Breaking: Clinton Team & Media Panic After Hillary Fails To Pack High School Gym-----Trump Lures 12K

Reality is setting in. I mean come on, think about it.....the first woman Democratic nominee for president can't pack a high school gym.

Hillary Can't Fill High School Gym in Iowa - Trump Sells Out 12,000 Seat FL Arena
This is from the Conservative Tree house news. The story is about news photo shopping crowd for Clinton Rally 2 days ago in St. Petersburg, Fla. Here is the story:

Media Photoshops Crowd Image For Hillary Clinton St. Petersburg, Florida Speech…

here is picture media - The Hill - put up:

hillary-in-st-pete-4-photo-shop.jpg


hillary-in-st-pete.jpg



Here is actual picture of people who were there. Quite a difference. There were 171 people there according to the door count in the news story - you have link above.
 
Last edited:
I believe someone stated yesterday that people who go to rallys don't vote.
You can't make this bullshit up.
 
There is more. I saved a link to a news report someone here posted on another forum. I believe it was Picaro but I cannot remember. He will as I am crediting it to him unless someone else tells me it was their news link and not his. Okay so here is the link to that story as I saved it for my husband who reads this stuff ( I actually did read some of it too!) This is pretty shocking. Looks someone stole the nomination away from Sanders. There are quite a few graphs and charts you will have to click the link to look at all of them but I posted a few. The story about the hacking and paper copies really shows you how little they did to hide this corruption - if it is true - it is quite terrible that she got away with it. If it's true.

Odds Hillary Won Without Widespread Fraud: 1 in 77 Billion Says Berkeley, Stanford Studies - HNN - Higgins News Network

Widespread allegations of election fraud and voter suppression across the United States during the 2016 Democratic Primary has sparked the interest of several academic researchers and what they discovered in their research is disturbing.

The researchers each performed independent studies in which a few different statistical was applied to analyze various subsets of vote data and of the studies came to the same conclusion.

Namely that Hillary’s win was could have only been possible a result of widespread election fraud.

In fact, one of the statistical models applied by Stanford University researcher Rodolfo Cortes Barragan to a subset of the data found that the probability of the “huge discrepancies” of which “nearly all are in favor of Hillary Clinton by a huge margin” was “statistically impossible” and that “the probability of this this happening was is 1 in 77 billion”.

Furthermore, the researchers found that the election fraud only occurred in places where the voting machines were hackable and that did not keep an paper trail of the ballots.

In these locations Hillary won by massive margins.

On the other hand, in locations that were not hackable and did keep paper trails of the ballots Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton.

Analysis also showed repeatedly irregularities and statistically impossible reverses in reported live votes in several locations across the country.

In commenting on the research, Barragan stated that some of the models are rock solid and 59 years old and the results seen here have never been witnessed in non-fraudelent election during that time period.

To summarize, at least four different independent studies were conducted with various statistical models applied.

The researchers applied the different statistical models to:

  1. Actual vote counts as they were reported
  2. Discrepancies in polling data verse actual counts.
  3. Various subsets of demographic polling data verse actual vote counts
The results of each study corroborated the with the results of the others and some of the researchers have review the work of the others’ and go onto to confirm the findings in those studies.

It will take months for the studies to undergo peer review.

However, all of their research statistically proved there there must of been widespread fraud to create the discrepancies in the vote counts that exist in all 3 subsets of the data analyzed.

The research of Barragan, done collaboratively with Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands.

That research corroborates independent mathematical research conducted by Richard Charnin.

Further independent research was conducted by Beth Clarkson of Berkeley who also not only corroborated the two previous studies but reviewed them and after her research was done and confirmed their results.

A PDF Summary of the Barragan/Geijsel study “Are we witnessing a dishonest election? A between state comparison based on the used voting procedures of the 2016 Democratic Party Primary for the Presidency of the United States of America” can be found here.

The meat of the study is contained in the Appendix, Supplemental Analyses, and References to Barragan’s Study and in the attachments which follow.

Attachment:

Page 1

This report summarizes the results of our review of the GEMS election management system, which counts approximately 25 percent of all votes in the United States. The results of this study demonstrate that a fractional vote feature is embedded in each GEMS application which can be used to invisibly, yet radically, alter election outcomes by pre-setting desired vote percentages to redistribute votes. This tampering is not visible to election observers, even if they are standing in the room and watching the computer. Use of the decimalized vote feature is unlikely to be detected by auditing or canvass procedures, and can be applied across large jurisdictions in less than 60 seconds.

They allow “weighting” of races. Weighting a race removes the principle of “one person-one vote” to allow some votes to be counted as less than one or more than one. Regardless of what the real votes are, candidates can receive a set percentage of votes. Results can be controlled. For example, Candidate A can be assigned 44% of the votes, Candidate B 51%, and Candidate C the rest.

Instead of “1” the vote is allowed to be 1/2, or 1+7/8, or any other value that is not a whole number.
Fractions in results reports are not visible.Votes containing decimals are reported as whole numbers unless specifically instructed to reveal decimals (which is not the default setting). All evidence that fractional values ever existed can be removed instantly even from the underlying database using a setting in the GEMS data tables, in which case even instructing GEMS to show the decimals will fail to reveal they were used.


– from Fraction Magic – Part 1: Votes are being counted as fractions instead of as whole numbers | BlackBoxVoting.org

Percent_support_black_Clinton.jpg


Net_favorability.jpg




Scatterplot_percentage_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Early this morning I saw this story posted by Moorelloyd on the Politics forum. I was not surprised to learn that Obama is now claiming he is being "forced out" of the White House. He's adamant that he's not quitting. Considering the small crowds that have attended Hillary's meetings it is likely that there are a number of people behind closed doors that have known this for some time:


very brief video - pretty telling though..

transcript of interview:
Have you taken any divots out of the South Lawn here?” he was asked by David Feherty.

“The rough’s a little thick here, I don’t practice that much,” the president responded.

“You know, I’m a… I’m not a hack,” Obama said, divulging about his golf game he’s worked extensively on during some 300 rounds during his presidency.

“But I’m not quitting my day job.”

“Actually you are quitting your day job fairly shortly,” Feherty jumped in, referring to the president’s term expiring in January.

“Then I may get good. I’m being forced out, I didn’t quit,” Obama said.

Then talking about his game again, he said, “I’m an honest 13 (handicap). I think my irons are good. My drive is straight but unimpressive in length.”

So will he actually leave? We’ll find out in January.
Obama says he’s being ‘forced out’ of White House
 
At least Donald Trump puts pedophiles in the front row of his.
CpiclGkXEAEl4yQ.jpg


Mark Foley Really? Really? Are they going to hop on the pedo express after the rally?
 
I guess if you don't have polls favoring your candidate, you have to deflect by pointing at rallies.

Me, I'd rather have the polls favoring my candidate, because, you know, you win that way.
 

Forum List

Back
Top