According to an academic paper by Dr John R Lott Jr. to appear in the journal Public Choice, Biden got 255,000 excess votes in key swing seats. Voter turnout in Republican areas increased from 2016 to 2020 while voter turnout among Democrats decreased. But this was except in places where voter fraud was claimed. “More heavily Democratic counties actually had a slightly lower turnout in 2020, except for counties where vote fraud was alleged. In those counties, you had a huge increase in turnout,” according to Lott. “In some of those swing states, you had counties where vote fraud was alleged. In some of those swing states, you had counties where vote fraud wasn’t alleged. And yet you only had huge increases in turnout where vote fraud was alleged.” Suspicious, eh?
Lott does not want his research to challenge the 2020 results. Sure, fat chance of that. Maybe some time in the 22nd century what is left of American politics, will crack open a radioactive beer and gloat about it.
https://gellerreport.com/2022/03/stolen-biden-got-255000-excess-votes-in-key-swing-states.html/
“Biden Got 255,000 Excess Votes in Key Swing States
Townhall, March 29, 2022:
The 2020 election will be forever tainted in controversy. The 2016 election will be forever soaked in mayhem. Democrats will always believe in the Russian collusion myth. Republicans will always feel that the 2020 election irregularities point to voter fraud, a steal if you will. The latter is more grounded, though marinated in nuance. Was it a stolen election a la Putin’s Russia or a banana republic? No. The ‘stolen’ portion solely centers on secretaries of state illegally altering the voting methods for the 2020 cycle without the approval of their state legislatures. Michigan and Pennsylvania—looking at you two especially. There’s a reason why a vote to alter the voting process never happened. The secretaries of state here are Democrats. The state legislatures in these respective states are Republican. Need I say more. I mean, as we know—it’s not hard to pull some funny business with mail-in ballots.
Now, a new study from John R. Lott reportedly shows how Biden received 255,000 excess ballots in key swing states. He doesn’t want this study used to challenge the 2020 results, though that’s exactly what’s going to happen. He merely wanted to show how easy it is to count invalid ballots. It’s a peer-reviewed study (via Washington Times):
This new study provides a simple, powerful test to measure vote fraud.
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraudhttps://t.co/uYs540UPPm
Here is the research it is based on that is forthcoming in the academic journal Public Choice.https://t.co/kZmX4XY0PO
— John R Lott Jr. (@JohnRLottJr) March 28, 2022
Looking at six swing states, the data he crunched found that voter turnout in Republican areas increased from 2016 to 2020 while voter turnout among Democrats dropped — except in places where voter fraud was claimed.
That accounted for 255,000 “excess” votes for Mr. Biden above what would be expected, Mr. Lott said. His paper has been accepted for publication in Public Choice, a peer-reviewed journal specializing in the intersection of economics and political science.
“More heavily Democratic counties actually had a slightly lower turnout in 2020, except for counties where vote fraud was alleged. In those counties, you had a huge increase in turnout,” Mr. Lott told The Washington Times in an interview explaining his findings.
“In some of those swing states, you had counties where vote fraud was alleged. In some of those swing states, you had counties where vote fraud wasn’t alleged. And yet you only had huge increases in turnout where vote fraud was alleged,” he said.
Taking another tack, Mr. Lott looked at specific voting precincts that touched each other but where one was inside a Republican-dominant county and the other inside a Democratic-leaning county where there were fraud accusations.
He found that in-person voting for the neighboring precincts was about the same, but absentee or mailed balloting tilted toward Democrats in the Democratic precincts.
Mr. Lott said there is no clear reason why absentee turnout alone should increase in just the Democratic jurisdiction, which suggests shenanigans were afoot.
“You’re comparing two tiny areas that are very homogenous, very similar to each other, across the street from each other, and the thing that differs from these two, for the absentee ballots, is where the ballots were counted,” the researcher said.
[…]
William F. Shughart II, editor of Public Choice and professor at Utah State University, called the peer-reviewed paper “provocative.”
“By comparing differences in election results for 2020’s presidential candidates between in-person and mail-in ballots in matched samples of precincts in selected U.S. states, It offers a novel way of detecting ‘irregularities’ in postal voting,” he said in an email.
“To my knowledge, Dr. Lott is the first scholar to examine the most recent U.S. presidential election at the voting precinct level and actually present statistical evidence supporting allegations of fraud in at least two key states (Georgia and Pennsylvania),” he said.
If the findings are confirmed by other scholars, Mr. Shughart said, they could play a role in future debates about authenticating mail-in ballots.”
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988
“Simple tests for the extent of vote fraud with absentee and provisional ballots in the 2020 US presidential election
Public Choice, forthcoming
39 Pages Posted: 29 Dec 2020 Last revised: 21 Mar 2022
Crime Prevention Research Center
Date Written: December 21, 2020
Abstract
This study reports three tests measuring vote fraud in the 2020 US presidential election, although they provide inconsistent evidence. To isolate the impact of a county’s vote-counting process and potential fraud on candidates’ vote margins, I first compare voting precincts in a county with alleged fraud to adjacent precincts in neighboring counties with no allegations of fraud. I compute the differences in President Trump’s vote shares on absentee ballots in those adjacent precincts, controlling for the differences in his vote shares on ballots cast in person. I also control for registered voters’ demographics and compare data for the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. When I examine Georgia and Pennsylvania separately, weak evidence of vote fraud on absentee ballots is found. However, combining the samples produces significant results and implies at least 10,000 additional votes for Biden in Pennsylvania’s Alleghany and Georgia’s Fulton counties. I then apply the same method to provisional ballots in Alleghany County, where, contrary to state law, voters were allowed to correct alleged defects in absentee ballots by submitting provisional ballots on Election Day. My analysis finds that such permission contributed to a statistically significant additional 6,700 votes for Biden. Finally, vote fraud can show up as artificially larger voter turnouts. Fraud can take many forms: higher rates of filling out absentee ballots for people who hadn’t voted, dead people voting, ineligible people voting, or even payments to legally registered people for their votes. The estimates for Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin combined indicate an average of 255,000 excess votes for Biden.”