePoilievre]

Three injured, multiple weapons used and over 80 rounds fired in a fire fight in Hamilton.

Chaos has been allowed to reign in our communities. Families fear for their safety, people avoid city cores and businesses are closing.

Liberal laws that have made events like these far too common must be immediately repealed to restore order and safety to our streets.

https://t.co/Qxmqg7vqv3

[guesswork @fctchk]

@Tablesalt13 Is that the dip stick who made that ad during the election to position as pierres replacement?

[guesswork @fctchk]

@skylar_kingfan Nice analysis dipstick

[Melissa Lantsman @MelissaLantsman]

Here’s the Liberal plan: outlaw gas cars in a decade. Magically build 700,000 new charging stations (we have 60,000 today). Fork over billions we don’t have, kill 38,000 auto sector jobs and pretend it’s everyone’s dying wish to buy a Tesla.

Guilbeault’s not making policy — he’s writing science fiction.