Anti-taxxer said:

---

It would be cool if tweets shared were from someone with a blue check.

Or if the poster provided info about who the tweeter is and why they know what they're talking about.

Please?

---

Blue checks are only for liberals. It is in the Twitter bylaws.

most of the people these days actually doing the investigative journalism and research are people like you and me. I don't have nor do i need a blue check mark.

ShawnTxAg said:

---

most of the people these days actually doing the investigative journalism and research are people like you and me.

---

Yep, once the media decided the goal was to tell stories that fit their chosen narrative, their curiosity left them. No need to go look into anything if it isn't going to result in a story that drives the narrative they want.

ShawnTxAg said:

---

most of the people these days actually doing the investigative journalism and research are people like you and me. I don't have nor do i need a blue check mark.

---

Ok, that makes sense. It would just be nice to know if the person posting has any idea what they're posting about.

J.D. c/o 05 said:

---

Onto more important things.

---

Hear Pat Mahomes is getting one opened up in KC as well.

Cactus Jack said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

---

However, some researchers don't think this is always valid in terms of elections:

---

Even so, if every other election and even the presidential election in non-swing states fits, that really looks suspicious.

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

---

I wonder how many of these votes went for Trump?

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

I dont know about who he is married to but search Blum in the following link. Looks yo me like he purchased 70% ownership through 7 different corp (10% each) in April of this year.

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/own-disp?action=getissuer&CIK=0000896841

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

https://ir.avid.com/node/20506/html

Good Poster said:

---

---

Great. What are they going to do about the current dumpster fire?

Has someone proven that thy a were the providers of the software?

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

I don't think he owns that much. From the records I searched, he owned about 15% of 6.5 million shares until April 7 of this year. He sold 5,000,000 of those shares on April 7 and now owns about 1.5 million shares. Based on what was linked elsewhere on this, I think people are seeing his filings as a >10% owner under at least 4-5 different entity names and assuming each entity owned more than 10%, when the reality is that each entity had to do their own filings, but collectively together they only owned about 15%.

Good Poster said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

https://ir.avid.com/node/20506/html

---

All that proves is that he bought a few thousand shares in 2006, not that he owns over 60%. Spoiler...he doesn't own 60%.

Cactus Jack said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

---

Figured it out. The theory is if someone is fudging numbers in a set they will put random numbers down. In reality, the number 1 is most common in datasets and should be seen more frequently in a reliable set.

However, some researchers don't think this is always valid in terms of elections:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-analysis/article/benfords-law-and-the-detection-of-election-fraud/3B1D64E822371C461AF3C61CE91AAF6D#

---

Yes. This is the same process used in forensic accounting to find where companies are cooking the books. Many companies who went down for fraud were busted by the fact that entering random numbers or fudging numbers is subject to human psychology which does not have the capacity to understand vast arrays of numerical data. We naturally pool on 5's and 0's, and we don't use 1 as often as we should.

chjoak said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

I dont know about who he is married to but search Blum in the following link. Looks yo me like he purchased 70% ownership through 7 different corp (10% each) in April of this year.

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/own-disp?action=getissuer&CIK=0000896841

---

That is not 7 different ownerships of 10% each. That is 7 different entities collectively owning >10%. Prior to this 4/7/20 transaction, he was listed as owning 6.5 million shares. As the form linked below shows, he distributed 5,000,000 shares to partners of one of his holdings on April 7, 2020. Unless he has sold or bought more since then, he now holds about 1.5 million shares, which is well under 10%.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/847243/000165260820000003/xslF345X03/edgar.xml

Good Poster said:

---

---

Just checked on this. Looks like the two Iowa seats will be narrow losses for the GOP. Iowa 3 will be lost by just a couple hundred votes.

Owens is down again, although only by a few hundred votes. I read about this district. The Utah legislature drew this district to be 50/50. Could go either way. They are already talking about redistricting next year to make it easier for the GOP candidate to win.

Looking more like the California flips will hold. One of them especially looks really good.

New York numbers looking good as well.

Interesting turn of events

That's been a huge problem this year. Some media outlets are still reporting precincts reporting % while some media outlets have switched to expected votes. 100% of votes are not in. 100% of the precincts have reported some votes.

Look at another source and you will see percentage of votes expected to be outstanding.

txags92 said:

---

chjoak said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

I dont know about who he is married to but search Blum in the following link. Looks yo me like he purchased 70% ownership through 7 different corp (10% each) in April of this year.

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/own-disp?action=getissuer&CIK=0000896841

---

That is not 7 different ownerships of 10% each. That is 7 different entities collectively owning >10%. Prior to this 4/7/20 transaction, he was listed as owning 6.5 million shares. As the form linked below shows, he distributed 5,000,000 shares to partners of one of his holdings on April 7, 2020. Unless he has sold or bought more since then, he now holds about 1.5 million shares, which is well under 10%.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/847243/000165260820000003/xslF345X03/edgar.xml

---

So he diluted his interests significantly before the election and the machines subsequently "glitching?"

Did he own the largest position before that dilution? Because that looks iffy on its own.

txags92 said:

---

chjoak said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Is this true?

---

I don't buy it.

Prove to me this is true and I will personally start the hot war.

---

I dont know about who he is married to but search Blum in the following link. Looks yo me like he purchased 70% ownership through 7 different corp (10% each) in April of this year.

https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/own-disp?action=getissuer&CIK=0000896841

---

That is not 7 different ownerships of 10% each. That is 7 different entities collectively owning >10%. Prior to this 4/7/20 transaction, he was listed as owning 6.5 million shares. As the form linked below shows, he distributed 5,000,000 shares to partners of one of his holdings on April 7, 2020. Unless he has sold or bought more since then, he now holds about 1.5 million shares, which is well under 10%.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/847243/000165260820000003/xslF345X03/edgar.xml

---

So you dont think Blum Capital Partners, BCP & Blum Stratigic GP arent all owned atleast in part by Blum?

Rapier108 said:

---

---

posted 3 hours ago but only 5k shares...odd.