Williams College Professor and Mathematician Flags up to 100,000 Suspicious Ballots in Pennsylvania

Epoch Times ^ | 12/06/2020 | Jack Phillips

[SeekAndFind]

A professor of mathematics at Williams College, in a sworn affidavit, flagged nearly 100,000 ballots in Pennsylvania after analyzing election data and phone interviews.

Steven Miller, who specializes in analytic number theory and sabermetrics, said that one instance of possible fraud involved potential votes that weren’t counted and another instance involved ballots that may have been requested by a person other than the GOP-registered voter.

“I estimate that the number of ballots that were either requested by someone other than the registered Republican or requested and returned but not counted range from 89,397 to 98,801,” Miller said in the sworn statement (pdf), according to Just The News.

Elaborating, Miller said that “almost surely, the number of ballots requested by someone other than the registered Republican is between 37,001 and 58,914,” and that “almost surely the number of ballots requested by registered Republicans and returned but not counted is in the range from 38,910 to 56,483.”

Pennsylvania’s state data for early and absentee ballot requests showed 165,412 ballots requested in the names of registered GOP voters that were not counted as of Nov. 16, Miller stated.

Data shows Democratic nominee Joe Biden is ahead of President Donald Trump by around 80,000 votes in Pennsylvania.

Federal Election Commission Chairman Trey Trainor, an appointee of Trump, told the news outlet that Miller’s affidavit is evidence of potential voter fraud.

“This data, which is provided by an expert witness, who would be qualified in almost any court in the country, adds to the conclusions that some level of voter fraud took place in this year’s election,” Trainor remarked. “Therefore, the rush to certify results that are this suspicious from places with known election violations would nullify millions of votes that were legally cast by individual voters.”

Miller, who was educated at Yale and Princeton, said he analyzed data from Pennsylvania’s election that was collected by Matt Braynard, who formerly worked for the Trump campaign, and conducted 2,684 voter interviews by a phone bank.

The American Mathematical Society in 2019 said Miller was included in its class of fellows “for contributions to number theory and service to the mathematical community, particularly in support of mentoring undergraduate research.”

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar’s office has not responded to a request for comment.

Boockvar’s office previously said it has found no evidence of voter fraud or mass irregularities in Pennsylvania, while other secretaries of state in Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan have said the same. Earlier this week, the Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity division said the Nov. 3 election was the “most secure” in U.S. history, saying there is “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

Trump’s legal team, however, has said they have found enough evidence to potentially overturn the election.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Funny how the Democrats screamed election interference for four years and suddenly when we have election interference it's the most secure election history. Words can not describe what should happen to those people.

[organicchemist]

Williams is massively woke. This prof has a lot to lose by revealing this

[OKSooner]

(Insert standard default remarks about federal capital punishment here, with caveat about “After the fair trials”.)

[lightman]

Pennsylvania Ping!

Please ping me with articles of interest.

FReepmail me to be added to the list.

[linMcHlp]

bttt

[linMcHlp]

“number of ballots requested by registered Republicans and returned but not counted”

Systemic problem across our country.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Williams is massively woke. This prof has a lot to lose by revealing this

If he is tenured, what kind of false accusations will they bring to get him fired?

[Eagles6]

"Pennsylvania’s state data for early and absentee ballot requests showed 165,412 ballots requested in the names of registered GOP voters that were not counted as of Nov. 16, Miller stated."

Line. Up volunteers and call every one of those Republicans.

"Did you request a mail in ballot?"

"Did you complete and return your ballot?"

"Did someone else request and use a ballot in your name and you were forced to vote provisionally?

If only a little more than half respond affirmatively that's enough to flip the election. "Will you sign an affadavit?"

[linMcHlp]

Williams fate is in the hands of a contest between the woke alumni with money vs. the unknown number of conservative alumni.

[Svartalfiar]

Elaborating, Miller said that “almost surely, the number of ballots requested by someone other than the registered Republican is between 37,001 and 58,914,” and that “almost surely the number of ballots requested by registered Republicans and returned but not counted is in the range from 38,910 to 56,483.”
...
Data shows Democratic nominee Joe Biden is ahead of President Donald Trump by around 80,000 votes in Pennsylvania.

So other person requests would likely be Trump switched to Biden votes, while the not counted were simply straight Trump subtractions. So, that means ~40M ballots would be subtracted from Biden, and ~80M should be added to Trump.

So, ignoring all the other fraud, just this guy's stuff alone would flip the results by 120M votes and give Trump a 40,000 lead.

[lepton]

Trump’s legal team, however, has said they have found enough evidence to potentially overturn the election.

---

The problem is that most is of the ‘high likelihood’ variety, and not the ‘proven’ variety. The courts are ignoring, rightfully or not, anything that isn’t outright proven. 90,000 ballots, 90% likely is not 90k, or even 81k, but zero.

Can they actually pin enough of them down in time?

[bitt]

p

[tanstaafl_luna]

I am the professor, and the work is being taken greatly out of context. Further, the report linked in the Epoch times is NOT the file submitted to the court. That file is located here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18618673/200/1/donald-j-trump-for-president-inc-v-boockvar/ The filed report clearly states before each conclusion that this depends on the responders being representative and accurate. For example, as remarked in the report, there are other explanations (such as people honestly forgetting they requested a ballot). There are two questions. The first is the data collection, the second is the extrapolation of what it would mean if the data is correct. I did not comment at all about the data being correct; while what I wrote is correct it is not the whole story, and the two questions should be discussed together. Matt Braynard has offered to discuss the steps he took to ensure the integrity of the data, but without such a discussion the conversation is incomplete. Also, to me this is part of a larger question: how well did large scale first time mail-in voting work during a global pandemic response? Braynard has data for other states as well (all the other states are just registered voters, only the PA data is just for Republicans).

[tanstaafl_luna]

I am the professor, and the work is being taken greatly out of context. Further, the report linked in the Epoch times is NOT the file submitted to the court. That file is located here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18618673/200/1/donald-j-trump-for-president-inc-v-boockvar/

The filed report clearly states before each conclusion that this depends on the responders being representative and accurate. For example, as remarked in the report, there are other explanations (such as people honestly forgetting they requested a ballot).

There are two questions. The first is the data collection, the second is the extrapolation of what it would mean if the data is correct. I did not comment at all about the data being correct; while what I wrote is correct it is not the whole story, and the two questions should be discussed together, precisely because you can reach the wrong conclusion by focusing just on the standard stats 101 extrapolation I did. This is why my stats colleagues have argued that the two should not be split, and seeing what has happened I agree with them and apologize that I did the report the way I did, as it is easy to read it out of context.

Matt Braynard has offered to discuss the steps he took to ensure the integrity of the data, but without such a discussion the conversation is incomplete. Additionally, the PA date concerns only registered Republican (his work in other states is on all requesters not split by party affiliation). Thus again more information is needed if you are going to make an argument that this could change the result.

I view this analysis as trying to gauge how well large main-in voting for the first time worked during a pandemic. The analysis I did here is contingent on the responders being accurate and representative, and thus until that point is addressed no conclusions can be drawn from the calculation I did.

For example, click here for some analysis I did with a colleague on the distribution of first digits of vote totals for Biden and Trump; many people were citing that this violates Benford's law and indicates fraud, but there are other explanations (see also a By The Numbers column in the WSJ, available here.

[Liz]

Earlier this week, DHS' cyber-security division said the election was the “most secure” in U.S. history;
there is “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

Just a prelude of things to come, people----the deepstate told Biden he will be creating a series of new govt czars:
<><> A Truth czar, to confirm that the 2020 election was "the most secure" in American political history.
<><> A Re-Education czar, to help the ignorant deplorables to learn .......and accept...... the truth.
<><> An Internment Camp czar, to give the stubborn ones a little extra incentive to accept the truth.
<><> An Organ Donor czar, for hopeless patriots, who can at least do something useful for the State. (h/t robel)

[Shady]

So true! My Bro-In-Law was graduated from Williams. We sat next to Jeb Magruter at the Graduation while Gary Trudeau tore him apart. It was ugly.

[Carriage Hill]

SPJNK.

[GOPJ]

Miller said that “almost surely, the number of ballots requested by someone other than the registered Republican is between 37,001 and 58,914,” and that “almost surely the number of ballots requested by registered Republicans and returned but not counted is in the range from 38,910 to 56,483.”

If democrats used fraud to illegally vote Republicans then they're moving into the big time.

Decades ago in Florida one of the folks doing voter fraud for democrats accidentally using the 'hammer and ice pick' method to knock out chads - made a down ballot mistake and threw enough votes to a local Republican to get that person elected. Luckily no one looked at the race to closely to see that it was the 'black community' that pushed him over the top...

[tanstaafl_luna]

Please look at reply 14 (I am the person whose report is being quoted). The analysis is dependent on the data being accurate and representative. If it is, it is a simple calculation to extrapolate. The real question is whether or not this is true.

Braynard is very willing to talk about the steps he took, and in other states the data is not split by party registration. To me, the big issue is how well did massive mail in voting work for the first time during a pandemic? That is a very important question which should be studied. It is related to the question of what happened in this election, but the analysis I did cannot speak on fraud, as there can be other explanations (for example, people forgetting they requested a ballot / not realizing they requested one). It can however indicate something worth studying further.