[ad_1]
“Basham made it very clear that this election was almost certainly stolen in five states. All Americans should be concerned about this election theft.”
Every Republican state legislator should read Patrick Basham’s analysis https://t.co/3mUFZtD1Y8 and demand that an oversight committee review their state’s vote. Basham makes it clear that elections were almost certainly stolen in 5 states. All Americans should be concerned about theft.
– Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) November 28, 2020
Basham is a former part-time scholar and principal investigator for the Cato Institute think tank and founding director of the Democracy Institute. Basham was the founding director of the Center for Social Affairs at Fraser College in Canada.
But he claims to be an observer of public opinion.
Basham published an article in The Spector on Friday (27) (titled “Reasons why the 2020 presidential elections are deeply puzzling”), pointing to the results of the American elections. Many violations of common sense.
He wrote that whoever wants to say out loud now that they believe the outcome of the 2020 presidential election is strange will be mocked as a conspiracy theorist.
“So consider me a conspiracy theorist … In the early hours of Wednesday, November 4, something very strange happened with the American democratic system. For many Americans, it is actually reasonable to want to know what happened that day.” Shamm wrote: “I am an observer of public opinion and I found this election extremely confusing; I also believe that the Trump campaign team (Trump) is still discussing the results of the election within their power.”
In his article, he listed some basic facts about the 2020 election, as well as the violation of common sense, and questioned how Trump could lose.
First, President Trump has won more votes than any previous president seeking reelection.
Compared to 2016, Trump’s general election in 2020 has increased by 11 million votes. Among presidents seeking reelection in history, Trump has the third-largest surge in support.
By comparison, the number of votes (in 2012) when President Obama was reelected was 3.5 million fewer than four years ago.
Second, Trump’s votes in 2020 have risen a lot. According to export polls, Trump’s performance in many major groups is much better than in 2016.
Ninety-five percent of Republicans said they voted for Trump; Catholics also support it with a higher percentage; Trump is also very popular with working-class white men in the suburbs.
Additionally, Trump is also the Republican presidential candidate with the highest minority vote rate since 1960; his approval rate among African voters has also increased by 50% from 2016.
On the other hand, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden (Joe Biden) has an African-American support rate of less than 90% in the United States, and this is the level of turnout that Democratic presidential candidates can generally maintain.
Additionally, Trump’s votes among Hispanics have increased between 40% and 67%. Mathematically speaking, in states where Hispanics make up about 60% of the population – Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico – the Democratic presidential candidate cannot win these states under these circumstances.
Third, the leading state (wind direction state) is more skewed toward Trump than in 2016. Florida, Ohio, and Iowa have shown in US media polls that Trump will win by a wide margin.
Since 1852, only Republican presidential candidate Richard Nixon (Richard Nixon) has lost the electoral vote after winning these three states. How he lost to the Democratic presidential candidate John Kennedy in 1960 (John F. Kennedy) still suspicious.
As for the Midwestern states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, they have always been consistent with Ohio and Iowa. Ohio and Florida tend to have an oscillating trend in the same direction. Current statistics show that on the periphery of some cities, the “rust belt” is skewed toward Trump.
In other words, the leadership of these three states should have followed the lead state to Trump, but the result was not.
Fourth, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all due to large urban African-American votes.
An avalanche of African-American votes appeared in the major Democratic cities of these states: Detroit, Philadelphia and Milwaukee.
Biden’s “winning” advantage is derived almost entirely from those voters in these cities, and coincidentally, his African American votes always appear in the crucial place and critical moment of decisive victory.
In other comparable states and groups, Biden has not received the same support, which is extremely unusual for a presidential winner.
Fifth, Biden lost more than 300 counties than Obama, but got more votes than Obama.
Media reports say that Biden has won more votes across the country than any presidential candidate in history. But only 17% of the counties won, the lowest count in history; he only won 524 counties. In contrast, Obama won 873 counties in 2008, but now the report is Yes, Biden surpassed Obama in total votes.
In other words, Biden had to get more votes in 524 counties than Obama’s 873 counties that year. Then the average voter turnout in each county rose to at least half the Obama year. This is difficult to explain.
Sixth, a competent presidential candidate can generally lead and help his party colleagues win other seats, but not Biden.
Republicans saved the Senate and introduced a “red tide” in the House of Representatives, fiercely winning 27 electoral seats. Furthermore, Trump’s party has not lost any state legislature. In fact, the control of the Republican Party at the state level has advanced.
In other words, voters tend to choose their favorite presidential candidates and also select members of Congress from the candidate’s party, but Biden and the Democrats have not shown this pattern.
Seventh, there is an anomaly between public opinion polls and non-public opinion polls.
Even when the surveys are incorrect, the non-surveys are not incorrect, almost 100% of the records are correct. Every no-vote indicator predicts Trump’s reelection.
Non-surveys include: political party registration trends; respective main votes of the candidates; enthusiasm of the candidates; followers of social networks; radio and digital media ratings; online searches; the number of donors, especially small donors; and each The number of candidates bet.
If TrumpLose this choice thenOne or more of these non-public opinion indicators will make mistakes for the first time in history, and all indicators will make all mistakes at the same time; This is an extremely unlikely result. #
Editor in Charge: Li Yuan
[ad_2]
