The last 80 or so posts have been very interesting - but not very many of them have been about election fraud…
To be fair, the election fraud was never about election fraud…
Good point
yeah it’s just that simple
I can see my reference wasn’t clear. The concept that retired persons consume but do not produce is not a counter intuitive 20th century economic solution. My comment referred to Indy’s post.
One way or another, society is going to have to accommodate that simple fact. Back in the day, the children took care of the preceding generations. Not sure that solution is still n the table. SS seems a pretty good solution, imo.
Personal savings and self sufficiency is unattractive. Of course, I am biased in favor of pooling risks, having spent times the insurance sector.
Right, it’s time to throw in an election fraud post.
The Supreme Court had ZERO interest in the merits of the greatest voter fraud ever perpetrated on the United States of America. All they were interested in is “standing”, which makes it very difficult for the President to present a case on the merits. 75,000,000 votes!
So it looks like the greatest conspiracy ever now includes the three Supreme Court justices Trump appointed. No loyalty. Sad.
I had a history prof who said that you can’t argue with conspiracy theorists. If you say, “But in that case ___ would have exposed the conspiracy”, they just add more people to the conspiracy.
(and, I really wish we could talk about Social Security and ignore Trump)
About a month to go!
There is light at the end of the tunnel.
But, no telling how much damage he’ll do between now and then.
Yeah, and even after. He’s the last person you want with little to lose and lots of confidential information
1 Like
Matt Parker made a video discussing the “1 in a quadrillion” thing. Nothing in there that we haven’t already discussed - but I still enjoy his style.
Another example of why we’d be better off teaching basic stats than algebra 2 in high school
Having taught Algebra II, basic stats was a part of it. 
I don’t think that is universal, twig.
Probably wouldn’t help much in this case. Even after a college level “Intro to Stats” class most of the students come out not being able to give a correct interpretation of what a P-value means. It’s a really hard concept for students (and apparently people with multiple degrees who have been an expert witness in multiple cases and whatever) to grasp.
1 Like
That’s fair, but some background in it would probably at least give them a chance at seeing “close election result was actually a 1 in a quadrillion probability outcome because ur guy def cheated” and concluding someone probably played with some dice rolling assumptions and applied them to elections.
Yes, I believe the assumption not explicitly stated was “If votes are randomly determined with P(Trump Vote) = 50%,…”
And this exercise proves more than anything that this assumption was not true.
Yeah - it’s not clear what exactly the assumption was. It might have been “votes counted later come from the same distribution as those counted earlier”. Or, for his other analysis - “votes in 2020 have the exact same distribution as votes in 2016”.
Then he used a “sample*” of 4MM people, making the standard deviation pretty darned close to 0.
Either way - the fact that the test came back with a “nuh-uh” should surprise absolutely nobody.
*I’m still not convinced that it is even a sample - I think it is the entire population
Votes aren’t in any way a random sample of the voting population… we’re LITERALLY COUNTING the voting population…
I think soyleche’s is the one used. Both assumptions absurd.
Yes, it is the entire population (of those who voted) so any statistical analysis is wrong, compared to just counting. But counting has a different flaw. It assumes there was no massive fraud (as I and almost everyone do). But if other records show there were X registered voters, that Y votes were cast, and the count says B Biden votes and T trump votes, with B+T >> X > Y, then to maintain that B and T are accurate values would be hard to defend. (No, that is not the case here, just a situation where “the count is right” is a very unsatisfactory conclusion.)
Perhaps not as part of Algebra II specifically, but it should be included somewhere.