You’re wrong, she’s wrong, everybody’s wrong.

A few notes:

The spread of this disease is profoundly non-linear. Looking at cause and effect, and extrapolating the future from any given window of time is likely to produce very large (order of magnitude) errors. And has.

My hoped for “resistance” to infection and disease at about 35% is not supported by the facts. There is no factual reason to hope for this. The folks who predicted a fall wave based on people moving indoors have been more correct than anyone else.

Most people who extrapolated from the “case” explosion staring in May-Jun as testing ramped up (not shown on this graph) to produce curves like we are now seeing, and are claiming modelling success, are lying. “Cases” went up dramatically and stayed there for about 10-12 weeks before the disease as measured by deaths started climbing. In many places, cases and positive rates were falling as the last wave was increasing. This is still true. Nobody knows if the current wave will continue to grow for 12 more weeks, or will flatten and start to fall in the usual pattern, or some new pattern, starting today.  Sadly, we see few signs of peaking in the data yet.

The policy problems we have created by ignoring the false positive rate of the PCR-RT at a 40+ cycle count remain. A hypothetical administration, wanting to show better results, would lower the PCR-RT cycle guidance to, say 35.

There was a 3 month period when the US seemed to be doing dramatically worse than almost all (or all) reasonable comparisons.  I tried to explain this with the admittedly poor data I had in my models. What I did was remove the US (an outlier) , and then tried to do a Monte Carlo analysis of what I believed to be potential “causes” of disease spread and actual results to determine the sensitive variables. For the most part I failed to find much stastical correlation between policy and outcome. Variables that did seem to have an effect were limiting travel (globally and locally), limiting group sizes and population density. While I couldn’t measure it, there seems to be strong scientific reason to believe the 3’ (6’) practice is effective.

I failed to effectively model large quarantines with enough comparables effectively. I simply don’t know what they do.

One thing I did notice, and pointed out at the time, was that US failure to suppress the first wave was a statistical mistake – we were treating the summation over time of a many smaller graphs, each resembling places with smaller geography, as a single unit. In fact what we were seeing was the virus moving geographically, and hitting larger and larger populations, at the same time as we got better at treating it, and maybe better at preventing it. This explains, for me, the duration of the USA “bad time”, and the failure to suppress the first wave, but not the magnitude difference.

Of course, there were lots of explanations in the news: Southern and Mid-Western Americans are too stupid to follow rules, America all up is too stupid to follow rules, socialized medicine, the lack of a one-size fits all strategy, the lack of power at the federal government, unlike the more progressive China to weld shut the doors to people’s apartments, and the superior morality of people protects them from disease. Trump.

All nonsense, as we know can observe.

I’ll point out that global masking started as the same time as the geometrical explosion of wave 3. Policy and Karen wise, we still think whatever it is we’re doing with masks works. And there’s no real proof that it doesn’t. We can’t compare with wave 1 because the virus had not spread geographically yet.

There’s also no proof it doesn’t make things worse, which is what the data shows if you assume (statistical dangerous) correlation.

One constant though all of this: Fauci hasn’t a clue.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Was Trump “Worth It”? (was: You Never Go Full Smollett)

Trigger warnings: Longer than a tweet or a fb meme. Thought required.

The country is badly divided, and full of hate. Trump did such a terrible job on the important topics of election fraud and Covid19 that he lost the middle. He placed his sad lack of loyalty on full display and armed his opponents. The leftish media, greedy tech companies congress and the White House are now fully aligned and empowered for an old testament level assault on liberty.

Apparently not.

Unity. Now is the time for unity, they say. Unity, racists!, they say.

unity
u·ni·ty
noun
the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats

It’s important to remind ourselves that the overwhelming majority of conservatives in America do not know what 4Chan is, are not dumb, racist, sexist gun and bible clingers, and do not condone violence or economic / social punishment toward those who disagree with them. The majority of liberals are not so lacking self-awareness and consumed with hatred that they don’t know this. But some are, and with their bigotry amplified by the twitter and fb, they do a great deal of what we might call social injustice.

The amount of hatred on the ignorance networks this week is deeply saddening. And the justification for it, a cause for reasonable people to be concerned.

The odd thing is that we’ve told ourselves for 4 years now that the source of intolerance in America is the racist and sexist “far right” (i.e. your neighbor, two blocks down), led by the buffoonish clown Donald Trump. But Trump is a lame duck now, completely without power, and yet the anger has gone up. Way up.

Why is this? Perhaps conservatives are just too bad to be excused.

Perhaps.

One of the recurring patterns in Canadian elections is the post-election calls for the need to set aside differences and work together for the common good. I remember being proud of this civility and decency. It took me long time to notice that “setting aside differences” meant supporting more taxes, a larger civil service and more regulation. And nobody in the governing class really objected to this, because being a member of this class meant decent working hours, a low stress / low effort job, job security, early retirement and good, secure pension, expense accounts, and good bit of handy influence over business and people.

Canadian elections are not really about disagreements in the proper role of and size of government in society. That is a settled issue – nobody cares in the least how you really feel about it, and you have no ability to influence it. The power is fully distributed in the bureaucracy now. Elections used to be about who people believed could steer the leviathan a little more efficiently or fairly, but recently they’ve become  more about celebrity and greed. Each new generation understands and cares less about how government is supposed to work, and how it actually does work. Each generation lives under more regulation, has less freedom and fewer job opportunities. And each generation demand more of exactly that.

US elections are less civil, and less honorable. There is a lot more money at stake. The government class is less a group of people, and more system of coercion and collusion that includes corporations including the media and law firms, the education industry, non-profits, lobbyists, and the government itself. It’s worth reflecting on the fact that the the US government is Microsoft’s single largest customer.

Legal methods like trading “advice”, “speaking fees”, book and movie deals, board positions, non-profit foundations and others can net an ambitious political family like the Clintons $300 million, relative pikers like the Bidens a few 10s of millions,  the Obamas and Gores, $100 million. Run of the mill congressmen can easily make a few 10s of millions. And layers of staff, lawyers PR people and others around them do well too. One thing this election proved, clearly, is that the public couldn’t care less about any of this.

Politicians have to choose between a comfortable, easy life in exchange for just keeping quiet about the system, or working  to make it less corrupt, failing to achieve much, and ultimately losing power after being betrayed by their other friends in power.

While it sounds counter-intuitive, given that Donald Trump appears to place little value on integrity, loyalty and principal, the 4 year wave of hatred that was engineered against him was in no small way a result of the fact that he was not willing to be compromised by the swamp. It’s unclear exactly what his end game was, or if there was one, or if simply enjoyed messing with people, but he is far less compromised than the Bidens are. Joe’s range of motion will be severely restricted by the knowledge that he is deeply in debt to those that covered for him, and those that finance his family’s lifestyle.

Albert Bourla’s assertion that his timing of the news of a vaccine – one week after the election – after Pfizer had benefited from a large federal order, had nothing to do with politics, was not just a tribute to voter’s gullibility, but a statement that the swamp had prevailed against Donald Trump. It’s worth noting that Trump did not break Pfizer ‘s confidence about the vaccine’s progress, something he almost certainly knew about. And the current wave of deplatforming (i.e. removing their source of income) of conservatives at scale by tech companies is both a warning, and a signal of power. Tech companies, like the old media before them, can make or break you as a politician, and truth is not important as they can easily create monsters and heroes at will.

It was interesting to watch Microsoft, a company with very lefty employees and leadership, go quiet about Trump after the JEDI contract. And Amazon to sue, as soon as they saw Trump losing power. The purchase of Washington Post was far more “business”-savy than most people understand. I expect some sort of brokered deal between the companies, with the cover story that security and availability requires diversity of underlying systems.

And voters don’t care, or are actually for this level of corruption. Biden’s pre-selection assertion that he would not even consider a man for the VP and likely president role was a signal that you can expect the government and corporations to continue to create advantage for women at the expense of men. This alone likely bought him 5-10M votes.

Trump angered another group of people beyond the DC money crowd.

Over the last 50 years liberals have made steady inroads into the bureaucracy over nearly every organization: government, business, “non-profits”,  media, entertainment, academia, Christian churches. For 30 years of this long march, they have projected humility, altruism in the form of concern for the weak, unlucky, or disadvantaged. The perception, supported in no small way by some truth and a strong conviction that they on the right side of history – the good side – but still fighting more powerful forces, was one of a David and Goliath battle. Somewhere along the way liberals failed to notice that they had won. Indeed, the battle became more important than the results, and liberals were corrupted by power as everyone is corrupted by power.

Liberals have amassed huge power. They “educate” the children, shape values via the news and entertainment industries, use the law strategically to further their agenda, and decide who gets funded, hired, promoted or fired.

Over the last 6 or 8 election cycles, a pattern has emerged, growing more intense with every cycle. Preceding the election, the left, in the words of Eric Holder,  “When they go low, we kick them”. In fact, there’s a fair bit of kicking going on even if they don’t go low. And as they hurl unwarranted insults – always the same ones – at the right, they claim that it is actually the right that is doing this. Or “started it”. They have been forced by some injustice into a defensive offense.

Good grief.

After the election, all the nastiness is immediately forgotten. Not in the rhetorical sense – it is literally forgotten. It never happened. People forget what they said about Sarah Palin’s children, about Romney and many others. In fact it realty doesn’t matter who you are or what your record and values are; the rhetoric is simply necessary to defeat you so power can be maintained in the hands of the good people. To do good with.

Teabagger: Remember that one?

With Donald Trump they may have encountered the first candidate worthy of the level of contempt they had been handing out for decades.

If you don’t bring this up, maybe you won’t be next on the layoff list. If you do bring it up that is proof that you were and are the root of the problem all along.

Along with amnesia, the left also selectively reverts into a wounded position. They were and are being injured somehow, by your words. This is of course entirely fake and simply a tool to manipulate you.

If you doubt this, and reading the news, or the fb walls of liberals this week doesn’t convince you, here’s a little test you can do at home. Cut and paste the following into you fb status, and leave it there. Make sure your coworkers and colleagues see it too. And then watch the reaction:

While I am happy to see Trump marched off the stage in defeat, I sometimes wonder if in our zeal to defeat him we went too far. He didn’t start any new wars, doesn’t appear to have used his position for business gain as we feared he would, and did deliver a Covid19 vaccine in a year, as he promised. While these things don’t excuse his racism, intolerance toward LGBT and sexism and clownish behavior on the world stage, I am not sure we are completely blameless for acrimony know threatening to tear the country apart. Did we go too far?

We all know what the result will be.

But something different happened this cycle. The left lost, to a clown, that they had promoted during the primaries as an in-joke on the right.

Before Donald Trump had an opportunity to troll them, the left lost their shit. Then he trolled them mercilessly for 4 years. And they lost their shit. For 4 years. Decades of a formula that was working were dumped in favor of blatant dishonestly and an ugly nastiness that be very hard to put back in the bottle. It was ugly. The left behaved very badly.

If you doubt this, try this test:

Ask a liberal if the impeachment of Donald Trump was merited. Worth it.

Then, after the answer, ask what is was that got him impeached?

Now, repeat this a few times and compare the answers to the second question.

That will tell you want you need to know about the left’s honesty, objectivity and level of information.

We all know what the result will be.

Ironically Joe Biden was trying to clean this mess up and go back to the old successful formula. He tried, for a bit to call for unity. Unity, to the left, is where you forget all the things they did during the election, agree with everything they now assert to be true, and maybe you get to keep your job.

But even Biden couldn’t do it. His tweet about the hypothetical difference between how the capital protesters where treated and how BLM would have been treated was not just insulting, given that it’s not hypothetical – we know they answer – and BLM wasn’t shot and killed by the police despite 4 months of rioting, looting and murder. It was another baseless accusation of racism.

Conservatives a have some serious decisions to make here. The anger that got Trump elected was merited. And Trump was one of the very very few willing to fight an appallingly nasty opposition. But he didn’t have a plan, or a road map, he failed to understand that loyalty matters, he didn’t take good advice, and he repeatedly rearmed his opposition rhetorically. Trump’s treatment of Barr and Pence and I suspect many others was disgraceful.

A repeat of this, with each side taking it more the extreme don’t seem like a good choice. A return to the old way – surrender with decorum like Romney, doesn’t seem like a good choice either.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

This Damn Covid19

From Feb to May I observed many deaths from Covid19 graphs that looked like this:

I observed this in different populations, and population sizes, around the world. I hypothesized that something was dramatically slowing the spread of the disease long before the experts’ 70% herd immunity threshold. At the time there were reports of widely underreported (unmeasured) infections. This was followed by press reports of our failure to  manage this because of lack of tests.

The lack of testing got corrected by Jul and then I observed a lot of curves that looked like this:

To the degree that the explosion of “cases” without an increase in deaths was explained, the theories were: better case, better mitigations, false positives in the PCR-RT and pre-existing immunity. But the good news wasn’t really explored much, and the press was mostly about the increase in cases.

At the time, I tried and failed to correlate the mitigations we were trying with results. I was not successful. The virus seemed to do what it wanted.

I hypothesized that perhaps we were reaching herd immunity. Unfortunately this isn’t what happened. The threshold of resistance is no longer there.

At the time, there was a lot of press that stated that the USA was in long flat spot, or maybe even a second wave, relative to the rest of the world, which had apparently burned it out with their superior leadership and respect for science. I pointed out that that the long flat spot in the USA data was a result of the virus moving geometrically.

If we look at Deaths/M data for several states, we see that New York (and surrounding states) were responsible for wave 1, peaking at the end of Mar, and Texas, California and Florida (etc.) responsible for wave 2, peaking around the middle of Aug. Wave 2 was a much larger total population. At the time I thought I was observing a decrease in deaths/M over a larger population, leading to the appearance of “worse” outcomes (i.e. more total deaths) hiding the good news which is much better survival rates. I no longer see that in the data I’m looking at now. Perhaps I was being fooled by better outcomes relative to cases. I cannot explain this (although I didn’t spend much time trying).

The real puzzle is what’s going on starting in November? Death rates/M are increasing, not just in the USA but around the world. This definitely looks like (real) wave 2. The press has many explanations for this: Sturgis, Trump rallies, Thanksgiving, mask cheating, back to school, surfing, etc. None of them really correlate, and don’t explain the worldwide effect. Of course, many people predicted a second wave in colder fall when people go indoors. I haven’t spent any time looking at hemisphere data. Perhaps this is correct.

I don’t know how to make sense of the global increase in mask wearing with the global increase in deaths over the last 3 months. This doesn’t seem to make intuitive sense. But it’s what the data shows.

It would be helpful to have better test and control demographics, but I don’t. The press claims California is a  high compliance, high mitigation state, and Florida a free for all.

With all the caveats in the self-reported CMU mask data I flagged in the last post, let’s look at deaths/M in CA and FL. The blue line is mask wearing in FL and the orange line is death/M in FL. The grey and yellow lines are mask wearing and deaths/M in CA.

It isn’t working. Anywhere.

I think public policy folks know this by now but are out of ideas. And they sure as hell are not going to admit they have never known anything.

I was a bit surprised by the degree of offense my last post on masks produced. There seemed to be a widespread belief that “we” are wearing masks but “they” are not.

Perhaps.

Some folks made the “saves one life argument”. I agree with that. Unfortunately 300,000,000 masked people, each saving 1 life, would be 300,000,000 lives saved. Which would be great. If 300,000,000 masked people saved 100% of all Covid19 deaths to date in the USA, that would be 1000 masked persons / life saved. Even that would be good, if true. Unfortunately, so far, the data shows masking increases deaths, making it hard to model deaths saved.  

For what it’s worth, I’ve worn a mask since late Feb. Lately I gotten better at cleaning and replacement.

Feel free to do as you think best.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Covid19 “Science” from CMU, Squeee!

The Delphi Group at Carnegie Mellon University recently released data on mask-wearing in the United States via a project called a COVIDMap and public API. This is a valuable contribution to the understanding of Covid19 models; actual mask wearing data has been difficult to find, and there is much speculation about compliance. Indeed overlaying mask wearing with case and death data might be insightful as to how effective masks are, and over what timeframes and geographies.

Ignoring the quality issues with opt-in self reporting from a fb feed prompt and a fairly small sample set, the most significant thing this data shows is that as of now, mask wearing when in public in the United States is consistently above 90%, and often 95%. This has been true for about a month. As of 12 weeks ago, the range was 60% to 90%.

Unfortunately 2 ½ months of data is not nearly enough to observe correlations between mitigations and results. Almost any 10 week window in 2020 would have led to grossly incorrect results.

That didn’t stop The Delphi Group at Carnegie Mellon from doing exactly this, in the form of a map infographic that shows current mask wearing compliance, and new “cases” (i.e. PCR-RT positives),  a scatter plot showing the same thing, and text calling out North and South Dakota as example of bad mask compliance leading to higher “cases”.

There are few things to note about this content:

The difference in compliance rates are a few percentage points, indicating that mask wearing is a highly sensitive variable. It wasn’t in my models (with estimated compliance numbers), and I can find no studies indicating that anyone believes it is. That said, there could be an as yet undiscovered threshold that produces non-linear results, so we should remain curious.

If you choose just about any other 12 week window to compare cases or deaths with mask wearing in The Dakotas, you would observe the exact opposite outcome in the data – not wearing masks keeps a population safe from Covid19. What is likely going on here is that 12 week window chosen – because they had data – happens to coincide with the geographic movement of the virus. Indeed, I believe most assertions of correlations between mitigations and outcomes are random based on where the data window falls on the geographic progression of the virus.

The usual disclaimer is in the University’s text: “Correlation does not imply causation”, although this point seems to be lost quickly in the wave of press referencing the data from the project.

Now what would solve the last issue would be a comparison of two demographics, carefully selected to have highly similar potentially dominant variables but differing in mask compliance, rather like DANMASK-19 did. That study concluded that masks didn’t in practice work. I think the same meta-study will be possible with the Delphi Group’s data, given 2 or 3 more months of collection.

With the caveats aside, let’s look at the actual data. This graph shows daily new deaths due to Covid19 and daily mask wearing in North Dakota during the window we have data.

From this data, assuming any correlation at all exists between masks and deaths (a statistically unsound assumption), you would conclude that masks cause deaths, or Covid19 causes masks.

If we shift the mask wearing series back 3 weeks to account for effect, a common adjustment these days when forecasting high death counts from high PCR-RT positives, the correlation is more pronounced.

Of course, the informed data scientist understands that this data shows us nothing.

Nothing at all.

Google recently donated $1,000,000 to this project. One wonders if a project showing that we know nothing at all about the effectiveness of masks would be equally valuable.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A History of Science for Dummies

Faith

A long time ago, perhaps, some people believed that they could make it rain by tossing the right number of live virgins into live volcanoes, because someone with authority (power) told them so. Sometimes it did rain, establishing correlation, and sometimes it did not. When it did not, the person of authority explained that they tossed the wrong number of virgins in, or they were not the right kinds of virgins. And they used their authority (power) to ridicule and punish anyone (deniers) who questioned this. People who chose to believe, or were conditioned to believe, or pretend to believe, a counter-intuitive thing were referred to as the faithful. Examples of faith-based belief systems include Creationism, Evolution, and Critical Race Theory.

Wave 1: The Hard Sciences

Over time some people – virgins mostly – began to question if the act of the tossing of the virgins was actually responsible (causal) for the rain. They borrowed a method involving a control group and a test group that another group of folks had perfected to determine if sticking ones hands in fire caused burns to the hands. During one crop cycle, one town tossed the virgins, and one town did not. Rain came to those that tossed virgins, seemingly validating the theory with science.

But the remaining virgins were skeptical of these results, and had the test repeated. Alas, the results were different. It turns out that the test was not repeatable. So the virgins invented statistics and probability theory to finally prove, in a controlled, repeatable way, that rain after virgins was a coincidence. And from that point on, humans were enlightened, never to fall for superstition again.

Wave 2: Models

Many problems were testable. But for reasons of scale, time, cost, ethics or complexity, some were not. Examples of fundamentally untestable things are weather, climate, the path of forest fires, economies, wars and Covid19. “Science” evolved to accept a combination of a workable models combined with “believable” scenarios. As an example, weather could be predicted (“proven”), scientifically with models that when fed with 10 or more important (significant) data series variables with reasonable accuracy.

Wave 3: Bullshit

Some systems, like global warming, proved to be too difficult to model accurately, so we fell back to a system of observing a single correlation like C02 and temperature, and then ridiculed and punished deniers who questioned this. This is called scientific progress.

Wave 4: Just Shut the Fuck Up Now

We now have a scenario where mask wearing has gone up globally, and Covid19 cases have gone up over the same period globally, and we are to understand that science teaches us that masks prevent Covid19 cases. This is similar to global warming, but without any correlation at all. Indeed, if we were to apply exactly the same methodology here as is used for global warming, we would conclude that masks cause cases. Fortunately we have people with power to teach us faith that this is not so.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

How to End Voter Fraud

Lawyers are not going to do it. Courts are not going to do it. Democrats and the media, being all in on it, are not going to do it.

The first thing to understand is who does it, and why. Look backward at the values and behavior of the left over the last 4 years. Not just people you see on tv or read about, but people you know. Form an opinion about how many of them would report a duplicate ballot, ignore a few mismatched signatures or get sloppy with voter rolls. And how many would actually forge boxes of ballots, or pocket a thumb drive.

The left is convinced that they are literally fighting evil  – that they are the good – and they will make life better for everyone if they just had more power over other people. They do not respect the integrity of any system that would, could, bring a evil man like Donald Trump to power. The right, for the most part, just doesn’t want them or anyone to have that much power.

It important to understand https://mikezintel.wordpress.com/2020/11/08/voter-fraud-is-a-myth/ how fraud actually happens. There is no Dept. of Fraud, or Committee to Commit Widespread Fraud, because none is necessary, and these things would be discovered. Occasionally, a truly obviously corrupt thing like changing to mail in ballots at the last moment is necessary, but democrats can count on the press and their extended organization to control the messaging as needed. But for the most part, election fraud is a highly distributed thing. You really only need to signal where and how much is necessary.

We need to borrow from the computer security practice, and game this out. Smart folks need to examine every step of the voting process with exactly the mindset of someone trying to cheat. This needs to be well-documented. For two reasons:

The first is that the system needs to hardened against fraud, and the only way to approach this is the knowledge of exactly how it happens.

The second is that the right needs to leak these documents in ways that make people believe that – finally – they’ve figured out the con, and could engage in the same con, the same way, with the same success themselves.

This would likely do it, and actually cheating might not be necessary.

Nothing else is going to work.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Plus ça Change, Plus c’est la Même Chose

For a while I’ve been making the observation that perhaps herd immunity occurs at about 25%- 35% infected. The first dataset to support this was the experience of military and cruise ships.

Today, the best observation is Sweden, for the reason that they (as reported) have performed lower impact mitigations than many other places (i.e. they are not “fixing” it much):


Unfortunately we are not seeing that pattern in many places, at least as measured by a positive PCR-RT test.

Returning to  very popular view in the press, the USA does not fit that pattern:

This is the graph one would choose if they want to tell a story about how badly the USA has managed the pandemic, how our mitigations have been wrong or poorly timed, or how we suffer from our own lack of discipline. And, we want to fit the story to the curve. You construct this graph by plotting the most scary thing, “cases” against time, and then add a scaled deaths line. The scaled deaths line implies to those not paying attention to (frequently omitted) axis values that cases and deaths are … roughly … in the same order of magnitude.

Of course they are not. Not even close. Nor are death rates getting worse. People are still dying though, so total deaths continues to climb.

While this deception is easily discovered, it still common.  I see a variation of this graph 2-3 times / week. The ones from large media outlets do a better job with fonts and colors.

When there is little or no actual correlation between the things being plotted, you can make many stories fit.

With a slight modification, I can make the story that neither masks nor social distancing reduces cases:

What is likely actually going on is that the virus is moving geographically:

I’ve written elsewhere that the PCT-RT is subject to a large number of false positives. If you accept this, then “cases” becomes a terribly misleading indicator of anything. We know that it isn’t a good predictor of hospitalizations or deaths, and is likely much worse as variable in the effectiveness of mitigations.

But what if we use actual deaths to compare approaches. Contrast the USA and Canada, scaled per million people:

The graphs shapes are very similar, which we wouldn’t expect if the mitigations were substantially different, with different outcomes, as is commonly reported and believed. The magnitudes are different, but not dramatically so.

Sweden (again), with little mitigation (scaled/M). Note the magnitude of the peak is on a different scale, and is larger (i.e. the peak was worse):

If we calculate actual cases as the number would result in the actual death rate with a 2% CFR (red), and contrast this what the PCR-RT is telling us (blue). The difference is the number of false positives daily.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Forget The Following and Lose Gracefully Like Romney

Maxine Waters calls for impeachment before he takes office
53 congressional democrats boycott of the inauguration
petition urging the electors to vote for Hillary Clinton
RESIST
Russian prostitutes peeing on Trump in bed Obama slept in
Impeachment
Obstruction of justice
Russia stole the election with fb ads
Russian stole the election by modifying vote counts
FBI/DOJ
Impeachment
Mueller/Flynn
White Supremacist
Pussy hat marches
Michael Avenatti
Nick Sandmann
Joy Reid
fb memes and images: Trump as rat, pig, baby, etc. etc.
Racists
Kavanaugh
Iran / WWIII
Homophobes
Ukraine/Logan Act/Impeachment
BLM/antifa
Sexists
defund the police
Cancel culture
Katrinavirus
the “Trump Accountability Project”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Voter Fraud is a Myth

If you are really, really bored, you might post something somewhere with the phrase “voter fraud” in it.  The actual text of the post doesn’t matter much, unless the post is exactly “these  conspiracy theorists should just read snopes and this study or that study and learn that widespread voter fraud is a myth.

Now you might think that your post might produce the following responses:

“Do you think voter fraud happens?” 
“Where?”
“How?”
“How often?”
“By whom?”
“Does it matter?”
“How would be learn the truth?”
“How could we prevent it?”

You would be wrong.

What actually happens is a surprisingly well-structured and prompt response that makes the first point below, and some or all of the subsequent points:

You are a conspiracy theorist (i.e. gullible and not too smart).
You have no evidence (this is true).
Here are links to studies and fact-checking sites that proves it isn’t widespread (they don’t).
More rarely, and usually in the form of a link: “you are a racist”.

If you were in fact a conspiracy theorist, you might wonder briefly why these answers are so consistently structured, and how that happens.

In the 30 years I’ve been in America, I notice that the fraudulent election topic comes up from time to time. Every two years, give or take. And the following patterns are always exactly the same. Now any one of these, taken alone, proves nothing. And the sum total of them prove nothing. But they are somewhat curious, to the curious.

Republicans propose structural changes that would make fraud less likely. Democrats disagree with them. They explain that the GOP is trying to make voting too hard for blacks. They never quite explain how their argument, that blacks are incapable or unwilling to show a photo id  to vote is not in itself silly and racist. One presumes that they don’t believe it, but use it because they want to keep cheating.

Democrats never propose structural changes that would make fraud less likely.

In close elections where a republican candidate has a lead that that go into long voter counts, new ballots are always found that swing the election to the democrats.

In this election, a new patten emerged. The democrats preemptively planned for a claim of voter fraud, by asserting that the GOP would make it, and would contest the election.

Some wonder how they knew.

On the charge that no such grand conspiracy theory has been found, none would be necessary. This isn’t how these things would work, if in fact they were occurring.

Voter fraud would be highly distributed. 100,000 of thousands of people, believing they are working for an important cause, are in a position to silently move outcomes a little bit at time. All in the same direction.

The question is, “is this likely to happen?” 

Over the last 4 years, democrats have demonstrated a willingness to believe, or pretend to believe, that Trump had Russian prostitutes pee in him in a bed Obama slept on, that Russians stole the election via fb ads and that Michael Avenatti and Christine Blasey Ford were credible. They are willing to ignore obvious influence peddling by the Bidens and Clintons, but believe they heard it in a few seconds of Trump phone call with Ukraine. They are willing to believe that Trump is responsible for every Covid19 death in America. Perhaps, the world. They deny the existence of Antifa, and believe BLM are looting for justice.

This is a demographic that very much wants power over other people, and feels justified in gaining in. Because they would use this power with more wisdom and decency.

Very much so.

Mike.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

So What’s Next

Moderate centrist democrats older than 35 years old who believe that they voted for a return to a world where most politicians were reasonable adults will be disappointed. These people believe that Donald Trump is the only thing standing in the way of such a world, and that Obama was the archetype of kind, wise and fundamentally decent leader. The elitists of this group understood that Obama was condescending toward the “lower” classes, but thought they were too dumb to get the joke. While it’s tempting to be critical of these folks, I know more than a few Obama fangirls who don’t realize that he wouldn’t give them the time of day in person, for no reason other than they wouldn’t be comfortable ordering from a Thai menu.

But he was “presidential”.

This is one of two groups currently calling for a return to civility. Decorum. A time when republicans like Romney knew how to lose with grace.

These people will be disappointed. And confused. They will not figure it out.

The second group of over 35 democrats are the TDS-afflicted. These are folks for whom politics provide structure for their innate hatred of something. This group is also calling for a return to civility, primarily because they want to sweep their juvenile behavior of the last 4 years under the rug. And they will. Just like they swept their bad behavior toward Bristol Palin under the rug.

This group will not be disappointed, because either they never really believed their own nonsense or don’t have a firm grip on reality. To them, Trump was a symptom, not the cause. They will find another object to hate.

The under 35 democrats who are not just young romantics have no desire for a return to civility. To them, a vote for Biden was a sad compromise given that no one more extreme was running. They assume riots, looting and screaming about white privilege and racism is civility. The odd thing about this group is that they were created by the previous two groups, who assumed they could control them.

This looks unlikely.

Disenfranchised voters, frustrated by what they correctly perceive as a system skewed against them, will be disappointed.

People in other countries, who assume the jobs of the US president is to visit their leaders and smell each other’s farts will likely not be disappointed by Biden, but will find Harris has no time for such stuff.

Forward.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment