Fox Hollow, FL – According to a recent Stanford University study it now appears that our suspicions were valid and that Hillary Clinton not only cheated, but cheated big time likely with the assistance of the libtard media and many, many corrupt State and local Democrat officials. Seriously, the odds of Clinton defeating Sanders was 1 out of 77 Billion… Billion with a capital B.
Statistically, this is impossible, and under no random act of God or Nature could this ever occur per science. Now, God, he can do whatever he wishes, but then again why would God help Hillary cheat when Hillary is an atheist baby killer? The short answer is that God would never help this crook, and outside of the Lord himself helping Clinton out, which will never occur, there is nothing in Nature that can explain how Clinton beat Sanders.
This story isn’t going away either… the Bernie Sanders voters are so pissed that they are calling on other Sanders voters to vote for Trump.
Long story short according to Stanford University (a ultra-libtard institution mind you) it is scientifically, spiritually and naturally impossible for Hillary to have defeated Bernie Sanders in the Democrat Primaries based on the statistical data… i.e. Facts. Now all of us have the facts to back up our claims.
Now all of us in the Trump movement have known this for some time now and while we knew this to be true, it’s now nice to have facts from a libtard institution of lower education to throw back in the faces of the mouthbreathing Hillary Zealots.
It’s always sweeter when you can use the weapons of your enemy against them.
Now I could rail on about this like I normally do with every single subject I discuss, I think that the facts will speak on their own without my constant play-by-play. This isn’t that type of article. This article is about facts and not opinions, so let’s get down to the main attraction if you will… the research.
In commenting on the research, Stanford researchers stated that the models they used for this research project were based on rock solid models that have been used consistently for 59 years and the results of those studies have never been proven wrong or inconsistent by the scientific community.
To summarize, at least four different independent studies were conducted with various statistical models applied.
The Stanford and Tilburg University (Netherlands) researchers applied the different statistical models to:
All of the research statistically proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that there must have been rampant widespread voter fraud to create the discrepancies in the vote counts that exist in all 3 subsets of the data analyzed. These results further corroborates independent mathematical research conducted by Dr. Richard Charnin.
Further, independent research was conducted by Dr. Beth Clarkson of UC Berkeley (the Mecca of libtardism) who also not only corroborated the two previous studies but also reviewed the Stanford study, compared her results with the Stanford study, and independently confirmed their results.
The results of each study matched the results of hundreds of other controlled studies, so in short, the facts are sound. Despite being checked against controlled studies, it will take months for the studies to undergo peer review before being proclaimed as fact by the global scientific community.
A full PDF of the Stanford study can be found by Clicking 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… Enjoy!
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.
A full exhaustive breakdown of the Stanford Study can be found by Clicking Here.
#StayFrosty and #GodBless
Article by: Kevin Fett firstname.lastname@example.org
Thanks for reading! Please help WhiskeyTangoFett.com grow by following us on social media…
Twitter – @KevinFettWTF
Facebook – @KevinFettWTF
YouTube – Whiskey Tango Fett
Instagram – @KevinFettWTF
Periscope – @KevinFettWTF
Gab – @KevinFettWTF
Kevin Fett... The angry, bible clinging, gun toting, Harley riding, hockey playing, bacon eating, bearded blogger that Obama warned you about!