Replies

For instance, a log-normal distribution IDENTICAL to the ones we’re talking about here could be created by plotting the birthdates of each precinct/ward captain using this bar chart distribution plotting method (except with bins 1-12). That data is obviously utterly meaningless, but the chart would tell the exact same story (at least as the honest Trump plots). Point being, WHAT is being plotted absolutely cannot be ignored. “Trust but verify” as someone famous once said, especially with pretty pictures.

Stepping down from my angry scientist soapbox (sorry), I now understand what is going on here, and the results are extremely compelling. I would like to know how many total data points there are, which I think would equal the total number of precincts/wards in each of the three cities. Curious if we’re talking tens or hundreds (probably not thousands) of individual election results. The more data points the stronger the evidence of fraud.

To see a graphical presentation of data and say the original meaning of it is unimportant is horrifying. This is how the media bamboozles data-ignorant America with plots, charts, and other half-baked statistics (exhibit A: everything related to COVID). Understanding WHAT is being captured in any graphic is extremely important, both for validating the legitimacy of the graphic (and its conclusions) and for being able to explain it to others.

The original meaning of the data is unimportant for the analysis - it's simply the likelihood of your counting numbers starting with a particular digit once you stop counting. Sure, original meaning is important for the importance of the analysis and determining how the analysis applies to the world, but the analysis/formula itself only requires counting numbers from any source. As to the "control graph", that is based on nothing concrete, it's a theoretical formula that only deals with the mathematics. My post #59 walks someone else through it decently.

I now understand what is going on here, and the results are extremely compelling. I would like to know how many total data points there are, which I think would equal the total number of precincts/wards in each of the three cities. Curious if we’re talking tens or hundreds (probably not thousands) of individual election results

I assume you're responding to the set of six graphs posted above? That's Philly, Milwaukee, and Detroit.
Philly seems to have 718 poll locations.
Milwaukee looks like 478 of them.
And Detroit appers to have a total of 503 locations within the city proper, but I don't know if there's more locations outside the city (within the county) but still counted as "Detroit" for the purposes of those graphs above. So 503 minimum.