Darkpriest

Well, in those two countries math and physics are big things on all levels of education, while in US you have concepts of math being 'racist' etc.

I like how everything is bled o to Russia. And here i thought they are near bankrupt globally impotent shadow of prior soviet block, yet they seem to be able to heavily influence the greatest country on the earth

Because Laos is non-muslim Asia, so for Californians they are the same as privilaged Asians. I'm 100% sure, that if that would be some african, this would not be happening

Isn't this a bit naive and biased? Russians could by some theories pull it off in 2016, yet conflicted Chinese couldn't do it in 2020, when you have ample evidence of various institutions and individuals falling in line with their narrative? (Hong Kong and NBA, WHO and Covid in China+not recognizing Taiwan, various faculty members at US univeristies, etc.)

Not entirely true. You still need to outperform real inflation well enough, and you pension plan might crash and lose net worth depending on where the money is held. There also things like medical bills during retirement, life expectancy etc vs amount available at retirement age etc.

I read something about 70% to 86% of Trump supporters believe that. I do not track that much anymore, as chances of turning the result are near 0, or similar to an undected killer asteroid hitting earth next week.

Argue more on pronouns and other meaningless stuff, meanwhile in Asia https://www.wsj.com/articles/asia-pacific-nations-sign-major-china-backed-trade-deal-11605434779?mod=mhp

@GromnirI agree, people following various movements, tend to belive into highly improbable things, but for them these are certainties. Same like people of different religions belive their faith is true, even if in the reality none of them might be true. Dealing with things in absolutes like 'sure' or 'impossible' can be used to express beliefs and other emotionally loaded messages, but otherwise it is inaccurate in terms of probabilities.

I do not disagree. I do not know how big the probability is. Btw, i recommend to read these. https://medium.com/@kuangalia/the-ten-commandments-of-logic-d4c9f0e08482 https://www.relativelyinteresting.com/10-commandments-rational-debate-logical-fallacies-explained/ https://www.verywellmind.com/cognitive-biases-distort-thinking-2794763

I think the most common case is, where there are votes for a POTUS candiate only. Again its late for me and I have better things to do than to track every single story related to US election. I like to conduct thought experiments and think on what ifs scenarios to reset my brain from daily work with numbers, algorithms, processes and people working with them.

Ehh. What seems ridiculous now, is not ridiculous when it happens. I'll use a very controversial probability analogy (probability only) I'm fairly sure, that if you were told prior to 9/11 events, as a passanger of a flight, that you are going to get hijacked and the plane will hit and collapse a skyscraper in NY, you would also call this ridiculous. Sure, no one will build scenarios and their plan of action around such an outlandish probability scores, but extremly low probability is still not equal to impossibility. Do you really see no scenario, no matter how improbable, that these counts and EC predictions could be changed to favor Trump?

I think some people were calling what they deemed unusually odd discrepancies between votes for specific senate and house candidates and the votes for specific candidades. It was some time ago, so can't say what happened to those claims, as I have not been that invested in the result.

@Gromnir Until the process is finished and signed off, everything is possible, however there is a matter o probabilities. Even if the chance is near the ratio you need to win some 1.5 billion USD in a Powerball, it is still possible. We can do the math together, and decide how probable changes to the input data are. We can start with getting an average ratio of fraudulent votes in the total votes in each of the rust belt swing states in the last 3 elections. Lets apply that ratio and see what is potential average outcome. Then we can build various other scenarios, like the ratio of fraudlent and invalid votes in the subtotal of the mail-in votes in the last three elections per state and check from there. Etc. It's a numbers game until the game is called over.

Why? Do you claim it is impossible? Or is it just the potential outcome you'd not be willing to accept? Again, you deal in an environment of heavy 'partisian' division, and people, who are heavily invested emotionally into something, can go great lengths to see the outcome the desire. There is certainly a cognitive bias on each of the sides. One side really strongly believes that there was fraud and the election got stolen, and will exaggerate any irregurality to fit into that view. The other side really likes the outcome and thus believes everything is fine and will dismiss any and all information of irreguralities as insignificant or an attempt to surpress legitimate votes. Looking at the process, none of the extremes is likely, so now it's a matter of probabilities when it comes to the potential scale and its influence on the final outcome. Problem is, that most of the people on a one side of the fence will not be willing to accept the outcome that does not favor their vote. It applies to both sides.

Yes and no, look at the differnces. Use the prior averages, extrapolate by the factor of the total increase and factor in higher drive to see their own candidate winning as a potential ratio increase of such cases. Then compare it to the totals of differences. In Georgia, you have ca 11k difference? So it's enough if 6k vvotes were misplaced and given to a wrong candidate. PA is what? 50k difderence? 25k misplaced and it turns the tide Wisconsin is around 20k., So ca 10-11k misplaced. Considering the scale, I would not dismiss that from the realms of possibilities. Is it likely? That I would not be able to say, but I can certainly say that it is not impossible I wonder on another thing though, what would happen, if Trump would actually win after the recounts? Is this even something acceptable to people, who now stand so sternly behind Biden's win, even though the election is highly contested and the process requires to have all the lawsuits and disputes investigated and resolved?

Is it true that AZ got delisted as Biden's win and is still contested?

On one hand I'm happy with news around COVID vaccine, on the other hand, this might lead to ugly politics using the vaccine as a trump card in the geopol. Anyway, markets went bonkers wild with these algo triggers

This will be a year that built various groups of zealots, from BLM, Antifa etc, to Trump fanatics. Another example of people looking at patterns and confirming their bias? https://www.zerohedge.com/political/it-defies-logic-scientist-finds-telltale-signs-election-fraud-after-analyzing-mail-ballot I wonder if dems and reps will each split into additional two factions, of woke communists with AOC, Warren and Bernie leads, and Trumps nationalists, 'Murika first

How is the person, who took to her own a voice and a stand against segregation relevant to this point?

You said it's important. Usually the person putting a thesis forward needs to prove it. I do not see why it would be important. I do see this however A person with miniscule support during dems primaries, will be de facto a prssident, when they will pull Biden from the white house in mid 2021, due to "health conditions and being unable to work in full capacity"

Why?

To whom? And why?

Nah, democrats will be busy with trying to appease all the raging mobs, which they first pushed for. Now there will be no Trump to "rally against". What will media do? What will happen, once more business will offshore more work, funnilly enough, the next on the cutting stand are banking, journalism and tech jobs. Some will be cut, others automated or offshored.

I'm calling it, you will not know who is the new POTUS until mid Jan 2021

He will get replaced as soon as summer 2021 by Harris