whoareyou

love history, research and writing, and sometimes I post interesting facts and opinion

[whoareyou @namihwon]

The real outcome is:

1) the new LA mayor will be considered illegitimate by many in the country.

2) this will cause voter suppression. “Why vote if it’s all rigged?”

3) anyone who lives in LA could assume they don’t need to obey authorities since city government is illegitimate.
It could cause more civil disobedience- if that’s possible.

4) flight from CA due to frustration with the system

[whoareyou @namihwon]

Raman lost her own district( 4)

I’d like to run the raw numbers by district and do a probability of Raman getting 206% increase post Election Day.

If you run a randomized probability it comes to 1 in over a trillion that Raman gains so many votes.

I posted this in my profile. It’s statistically impossible (p=0)

Huh! It’s almost as if some group went out to intentionally collect exclusive (and known) ballots for Raman to prevent Pratt from taking 2nd place.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

Suggestion:
to challenge the likely fraud in LA, hire “on-the- street” investigators (maybe off duty sheriff officers) and them physically track down the persons on the voting list.

Then gather affidavits from these investigators for those votes that have “unknown person or location” and dead or ineligible voters.

You will need to gather several thousand quickly. (Big lift but if dead people or others are illegally voting …)

Present these affidavits to a judge to challenge the election integrity and outcome.

You will also need to hire experts in data and probability.

This will be expensive. But there is now national concern over election integrity and you could likely raise funds.

I know … it’s a big lift.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@CynicalPublius It also results in voter suppression.

Fewer people will vote if they think their vote is pointless.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@DemRetribution @grok @BuzzPatterson @FBI @DOJFraudDiv Then explain why Raman didn’t win her own district (4) but sudden won other districts after Election Day via ballot drops?

I would run that probability but don’t have the raw numbers. But I’m sure the sudden surge would also have a probability if 0

You are assuming a miracle.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@Scott_Wiener CA has something to hide, doesn’t it?

[F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli @USAttyEssayli]

California Is Blocking a Federal Audit of Its Voter Rolls

California allows first-time voters to register using forms of ID that most Americans would find surprising, including:

-Gym membership card
-Employer ID card
-Credit or debit card
-Prescription drug label
-Insurance card (California provides free health coverage to undocumented immigrants)

Full list: https://t.co/BvfviJsYG8

This is permitted when a voter fails to provide a Social Security number or driver’s license at registration. Our office believes this policy deserves a closer look.

We also have serious concerns about how California maintains its voter rolls. There are open questions about whether the state is promptly removing deceased voters, people who have moved, and individuals convicted of disqualifying felonies.

On top of that, California allows third parties to collect and turn in ballots on voters’ behalf (a practice known as ballot harvesting) with few restrictions. This makes it difficult to track who actually received, completed, and submitted each ballot.

For over a year, the Department of Justice has been trying to audit California’s voter rolls. Federal law gives the Attorney General the authority to review state voter files and confirm that only eligible U.S. citizens are voting in federal elections.

@AAGDhillon sent California a letter explaining our legal authority. California refused to comply, claiming state privacy laws block the review, an argument that does not hold up because those laws don’t apply to the federal government in this context. We’ve sued California in federal court, and the case is before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

If California genuinely wants voters to trust its elections, it should open its records, not fight to keep them closed.

What are they afraid of?

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok
Give me the statistical probability of 3 candidates receiving these votes over the course of 3 days.

Received on Election Day
Total ballots counted by person:
(A) 117,629
(B) 86,343
(c) 61,490

Received on Days 2-3
Mail in ballots count

Day 1 (post election received totals)
A). 67, 242
B) 44,975
C) 9247

Then ..
Day 2 (post election ballots received):

A) 30868
B) 44260
C) 68323

What is the statistical probability of candidate C receiving that increased number on day 3 (assume ballots are a received by mail in a random sample)

Let me know if you need to know further parameters.

This is from information posted on ballots received in LA for the most recent election for mayor.

Thank you

[whoareyou @namihwon]

If you do a statistical probability study of the count, there is a virtual 0 probability for the sudden increase over 208% for the count of votes in LA for Raman.

It’s less than 1 in Several trillions.

If your curious, I ran the initial 3 day mail in ballot counts -
P=0

I posted it on my profile

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@MaryWalterRadio Yeah - but the truth is the truth statistically

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@mattvanswol @libsoftiktok Statistical probability for Raman gaining that many votes?
(A 208% increase on the 3rd mail ballot count day) =
1 in several trillions (per grok)

Virtually 0

My query to grok ⬇️

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok
Give me the statistical probability of 3 candidates receiving these votes over the course of 3 days.

Received on Election Day
Total ballots counted by person:
(A) 117,629
(B) 86,343
(c) 61,490

Received on Days 2-3
Mail in ballots count

Day 1 (post election received totals)
A). 67, 242
B) 44,975
C) 9247

Then ..
Day 2 (post election ballots received):

A) 30868
B) 44260
C) 68323

What is the statistical probability of candidate C receiving that increased number on day 3 (assume ballots are a received by mail in a random sample)

Let me know if you need to know further parameters.

This is from information posted on ballots received in LA for the most recent election for mayor.

Thank you

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@elonmusk Statistical Probability of the Raman vote count increasing 208% = less than 1 / trillion
Per my question to Grok ⬇️

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok
Give me the statistical probability of 3 candidates receiving these votes over the course of 3 days.

Received on Election Day
Total ballots counted by person:
(A) 117,629
(B) 86,343
(c) 61,490

Received on Days 2-3
Mail in ballots count

Day 1 (post election received totals)
A). 67, 242
B) 44,975
C) 9247

Then ..
Day 2 (post election ballots received):

A) 30868
B) 44260
C) 68323

What is the statistical probability of candidate C receiving that increased number on day 3 (assume ballots are a received by mail in a random sample)

Let me know if you need to know further parameters.

This is from information posted on ballots received in LA for the most recent election for mayor.

Thank you

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@mitchellvii Here is Grok’s take on the probability the LA election results (based on numbers as reported by LA Times graphic)

Results: the probability is 0 (1 in trillions) for these numbers to occur.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok
Give me the statistical probability of 3 candidates receiving these votes over the course of 3 days.

Received on Election Day
Total ballots counted by person:
(A) 117,629
(B) 86,343
(c) 61,490

Received on Days 2-3
Mail in ballots count

Day 1 (post election received totals)
A). 67, 242
B) 44,975
C) 9247

Then ..
Day 2 (post election ballots received):

A) 30868
B) 44260
C) 68323

What is the statistical probability of candidate C receiving that increased number on day 3 (assume ballots are a received by mail in a random sample)

Let me know if you need to know further parameters.

This is from information posted on ballots received in LA for the most recent election for mayor.

Thank you

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@AGHamilton29 I just ran a statistical model (using Grok) to assess the jump in ballots on day 3 for Raman (amongst all 3 candidates)

The probability is less than 0 that her total could jump over 208% on the third day.

It’s basically 1 in several Trillions for that to occur.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok @BuzzPatterson @FBI @DOJFraudDiv It could trigger a chain of custody investigation - I don’t have access to that information.
Peace

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok @BuzzPatterson If I had it, it would give it to you !
These are raw numbers but a growth of 208% is staggering on the 3rd day

Still, I hope @fbi and @DOJFraudDiv take a look at these probabilities of election results

[whoareyou @namihwon]

@grok @BuzzPatterson So Buzz (and all LA basin Angelenos)

These deviations are not plausible under random sampling.

The probability of C receiving only ~33% of its “fair share” on Day 1, then ~206% on Day 2 (while A does the reverse) is vanishingly small.

[whoareyou @namihwon]

I understand the possible sampling problem from neighborhoods, but assumed random sampling would be more likely if USPS collected individually and was processed through the mail (as opposed to batches being clustered)

I wanted to know the random based probability.

It is basically less than 0 (1 in trillions, correct?)

Thank you