NOTICE OF UPDATE: The numbers J.D. Rucker used in the sources for this post can no longer be verified. Now HIS alleged source is showing numbers that don’t support his argument. I can’t imagine that Rucker, who has some credibility and writes for various conservative publications, would make up statistics wholesale for a post about statistics. I can imagine the statistics being altered after he called attention to their suspicious nature, since there is such a concerted effort to discredit any claims that the voting totals may not be accurate, but there is no evidence of that. This is the whole problem. There are no reliable sources.
\You want smoke? You want red flags? You want the appearance of impropriety? You want to hear about yet another dubiously flipped crucial state in the 2020 election?
Conservative writer J.D. Rucker reported that numbers from DecisionDeskHQ showed that 5,867,609 people in Michigan voted for President while only 5,717,819 voted in the hotly contested Senate election. That’s a 149,790 difference. As of the time of his post, he wrote, Joe Biden was ahead by 145,935 votes.
“What a coinkydink!” (Special credit for identifying the film quote and the actor!)
It does seem odd, since Michigan had a very competitive Senate race. It is not unusual for some voters to skip one part of a ballot or another, but doing so has still occurred in proportionately small number in past years. Other states this election followed the usual pattern, with voters of both parties designating their preferences for both the presidential race and the Senate. In Oregon, for example, where there was no chance of the state going to Trump, 2,317,816 voted for President compared to the 2,281,011 votes cast in the Senate race, a 36,805 difference.
South Carolina is a reliably conservative, Republican state that had a Senate race that was hotly contested. There, 2,514,124 voted for President and a nearly identical 2,512,793 voted in the Senate race, a mere 1,331 difference.
Michigan’s huge and convenient number of single-purpose ballots doesn’t prove anything. It is, however, one more questionable clue in the early morning wave of Biden votes that flipped Michigan, where other irregularities were in play. J.D. Rucker edits the NOQ report and has a theory about this, which I don’t understand at all and states as fact assertions that I cannot verify to my satisfaction. If you want to get into those weeds, be my guest.
This one should be easy to clear up: if all or most of the ballots with only a Presidential vote favored Biden, that would signal a ballot dump. If the Senate vote-free ballots are reasonably split, then, as Emily Litella would say,
This weird statistic is one of many sources of doubt that mail-in voting allowed to pollute this election, and like the rest, they have to be investigated and explained before anyone will trust the results.
We must have a result in the Presidential race that can be trusted.
Ethics Alarms 
Compare the difference between Joe Biden and Gary Peters and the difference between Donald Trump and John James.
I will let you look it up.
What if these election disputes aren’t decided by 12/8/2020? What happens on 12/14/2020 when the electors are scheduled to meet and the disputes aren’t resolved?
Will they just push ahead and elect Biden?
With the overwhelming left bias of the MSM and Big Tech, it gives the appearance that the conservative base in this country is in the minority and they will push forward and Biden will be installed as President – for me, there seems to be no hope of a true resolution for the election of 2020. I hope I’m wrong.
The Republic hangs on a razor thin balance.
In the name of decency and stability, electing Biden seems appropriate. But we can never trust elections again and we can never trust that Democrats, once they flip the Senate in January using the exact same questionable tactics, will ever allow an election to go Republican again.
OR
We discover that indeed, President Trump *was elected* by the legally cast ballots, and we do the Lawful things and re-install him as President. Republicans, who uphold rule of law, then go into the 2022 elections, legally and ethically, with a fair mind, and get clobbered out of the Senate and lose all gains and more in the House. Then are trounced in 2024 and it’s the same game.
The totalitarians winning (and staying) strike me as the 85-90% likelihood by 2024, given the two ugly forks in the road ahead of us.
(But in fairness, the Republic has balanced on that precipice since about 2008-2012.
I wonder how many progressives are secretly hoping for the second.
A veto-proof majority in the House and Senate in 2023 would do wonders for their agenda.
Every bit of evidence indicates that the Democrats are facing a likely wipe-out in 2022.
(If Biden gets the Presidency, which, means, if abject corruption is discovered, then he’s handed the Presidency despite *rule of law* just to appease the mobs)
The reverse wipe-out occurs in 2022 if discovered corruption is enough to hand the Presidency back to Trump.
So discovery of Democrat corruption will make people vote MORE for them? Please explain.
You must still have faith that the average Democrat gives a crap about rule of law. They don’t. I’ve watched them for 16 years, they want power.
And a Trump win will lead to the pattern of all mid-terms…the Party in the White House gets shellacked by vengeful opposition as complacent supports are less enthusiastic about going to the polls.
“They don’t.” should fall between “…rule of law.” and “I’ve watched them…”
No, but I have SOME faith that SOME Democrats aren’t totally rotten to the core, and won’t accept that open corruption.
I dunno about that. From what I am reading, the Democrat machine (Act Blue, the unions, the NEA, etc.) are poised to spend a billion dollars in Georgia to win both Senate seats. That would change the balance in the Senate significantly, especially considering that there are at least 3 senators whose support cannot be trusted to stay in line with Republican vote strategies.
jvb
You know, they spent billions already, and lost 8 seats in the House. Money just does not have the influence in elections people think it does.
I don’t understand the logic.
jvb
What logic?
Adopt my reasonably founded mistrust of Democrats and it makes sense.
My understanding is that the election would then be tossed into the House of Representatives with the House delegations from each state voting as a block. This would favor the president, since Republicans control a majority of the state delegations in the House.
Yes, Trump wins in the House. My worst case scenario, as far as triggering the AUC goes. Imagine the bitching about the Electoral College X 1000…
Oh, I see. If it goes to the house, then they don’t need the majority in the house, they only need a majority Republican on a state by state basis (primarily the contested states). Is my understanding correct?
You are correct , sir!
The problem will come well before then. The electoral college meets in mid-December to cast their respective votes. Before that happens, all states must certify their vote totals and slate of electors.
If the vote totals cannot be certified (in 2000, Florida was on hold until the 12th of Dec., two days before the EC met), then what I think will happen is that all certified electors may vote. I don’t think Biden can muster a majority without Pennsylvania, which is the object of the most serious disputes. It will also matter if Arizona’s final results indicate Trump actually won as many competent observers think will happen.
If the EC cannot vote a majority to one candidate or the other at the time of their meeting, either the courts will have to order an extension to that meeting or, if that is impossible and neither candidate can get 270, then the House of Representatives, voting by state delegation, must select the president. Likewise the Senate elects the vice president by simple majority vote.
The EC meeting date is set by federal law and can be changed by Congress just like any other law, provided they are willing. But political gamesmanship is possible — if it looks like the election must go to the house, I am not sure the Republican senate would consent to changing the date, although they might.
I don’t know what I think will happen now. Whatever it is, I hope it’s a clear result one way or the other. If there is room for doubt, there’s anything from riots to civil war in the offing.
I just read an article that we rejected a Ukraine election over mail-in ballots and excessive turnout. 🙂
We are becoming what we purport to hate — a banana republic.
Eh. I meant “Ukraine” not UK.
But the Ukraine’s close friends call it “UK” or just “Ukey.”
The vast majority of European nations (which American leftists have an odd and perverse romance with) ban mail in ballots because even *they* know how corruptible they are.
Hmmmm…the ONE way the American left does NOT want to “be like the Europeans.” Again: hmmmm.
Re-do it all. In person. Government ID. ONE DAY only. Reasonable exceptions for a *bare minimum* of people who can prove hardship or prove requirement to be part of essential services that day.
Won’t happen, but of course that would be the best remedy. Still a pipe dream…
Secure it with the US supervised Iraqi or Afghani method…put your thumb in semi-permanent ink that doesn’t wash off for a month so you can’t hop from polling place to polling place.
As I was saying…(some number of Jack’s posts ago).
Still, it’ll never happen. I still expect the House to elect Pelosi for POTUS.
Yes! Let’s keep redoing it until we get the result we want!
The result we want is one that doesn’t look like a sham. Which is massive mailed out ballots looks like.
Warning, Tom: your comments are edging into trolling territory. Everyone should want results that are not redolent of back room manipulation and potential or suspected fraud.
It’s parody. Geez.
It’s really hard to tell, TomR, after four years of invective everywhere, accusing anyone even slightly right of center of being ignorant and dishonest. Your comment read like any FB post or Reddit thread this week.
People like me are fed up. My FB feed is 90% liberal. My few conservative FB friends are elderly relatives and acquaintances. We used to talk, share. One friend knits and crochets hats for cancer patients. One sends care packages to our soldiers. Another’s daughter is becoming an accomplished dancer. They posted their hats, asked for suggestions for the care packages, put up video of dance recitals. I haven’t seen a photograph or a post of anything personal for four years. It’s not just them, though, these are a couple examples. 75 of my FB friends, including these three, post nothing but anti-Trump memes, articles, political cartoons, and SNL videos.
It started the morning after the election, posts ranging from selfies of eyes puffy from crying for hours about Trump having won, to hysterical warnings that women had better ‘stock up on birth control now, before it’s outlawed, and if you don’t want children get sterilized now!’(an actual claim, my jaw dropped). The rest of us kept posting as usual, hoping it would get better. Cooking and baking are my passions, I posted my cakes, croissants and New Year’s dinners. Instead of the usual comments, comments like ‘How can you post about things like this when our lives are at stake!?’ began to show up. It never got better.
I don’t bother anymore. Posting into a vacuum isn’t enjoyable, being defriended for not being an activist (‘It’s the fault of people like you we’re in this mess!’) by people I’ve known online for a decade or more is just such juvenile behavior for people over 50 to be engaged in that I just can’t deal with it anymore. Everyone knows about Trump, we all have eyes and ears. The daily blanket of anti-Trump posts is what? They don’t trust us to understand? They need to educate those around them? The conviction that they are right, and so much better than those who are not in lockstep, is so grating.
It’s death by a thousand cuts. After being beaten round the head for four years, I flinch.
I was harsh, and I apologize.
I agree with you. I find the woke-left, the far-left, AOC, etc, pretty despicable. But I’m not going to become like them and lose my sense of reality and objectivity. They interpret everything in the absolute worse way possible. Reading into things that don’t exist. That’s what the far-left does. Every cop who kills someone, automatic racist. Anytime Trump says something a little untoward, they interpret it in the worst possible way.
I’m not going to do that with the apparent fraud in this election either. You can find anomalies in everything if you look hard enough. Trump isn’t a reliable source for facts anyway, and I’m not going to let him cause me to lose faith in our democracy. Because that’s what he wants.
Everything I’ve read so far has been smoke and mirrors. Nitpicking. An auditor applying tax fraud to voter fraud…some other thing about numbers that was later retracted that no one can even follow.
I’ll wait to see what the courts say. I’ve been trying to read and get my info as close to the source as possible. I don’t know why this blog hasn’t talked about the actual court cases and what the judges have said.
I first came on FB in 2007, and I posted nothing political for that first year. My dad still posts nothing political, thinking of FB as a living room, where you discuss the good things in life, not the controversial things. Then came 2008, and it all went politics.
Yeah, I started using Facebook in 2008. So politics-is-everywhere-there is how I knew the space from the very start. The hysteria over Obama was hilarious – until it wasn’t.
Why not? When there were votes about gay marriage that went against it in 30+ states, like in Maine in 2009, they just kept putting it back on the ballot until they got a vote for it, then suing, until they got their way.
So not the point. In Antrim County MI (pop. 23,365), 6000 votes for Trump went to Biden, as they failed to update the software before the election. Are you sure that all 28 or 30 states using the same software all updated it like they should have? 6000 in a district of 23000 doesn’t bode well for counts in larger cities. The order that went out in GA for postal workers to comb post boxes for late ballots, and separate them from the rest of the mail so they could be back-date stamped 11/3 is obviously illegal.
Your posts are taking on a whiff of someone suffering from Trump derangement. This is not a conservative blog, Jack does not claim to be a conservative. Many of us may be more conservative than YOU, but no one here is hard right. I’m a registered Independent.
If by chance, Trump is found to have won, will you embrace those results?
Or maybe it’s a Republican plot to not count all the votes in the Senate race. FRAUD!!!!
Maybe! Worth looking into.
The numbers I looked at on DecisionDeskHQ just now tell a different story — a difference of just 58,881 fewer votes for senator than for president (all contenders).
That’s interesting…how did that change between the posting of the first figures and now?
Darned if I know. I thought you got your numbers from N0Q since they are identical. N0Q’s post was dated 11/7, while DDHQ seems to refresh their count regularly, almost continuously.
Meh. Math is hard.
He’s comparing differences when he should be comparing percentages. The totals in the “more reasonable” districts are smaller because both the inputs are smaller. If you take Senate numerator and Presidential denominator, you see the three differ from each other by about one and a half percent.
Sure it looks suspicious, certainly warrants a closer look, but it’s one of the weaker suspicious drums to be beating on.
Agreed…but all suspicious drums should be beaten.
In the meantime the pressure mounts for a concession and the media acts like it’s a done deal, slobbering over the Bidens’ dogs and talking about policy initiatives when the incoming administration hits the ground running and other countries welcoming America back. Kind of reminds me of 2018 when the role-playing game site RPGnet issued a very clear directive banning support of Trump or his administration on the site, calling it an “elected hate group.”
I’m glad you posted this. My cousin posted a rebuttal to the claim that democrats didn’t rig the election because if they had, they would have also won the senate. Seems like kind of a dumb argument to say we didn’t commit x crime because more crimes weren’t committed.
Just reply: Hand bubbling 149,790 ballots is going to take a while, even with a big team. Hand bubbling 299,580 ovals on 149,790 would take twice as long, and they only had one night to do it.
You’re not implying they have 149,790 ballots selecting only votes for president with all other offices up for election blank, are you? The existence of that kind of evidence seems like it would be a slam dunk for fraud detection. Sure, maybe a few people could leave some columns blank but not 149,790.
That’s true. Absence of one crime doesn’t mean another one doesn’t exist.
Someone used that argument against me regarding the Hunter/Biden stuff. People also use that argument regarding sexual assault cases too (see Biden).
J.D. Rucker, the ultra-conservative writer… has a theory which I don’t understand at all and can’t verify…I will endorse this part of Rucker’s conclusion…
Makes sense.
What happened to this blog? Please don’t turn into a pro-Trump, conspiracy site. Go read the actual court documents and what evidence they are really presenting.
I share your concern, Tom. the numbers that J.D. Rucker used are not the numbers on the Decision Desk HQ site now, and who knows where Rucker got his numbers from. With bad data, there is no obvious reason to endorse any part of Rucker’s conclusion. The numbers on DDHQ just a few minutes ago showed a difference of 58,881 total votes cast for a presidential candidate vs votes cast for a senatorial candidate. That’s a little over 1% of the presidential votes. Is that enough to raise suspicions of fraud? I don’t think so.
I revised the post based on the numbers changing, or being misreported, or something. Rucker hasn’t I don’t know what’s going on.
Geez.
Well, dunno whether these count are significant or not, but there is somewhat of a trend.
You look at Maine, South Carolina, Kentucky — none were all that close for president, even if we thought they were going to be close for Senate (which they weren’t), but the vote totals for president and senate are almost identical — I think the same down to the thousands.
Then you look at Michigan, Minnesota, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina — all of which we expected to be close as far as the presidential vote, and most of which had competitive senate races. There are significant shortfalls in the senatorial votes versus presidential votes — from 30k up to about 85k in one of the Georgia races (the Georgia special race had something like 400 candidates so maybe I’ll give them a pass).
Is that significant? Beats me. It is curious, though, don’t you think?
Oh, sorry, I meant to add that my source is the WSJ electoral map that seems to be updated in mostly real time. They’ve called Alaska but still not NC or Georgia. Arizona is down to just under 13k now.