@winterhaydn.bsky.social
Actually, I gave it some second thought, and it could be Trump being strategic for the next election. Pretending a unity. Although, it's still weird if he, if all people, can fake a giant smile like that.
November 22, 2025 at 1:45 PM
Actually, I gave it some second thought, and it could be Trump being strategic for the next election. Pretending a unity. Although, it's still weird if he, if all people, can fake a giant smile like that.
Yeah, Trump weirdly always went easy on Bernie Sanders, or avoided him, almost like he respected the guy (or else knew he couldn't win in a debate using his normal rhetoric).
Still, he does go after every other left-wing politician in a catch-all way.
Still, he does go after every other left-wing politician in a catch-all way.
November 22, 2025 at 12:41 PM
Yeah, Trump weirdly always went easy on Bernie Sanders, or avoided him, almost like he respected the guy (or else knew he couldn't win in a debate using his normal rhetoric).
Still, he does go after every other left-wing politician in a catch-all way.
Still, he does go after every other left-wing politician in a catch-all way.
Yes, well, concern over 2024 is at least slightly more rational than J6, which was fueled by ego as much as ignorance.
Anyways, I still cling to slight hope ETA will address this, but it seems unlikely right now. Nathan appeared to be an honest guy. I regret donating & supporting if they aren't.
Anyways, I still cling to slight hope ETA will address this, but it seems unlikely right now. Nathan appeared to be an honest guy. I regret donating & supporting if they aren't.
August 31, 2025 at 5:01 AM
Yes, well, concern over 2024 is at least slightly more rational than J6, which was fueled by ego as much as ignorance.
Anyways, I still cling to slight hope ETA will address this, but it seems unlikely right now. Nathan appeared to be an honest guy. I regret donating & supporting if they aren't.
Anyways, I still cling to slight hope ETA will address this, but it seems unlikely right now. Nathan appeared to be an honest guy. I regret donating & supporting if they aren't.
Yes, I'm ignorant about her and mainly went by someone else's words on the matter. Ignore me, I'm not really helping anything here. need to read further
August 30, 2025 at 10:10 AM
Yes, I'm ignorant about her and mainly went by someone else's words on the matter. Ignore me, I'm not really helping anything here. need to read further
And I still feel like a recount would be a good option to lay concerns to rest, given the election that was razor thin and the winning candidate is known to cheat (he literally just appointed Heather Honey to election integrity oversight after she went to prison for election tampering, ffs).
August 29, 2025 at 10:41 PM
And I still feel like a recount would be a good option to lay concerns to rest, given the election that was razor thin and the winning candidate is known to cheat (he literally just appointed Heather Honey to election integrity oversight after she went to prison for election tampering, ffs).
I still can't reconcile Trump's and Musk's (and Musk's kids') bizarre quotes about the election (or how dumb Americans can be to re-elect Trump), ... but so far I'm thinking ETA is on the wrong track now, unless they can substantiate their own claims better.
August 29, 2025 at 10:40 PM
I still can't reconcile Trump's and Musk's (and Musk's kids') bizarre quotes about the election (or how dumb Americans can be to re-elect Trump), ... but so far I'm thinking ETA is on the wrong track now, unless they can substantiate their own claims better.
I just responded to the other guy that the charts don't fit Russian tail.
August 29, 2025 at 10:31 PM
I just responded to the other guy that the charts don't fit Russian tail.
I was just reading the sullivan.zip material. It does bring things to a different light.
I'm not changing definitions.
I'm not changing definitions.
August 29, 2025 at 10:25 PM
I was just reading the sullivan.zip material. It does bring things to a different light.
I'm not changing definitions.
I'm not changing definitions.
No, you're right. It's hard to find a great definition online, but the ETA graphs don't really seem to fit the russian tail claim.
August 29, 2025 at 10:19 PM
No, you're right. It's hard to find a great definition online, but the ETA graphs don't really seem to fit the russian tail claim.
And, you guys point out that a Russian tail usually shows a spike at the end. (it's not always the case)
I'm sure that if you're going to vote stuff an election, you'd do it in a smarter way (based on actual vote patterns) than that, which would be easy with algorithms.
I'm sure that if you're going to vote stuff an election, you'd do it in a smarter way (based on actual vote patterns) than that, which would be easy with algorithms.
August 29, 2025 at 9:33 PM
And, you guys point out that a Russian tail usually shows a spike at the end. (it's not always the case)
I'm sure that if you're going to vote stuff an election, you'd do it in a smarter way (based on actual vote patterns) than that, which would be easy with algorithms.
I'm sure that if you're going to vote stuff an election, you'd do it in a smarter way (based on actual vote patterns) than that, which would be easy with algorithms.
I'm still trying to understand what that higher turn out increase means. Because, ETA shows 'normal' elections where that doesn't occur. And, to me it doesn't seem logical. It should be more consistent from the start.
August 29, 2025 at 9:26 PM
I'm still trying to understand what that higher turn out increase means. Because, ETA shows 'normal' elections where that doesn't occur. And, to me it doesn't seem logical. It should be more consistent from the start.
Or, perhaps more striking: Not a single county flipped blue while many flipped red. [For comparison, in 1984, Reagan won 49 of 50 states, yet still 36 counties flipped blue.]
Along with the blatant remarks by Musk and Trump that the machines can be hacked.
Along with the blatant remarks by Musk and Trump that the machines can be hacked.
August 28, 2025 at 4:16 PM
Or, perhaps more striking: Not a single county flipped blue while many flipped red. [For comparison, in 1984, Reagan won 49 of 50 states, yet still 36 counties flipped blue.]
Along with the blatant remarks by Musk and Trump that the machines can be hacked.
Along with the blatant remarks by Musk and Trump that the machines can be hacked.
I'm simply trying to make sense of all this as a layperson. It will def. take time to explore.
Outside of the hard data, do you not think circumstantial matters say anything - example: A controversial candidate winning all 7 swing states, while saying "I don't need your votes" in a close race ?
Outside of the hard data, do you not think circumstantial matters say anything - example: A controversial candidate winning all 7 swing states, while saying "I don't need your votes" in a close race ?
August 28, 2025 at 4:16 PM
I'm simply trying to make sense of all this as a layperson. It will def. take time to explore.
Outside of the hard data, do you not think circumstantial matters say anything - example: A controversial candidate winning all 7 swing states, while saying "I don't need your votes" in a close race ?
Outside of the hard data, do you not think circumstantial matters say anything - example: A controversial candidate winning all 7 swing states, while saying "I don't need your votes" in a close race ?
Do you expect polls to capture fraud when the race was within the 3 points error range and votes were so close they were outside mandatory recount range ?
August 28, 2025 at 3:59 PM
Do you expect polls to capture fraud when the race was within the 3 points error range and votes were so close they were outside mandatory recount range ?
Dire Talks is part of ETA. Your screenshot shows they're going to address your comments.
EDIT: Nevermind. I see the date is from March.
EDIT: Nevermind. I see the date is from March.
August 28, 2025 at 3:37 PM
Dire Talks is part of ETA. Your screenshot shows they're going to address your comments.
EDIT: Nevermind. I see the date is from March.
EDIT: Nevermind. I see the date is from March.
I'm simply trying to understand how you perceive the data they present, since you seem to find it bunk and are vocal about why.
IOW - I'm trying to be open-minded to your case, against the backdrop of how their case sits with me.
IOW - I'm trying to be open-minded to your case, against the backdrop of how their case sits with me.
August 28, 2025 at 3:19 PM
I'm simply trying to understand how you perceive the data they present, since you seem to find it bunk and are vocal about why.
IOW - I'm trying to be open-minded to your case, against the backdrop of how their case sits with me.
IOW - I'm trying to be open-minded to your case, against the backdrop of how their case sits with me.
They show what expected normals look like.
August 28, 2025 at 3:06 PM
They show what expected normals look like.
Yes, everyone knows that Dems prefer mail-in and Repubs turn out more on election day.
The analysis shows that there was a drastic shift in voter preference *during* election day that doesn't simply correspond to turn out itself.
The analysis shows that there was a drastic shift in voter preference *during* election day that doesn't simply correspond to turn out itself.
August 28, 2025 at 3:05 PM
Yes, everyone knows that Dems prefer mail-in and Repubs turn out more on election day.
The analysis shows that there was a drastic shift in voter preference *during* election day that doesn't simply correspond to turn out itself.
The analysis shows that there was a drastic shift in voter preference *during* election day that doesn't simply correspond to turn out itself.
Hey, you got their attention. Good for you. I hope we get to the bottom of this.
August 28, 2025 at 3:02 PM
Hey, you got their attention. Good for you. I hope we get to the bottom of this.
What is your view on the downballot discrepancies?
Do you think those don't exist, or are you finding some other patterns?
Do you think those don't exist, or are you finding some other patterns?
August 28, 2025 at 4:58 AM
What is your view on the downballot discrepancies?
Do you think those don't exist, or are you finding some other patterns?
Do you think those don't exist, or are you finding some other patterns?
What they showed is that over a certain turnout threshold (I believe it was 50), votes flip right to Trump at an increasing rate. This, it's theorized, is due to an algorithmic 'switch' turned on.
This pattern happened in Nevada and elsewhere as well. Does that not strike you as very unnatural?
This pattern happened in Nevada and elsewhere as well. Does that not strike you as very unnatural?
August 28, 2025 at 4:48 AM
What they showed is that over a certain turnout threshold (I believe it was 50), votes flip right to Trump at an increasing rate. This, it's theorized, is due to an algorithmic 'switch' turned on.
This pattern happened in Nevada and elsewhere as well. Does that not strike you as very unnatural?
This pattern happened in Nevada and elsewhere as well. Does that not strike you as very unnatural?
how can the issue be transcription errors if they've been showing this consistent "russian tail" pattern over several states? And their red flags don't show up in non-swing states, by contrast.
I'm trying to be rational here, despite the severe mistrust I have of two known conmen (Trump and Musk).
I'm trying to be rational here, despite the severe mistrust I have of two known conmen (Trump and Musk).
August 28, 2025 at 2:13 AM
how can the issue be transcription errors if they've been showing this consistent "russian tail" pattern over several states? And their red flags don't show up in non-swing states, by contrast.
I'm trying to be rational here, despite the severe mistrust I have of two known conmen (Trump and Musk).
I'm trying to be rational here, despite the severe mistrust I have of two known conmen (Trump and Musk).
Yes, they've never hidden the fact that they came together as a result of 2024 concerns and aren't specialized in election analysis.
You've done your homework it certainly looks like. I sure wish ETA responded to this, as it doesn't make them look good.
On the other hand, (continues)
You've done your homework it certainly looks like. I sure wish ETA responded to this, as it doesn't make them look good.
On the other hand, (continues)
August 28, 2025 at 2:12 AM
Yes, they've never hidden the fact that they came together as a result of 2024 concerns and aren't specialized in election analysis.
You've done your homework it certainly looks like. I sure wish ETA responded to this, as it doesn't make them look good.
On the other hand, (continues)
You've done your homework it certainly looks like. I sure wish ETA responded to this, as it doesn't make them look good.
On the other hand, (continues)