|
Post by Bevo on May 26, 2024 22:39:31 GMT
You said there were no such increases for republicans in Georgia that didn’t get the money, but you post data showing they did. I can’t help anymore here. Maybe, you just can't be helped. What I said was this: "As for Zuckerbucks: They were highly effective in turning out more votes for Democrats. In Georgia, there was no such increase in the counties that didn't get the money."Maybe it wasn't as big as I thought, but it WAS significant. Enough to change the outcome in such a close race. We have no idea what the vote totals would have been in these counties if NO money had been spent. If you want to believe that $38M being spent in 5 counties around Atlanta had NO effect on the turnout, then... go ahead. If true, it was a tremendous waste of money. You are only narrowly focusing on Georgia because the data doesn’t support your rhetoric elsewhere. I only focused on Georgia because it got the most ZB money. And I wanted to see whether the summaries provided were correct. They are. That leads me to believe that the other summaries are correct too. Which means, it mattered in PA too. We can’t get two hours mandatory time off from work passed. There is no willingness to make voting easier by republicans, because voter turnout is the enemy of republicans. Why do we need mandatory PAID time off to vote? Most employers allow it already. The ones who don't may have good reasons why it's a burden on them. Polls are open longer than most people work. You're just plain lying about Republicans not being willing to make voting easier. Nearly EVERY state has added some kind of early voting or made access to mail-in ballots easier. Even in Red states like Georgia and Kentucky. I’m fine with means to make elections more secure, etc., but not arbitrarily difficult. It should be easy to exercise this right. Maybe you are, but Democrat leaders sure are not. They oppose ANY and EVERY measure aimed at making voting more secure. They even support letting illegal non-citizens voting. You are absolutely right about one thing, the country is doomed people don’t trust elections. Well, we agree on one thing at least. Maybe, one day, you'll realize that Trump didn't start this. People are RIGHT to question elections, because they are NOT secure.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 27, 2024 15:46:35 GMT
You said there were no such increases for republicans in Georgia that didn’t get the money, but you post data showing they did. I can’t help anymore here. Maybe, you just can't be helped. What I said was this: "As for Zuckerbucks: They were highly effective in turning out more votes for Democrats. In Georgia, there was no such increase in the counties that didn't get the money."Maybe it wasn't as big as I thought, but it WAS significant. Enough to change the outcome in such a close race. We have no idea what the vote totals would have been in these counties if NO money had been spent. If you want to believe that $38M being spent in 5 counties around Atlanta had NO effect on the turnout, then... go ahead. If true, it was a tremendous waste of money. You are only narrowly focusing on Georgia because the data doesn’t support your rhetoric elsewhere. I only focused on Georgia because it got the most ZB money. And I wanted to see whether the summaries provided were correct. They are. That leads me to believe that the other summaries are correct too. Which means, it mattered in PA too. We can’t get two hours mandatory time off from work passed. There is no willingness to make voting easier by republicans, because voter turnout is the enemy of republicans. Why do we need mandatory PAID time off to vote? Most employers allow it already. The ones who don't may have good reasons why it's a burden on them. Polls are open longer than most people work. You're just plain lying about Republicans not being willing to make voting easier. Nearly EVERY state has added some kind of early voting or made access to mail-in ballots easier. Even in Red states like Georgia and Kentucky. I’m fine with means to make elections more secure, etc., but not arbitrarily difficult. It should be easy to exercise this right. Maybe you are, but Democrat leaders sure are not. They oppose ANY and EVERY measure aimed at making voting more secure. They even support letting illegal non-citizens voting. You are absolutely right about one thing, the country is doomed people don’t trust elections. Well, we agree on one thing at least. Maybe, one day, you'll realize that Trump didn't start this. People are RIGHT to question elections, because they are NOT secure. You are right, I will redact that there is no willingness by republicans to make voting easier. That’s false. But generally republicans are for making it harder or not easier. I probably fall in the center, but I think we should generally make it easier to cast a secure vote. More time, time off, etc. On your point about Zuckerbucks, the data simply doesn’t support your arguments: As for Zuckerbucks: They were highly effective in turning out more votes for Democrats. In Georgia, there was no such increase in the counties that didn't get the money. There sure was in the ones who did get the money. Democrat votes increased in both Zuckerbucks and non-Zuckerbucks counties in Georgia, and the difference between the two isn’t statistically significant enough to prove Zuckerbucks was the cause. In the 6 states(AZ, GA, NC, PA, TX, VA) that the Zuckerbucks analysis had county level data to analyze, 4 of them had more democrat growth in non-Zuckerbucks counties than they did in Zuckerbucks counties. Based on the data you provided, there is no evidence that Zuckerberg spent $350 million to increase DEMOCRAT turnout. Finally, I am not arguing that you shouldn’t challenge election results. This is a straw man. I’m arguing that Trump had no justification to claim, as fact, that the election was stolen from him with fraudulent votes. I think you create the straw man because you know I’m right. Trump had every right to challenge the election results. We agree 100%. But I don’t think Trump had the right (or at least was wildly irresponsible) for claiming, as fact, that the election was stolen through fraudulent votes. And he said it over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on May 27, 2024 16:16:05 GMT
Your premise is that Christians would reject Christ? Better lick that calf over again. My premise is that republicans would reject Christ. "Well, that is one unique prophecy, Mr. Reacher"
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 28, 2024 10:12:12 GMT
Another way to look at the Zuckerbucks data is to assess other causes.
Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes.
All counties: 62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase
Zuckerbuck counties: 79.08% correlation with democrat vote increase 14.38% correlation for republican vote increase
non-Zuckerbuck counties: 51.98% correlation with democrat vote increase 23.18% correlation for republican vote increase
Georgia is growing, and that growth is strongly correlated with Democrats, especially in higher population areas.
I’d say the growth in population is a much stronger factor than Zuckerbucks to explain growth in democrat votes.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on May 28, 2024 13:15:50 GMT
Another way to look at the Zuckerbucks data is to assess other causes. Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes. All counties:62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase Zuckerbuck counties:79.08% correlation with democrat vote increase 14.38% correlation for republican vote increase non-Zuckerbuck counties:51.98% correlation with democrat vote increase 23.18% correlation for republican vote increase Georgia is growing, and that growth is strongly correlated with Democrats, especially in higher population areas. I’d say the growth in population is a much stronger factor than Zuckerbucks to explain growth in democrat votes. Yes... I'd thought of that and expected that the Dem areas grew in population faster. But we're looking at differences between 2016 and 2020, not 2010. The BEST way to look at the data would be to look at % turnout. ie: % of registered voters of each party voting. That would take into account the population changes. I suspect the impact of the money will be more evident there. I looked a little for that kind of data, but it was only available behind pay sites. Again though, I say..... we cannot know what the vote would have been if the money had not been spent. The urban areas around Atlanta are high minority populations. They weren't overly excited about Biden. It's a bit much to believe they turned out in record numbers for the plagiarizing cadaver. Their votes are also the easiest to harvest, or 'manufacture', because they often come from concentrated locations. IF one wanted to increase Democrat turnout in Georgia, and you had a LOT of money, you would spend it exactly the way it was: In the most populated counties having the high Democrat majorities. If that kind of money had NO impact, it would be a first in politics. I will concede that Trump's refusal to accept the election results and his subsequent challenges were far in excess of what previous Presidents have done. They might even have been irresponsible, by normal standards. But, they weren't illegal. And, they were not a "threat to democracy". The THREAT comes from the fact that we, the people, also don't trust the election. Trump was not brainwashing us. He was acting on OUR wishes, doing exactly what WE wanted. I think that's what people on the left just don't see. Or, maybe they DO see it, but they don't want to admit it. It's much easier to just lay the blame on one bad orange man. This sentiment started long before Trump. It will continue after Trump is gone, if we don't do something to rebuild confidence in our electoral process. But even with Trump, our democracy was never in danger. He fought, with legal means, and lost. Then, he left. These insane media people I hear saying Trump would refuse to leave office if he wins again simply amaze me with their ignorance. They truly do not understand the man, or US, his followers. We'd be the first ones in line to kick him out if he refused. But he would never do that. He'd go out a "winner". That's his dream. The worst for all would be if he loses in 2024. Then, he'll hang around and try again in 2028.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on May 28, 2024 13:16:28 GMT
You are absolutely right about one thing, the country is doomed people don’t trust elections. Well, we agree on one thing at least. Maybe, one day, you'll realize that Trump didn't start this. People are RIGHT to question elections, because they are NOT secure. Exactly. Our elections are not secure, because, apparently, some people want them that way. Our voting systems are not auditable, and by that I mean fully and correctly auditable. Recounts are NOT audits, despite them media's conflation of the terms. Audits take time to do them properly. Audits require testing all of the internal controls of the process along the way. Some people do not trust the electorate to vote "properly". We know how to properly secure elections, so why won't we do it?
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 28, 2024 15:30:42 GMT
Another way to look at the Zuckerbucks data is to assess other causes. Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes. All counties:62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase Zuckerbuck counties:79.08% correlation with democrat vote increase 14.38% correlation for republican vote increase non-Zuckerbuck counties:51.98% correlation with democrat vote increase 23.18% correlation for republican vote increase Georgia is growing, and that growth is strongly correlated with Democrats, especially in higher population areas. I’d say the growth in population is a much stronger factor than Zuckerbucks to explain growth in democrat votes. Yes... I'd thought of that and expected that the Dem areas grew in population faster. But we're looking at differences between 2016 and 2020, not 2010. The BEST way to look at the data would be to look at % turnout. ie: % of registered voters of each party voting. That would take into account the population changes. I suspect the impact of the money will be more evident there. I looked a little for that kind of data, but it was only available behind pay sites. Again though, I say..... we cannot know what the vote would have been if the money had not been spent. The urban areas around Atlanta are high minority populations. They weren't overly excited about Biden. It's a bit much to believe they turned out in record numbers for the plagiarizing cadaver. Their votes are also the easiest to harvest, or 'manufacture', because they often come from concentrated locations. IF one wanted to increase Democrat turnout in Georgia, and you had a LOT of money, you would spend it exactly the way it was: In the most populated counties having the high Democrat majorities. If that kind of money had NO impact, it would be a first in politics. I will concede that Trump's refusal to accept the election results and his subsequent challenges were far in excess of what previous Presidents have done. They might even have been irresponsible, by normal standards. But, they weren't illegal. And, they were not a "threat to democracy". The THREAT comes from the fact that we, the people, also don't trust the election. Trump was not brainwashing us. He was acting on OUR wishes, doing exactly what WE wanted. I think that's what people on the left just don't see. Or, maybe they DO see it, but they don't want to admit it. It's much easier to just lay the blame on one bad orange man. This sentiment started long before Trump. It will continue after Trump is gone, if we don't do something to rebuild confidence in our electoral process. But even with Trump, our democracy was never in danger. He fought, with legal means, and lost. Then, he left. These insane media people I hear saying Trump would refuse to leave office if he wins again simply amaze me with their ignorance. They truly do not understand the man, or US, his followers. We'd be the first ones in line to kick him out if he refused. But he would never do that. He'd go out a "winner". That's his dream. The worst for all would be if he loses in 2024. Then, he'll hang around and try again in 2028. The easier explanation for Zuckerbucks: the bigger counties got it because they had the most people and the most need. The data simply does not show that the money only increased democrat voters. Anyways, I think we are almost aligned on the Trump massively lying about election fraud, there is just a mix up between cause and effect. When the POTUS repeats something hundreds of times, it gains credibility. Even when it is a lie. By repeating the lie, he at least increased the distrust in the elections, which we agree is a threat to democracy. So by lying, he increased the threat to democracy. And why did he lie? Because he is a sore loser who cares more about himself than his country. And that is what I can’t support. …But you won’t say that he lied. You instead use euphemisms that he “challenged” or “questioned” the results. We cannot make any progress if you won’t agree that he lied when he said the election was stolen through fraudulent votes.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on May 29, 2024 2:06:20 GMT
Another way to look at the Zuckerbucks data is to assess other causes. Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes. All counties:62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase Zuckerbuck counties:79.08% correlation with democrat vote increase 14.38% correlation for republican vote increase non-Zuckerbuck counties:51.98% correlation with democrat vote increase 23.18% correlation for republican vote increase Georgia is growing, and that growth is strongly correlated with Democrats, especially in higher population areas. I’d say the growth in population is a much stronger factor than Zuckerbucks to explain growth in democrat votes. Yes... I'd thought of that and expected that the Dem areas grew in population faster. But we're looking at differences between 2016 and 2020, not 2010. The BEST way to look at the data would be to look at % turnout. ie: % of registered voters of each party voting. That would take into account the population changes. I suspect the impact of the money will be more evident there. I looked a little for that kind of data, but it was only available behind pay sites. Again though, I say..... we cannot know what the vote would have been if the money had not been spent. The urban areas around Atlanta are high minority populations. They weren't overly excited about Biden. It's a bit much to believe they turned out in record numbers for the plagiarizing cadaver. Their votes are also the easiest to harvest, or 'manufacture', because they often come from concentrated locations. IF one wanted to increase Democrat turnout in Georgia, and you had a LOT of money, you would spend it exactly the way it was: In the most populated counties having the high Democrat majorities. If that kind of money had NO impact, it would be a first in politics. I will concede that Trump's refusal to accept the election results and his subsequent challenges were far in excess of what previous Presidents have done. They might even have been irresponsible, by normal standards. But, they weren't illegal. And, they were not a "threat to democracy". The THREAT comes from the fact that we, the people, also don't trust the election. Trump was not brainwashing us. He was acting on OUR wishes, doing exactly what WE wanted. I think that's what people on the left just don't see. Or, maybe they DO see it, but they don't want to admit it. It's much easier to just lay the blame on one bad orange man. This sentiment started long before Trump. It will continue after Trump is gone, if we don't do something to rebuild confidence in our electoral process. But even with Trump, our democracy was never in danger. He fought, with legal means, and lost. Then, he left. These insane media people I hear saying Trump would refuse to leave office if he wins again simply amaze me with their ignorance. They truly do not understand the man, or US, his followers. We'd be the first ones in line to kick him out if he refused. But he would never do that. He'd go out a "winner". That's his dream. The worst for all would be if he loses in 2024. Then, he'll hang around and try again in 2028. Let's just keep it simple. This was all about the zuckerbucks voter impact. The only way we could know the true impact on Zuckerbucks impact at the county level would require data on the votes tabulation from Zuckerbucks drop boxes and the remainder of the votes. I have yet to see that data for that. Therefore you can only go on the impact on the state as a whole.
2016 to 2020 Change in voter tournout
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state
Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the impact on Zuckerbucks in Georgia considering there was only an 11 K difference in the vote count. Then we have the fake water leak where the republicans left and democrats continued counting illegally on camera. You also have the endless number of people on video dropping in multiple ballots with masks on at 3 in the morning at the zuckerbucks drop boxes. Any reasonable or moderate would be able to recognize that maybe just maybe there was voter fraud that could have potentially change the outcome of the election.
Then we get this BS:
Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes.
All counties: 62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase
This is the most worthless piece of handpicked data that was simply chosen to try to make false point. 2010 is a non presidential election year and it is very typically that Republicans turn out at a high rate than Democrats.
If you were going to go back years then you should at least pick a presidential year. Here is the data from 2008 to 2020
Georgia all counties 2008 - 2020 34.14% correlation with democrat vote increase 20.16% correlation with republican vote increase
Another very deceitful and dishonest attempt of a so called moderate trying to make his point.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 29, 2024 6:55:25 GMT
Yes... I'd thought of that and expected that the Dem areas grew in population faster. But we're looking at differences between 2016 and 2020, not 2010. The BEST way to look at the data would be to look at % turnout. ie: % of registered voters of each party voting. That would take into account the population changes. I suspect the impact of the money will be more evident there. I looked a little for that kind of data, but it was only available behind pay sites. Again though, I say..... we cannot know what the vote would have been if the money had not been spent. The urban areas around Atlanta are high minority populations. They weren't overly excited about Biden. It's a bit much to believe they turned out in record numbers for the plagiarizing cadaver. Their votes are also the easiest to harvest, or 'manufacture', because they often come from concentrated locations. IF one wanted to increase Democrat turnout in Georgia, and you had a LOT of money, you would spend it exactly the way it was: In the most populated counties having the high Democrat majorities. If that kind of money had NO impact, it would be a first in politics. I will concede that Trump's refusal to accept the election results and his subsequent challenges were far in excess of what previous Presidents have done. They might even have been irresponsible, by normal standards. But, they weren't illegal. And, they were not a "threat to democracy". The THREAT comes from the fact that we, the people, also don't trust the election. Trump was not brainwashing us. He was acting on OUR wishes, doing exactly what WE wanted. I think that's what people on the left just don't see. Or, maybe they DO see it, but they don't want to admit it. It's much easier to just lay the blame on one bad orange man. This sentiment started long before Trump. It will continue after Trump is gone, if we don't do something to rebuild confidence in our electoral process. But even with Trump, our democracy was never in danger. He fought, with legal means, and lost. Then, he left. These insane media people I hear saying Trump would refuse to leave office if he wins again simply amaze me with their ignorance. They truly do not understand the man, or US, his followers. We'd be the first ones in line to kick him out if he refused. But he would never do that. He'd go out a "winner". That's his dream. The worst for all would be if he loses in 2024. Then, he'll hang around and try again in 2028. Let's just keep it simple. This was all about the zuckerbucks voter impact. The only way we could know the true impact on Zuckerbucks impact at the county level would require data on the votes tabulation from Zuckerbucks drop boxes and the remainder of the votes. I have yet to see that data for that. Therefore you can only go on the impact on the state as a whole.
2016 to 2020 Change in voter tournout
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state
Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the impact on Zuckerbucks in Georgia considering there was only an 11 K difference in the vote count. Then we have the fake water leak where the republicans left and democrats continued counting illegally on camera. You also have the endless number of people on video dropping in multiple ballots with masks on at 3 in the morning at the zuckerbucks drop boxes. Any reasonable or moderate would be able to recognize that maybe just maybe there was voter fraud that could have potentially change the outcome of the election.
Then we get this BS:
Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes.
All counties: 62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase
This is the most worthless piece of handpicked data that was simply chosen to try to make false point. 2010 is a non presidential election year and it is very typically that Republicans turn out at a high rate than Democrats.
If you were going to go back years then you should at least pick a presidential year. Here is the data from 2008 to 2020
Georgia all counties 2008 - 2020 34.14% correlation with democrat vote increase 20.16% correlation with republican vote increase
Another very deceitful and dishonest attempt of a so called moderate trying to make his point.
I correlated voter growth to population growth. This is a correlation. Linear least squared regression between two data sets. One data set was voter growth, another was population growth. I used 2010 and 2020 because there is a very significant event that happens every ten years to characterize population growth. Hint: it’s even in the constitution. Before you accuse me of being biased, you should at least try to understand the words in my post. I will be glad to teach you what a correlation is and how to calculate it in excel, since it apparent that Ohio State did not.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on May 29, 2024 18:19:29 GMT
Let's just keep it simple. This was all about the zuckerbucks voter impact. The only way we could know the true impact on Zuckerbucks impact at the county level would require data on the votes tabulation from Zuckerbucks drop boxes and the remainder of the votes. I have yet to see that data for that. Therefore you can only go on the impact on the state as a whole.
2016 to 2020 Change in voter tournout
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state
Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the impact on Zuckerbucks in Georgia considering there was only an 11 K difference in the vote count. Then we have the fake water leak where the republicans left and democrats continued counting illegally on camera. You also have the endless number of people on video dropping in multiple ballots with masks on at 3 in the morning at the zuckerbucks drop boxes. Any reasonable or moderate would be able to recognize that maybe just maybe there was voter fraud that could have potentially change the outcome of the election.
Then we get this BS:
Correlate percent growth in county population between 2010 and 2020 to percent growth in votes.
All counties: 62.18% correlation with democrat vote increase 16.62% correlation with republican vote increase
This is the most worthless piece of handpicked data that was simply chosen to try to make false point. 2010 is a non presidential election year and it is very typically that Republicans turn out at a high rate than Democrats.
If you were going to go back years then you should at least pick a presidential year. Here is the data from 2008 to 2020
Georgia all counties 2008 - 2020 34.14% correlation with democrat vote increase 20.16% correlation with republican vote increase
Another very deceitful and dishonest attempt of a so called moderate trying to make his point.
I correlated voter growth to population growth. This is a correlation. Linear least squared regression between two data sets. One data set was voter growth, another was population growth. I used 2010 and 2020 because there is a very significant event that happens every ten years to characterize population growth. Hint: it’s even in the constitution. Before you accuse me of being biased, you should at least try to understand the words in my post. I will be glad to teach you what a correlation is and how to calculate it in excel, since it apparent that Ohio State did not. Linear least squared regression between two data sets??? Wow that is really impressive. Us with an engineering degree call that a simple trend line. I actually learned y = mx + b in high school algebra.
So Georgia population from Wiki is as follows.
2010 9,687,653 2020 10,711,908 10.6% 2023 (est.) 11,029,227 3.0%
Georgia all counties votes 2008 - 2020 34.14% correlation with democrat vote increase 20.16% correlation with republican vote increase
Considering there was a huge spike in the vote count in 2020, the trend line (you know the linear least squared regression line) would be far less than 34.14 percent in 2020. With Georgia population growing at a 10.6 rate should make me wonder how you got to 62.18 with a line???
Since you offered, yes please educate me on how you came to this conclusion of that 62.18 percent increase. Please provide your data sources as well as I feel that one will be a challenge. Let me guess you used your hand picked data which included non election years. Just another one of your efforts to misinform everyone on this board. Bravo.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 29, 2024 21:03:03 GMT
I correlated voter growth to population growth. This is a correlation. Linear least squared regression between two data sets. One data set was voter growth, another was population growth. I used 2010 and 2020 because there is a very significant event that happens every ten years to characterize population growth. Hint: it’s even in the constitution. Before you accuse me of being biased, you should at least try to understand the words in my post. I will be glad to teach you what a correlation is and how to calculate it in excel, since it apparent that Ohio State did not. Linear least squared regression between two data sets??? Wow that is really impressive. Us with an engineering degree call that a simple trend line. I actually learned y = mx + b in high school algebra.
So Georgia population from Wiki is as follows.
2010 9,687,653 2020 10,711,908 10.6% 2023 (est.) 11,029,227 3.0%
Georgia all counties votes 2008 - 2020 34.14% correlation with democrat vote increase 20.16% correlation with republican vote increase
Considering there was a huge spike in the vote count in 2020, the trend line (you know the linear least squared regression line) would be far less than 34.14 percent in 2020. With Georgia population growing at a 10.6 rate should make me wonder how you got to 62.18 with a line???
Since you offered, yes please educate me on how you came to this conclusion of that 62.18 percent increase. Please provide your data sources as well as I feel that one will be a challenge. Let me guess you used your hand picked data which included non election years. Just another one of your efforts to misinform everyone on this board. Bravo.
Where did I say 62.18% increase? I said 62.18% correlation. The result of a linear leased squared regression. I really don’t think you know what correlation is. Anyways, I used census.gov data for county level population data in Georgia. The election results were the county level data source linked before.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on May 29, 2024 21:51:57 GMT
Linear least squared regression between two data sets??? Wow that is really impressive. Us with an engineering degree call that a simple trend line. I actually learned y = mx + b in high school algebra.
So Georgia population from Wiki is as follows.
2010 9,687,653 2020 10,711,908 10.6% 2023 (est.) 11,029,227 3.0%
Georgia all counties votes 2008 - 2020 34.14% correlation with democrat vote increase 20.16% correlation with republican vote increase
Considering there was a huge spike in the vote count in 2020, the trend line (you know the linear least squared regression line) would be far less than 34.14 percent in 2020. With Georgia population growing at a 10.6 rate should make me wonder how you got to 62.18 with a line???
Since you offered, yes please educate me on how you came to this conclusion of that 62.18 percent increase. Please provide your data sources as well as I feel that one will be a challenge. Let me guess you used your hand picked data which included non election years. Just another one of your efforts to misinform everyone on this board. Bravo.
Where did I say 62.18% increase? I said 62.18% correlation. The result of a linear leased squared regression. I really don’t think you know what correlation is. Anyways, I used census.gov data for county level population data in Georgia. The election results were the county level data source linked before. Correlation is typical used to predict trends using one data set versus the other. Please explain to me why you what this has to do with anything when we have actual real data that supports Bevo's position. Isn't that what this is all about anyway.
2016 to 2020 Change in voter turnout
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 29, 2024 22:18:03 GMT
Where did I say 62.18% increase? I said 62.18% correlation. The result of a linear leased squared regression. I really don’t think you know what correlation is. Anyways, I used census.gov data for county level population data in Georgia. The election results were the county level data source linked before. Correlation is typical used to predict trends using one data set versus the other. Please explain to me why you what this has to do with anything when we have actual real data that supports Bevo's position. Isn't that what this is all about anyway.
2016 to 2020 Change in voter turnout
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
That’s not what correlation is. With Bevo’s supplied data, there was almost the same percent growth of democrat voters in Georgia between Zuckerbuck counties and non-Zuckerbucks counties. Non-Zuckerbuck counties grew by over 30%. There was not enough of a difference to credit Zuckerbucks. It clearly isn’t Zuckerbucks that caused the increase, so I was offering another logical explanation why democrat votes would increase… that there are more people in Georgia.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on May 30, 2024 13:44:55 GMT
Correlation is typical used to predict trends using one data set versus the other. Please explain to me why you what this has to do with anything when we have actual real data that supports Bevo's position. Isn't that what this is all about anyway.
2016 to 2020 Change in voter turnout
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
That’s not what correlation is. With Bevo’s supplied data, there was almost the same percent growth of democrat voters in Georgia between Zuckerbuck counties and non-Zuckerbucks counties. Non-Zuckerbuck counties grew by over 30%. There was not enough of a difference to credit Zuckerbucks. It clearly isn’t Zuckerbucks that caused the increase, so I was offering another logical explanation why democrat votes would increase… that there are more people in Georgia. Zuckerbucks counties vs non Zuckerbucks is irrelevant when determining the Zuckerberg effect on the election in Georgia. Zuckerbucks boxes votes vs non Zuckerbucks boxes votes would have some relevance.
Instead of using some sort of correlation to try to plead your case. Why don't we just look at the actual data between 2016 and 2020 which is very compelling.
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
Member is Online
|
Post by aufan on May 30, 2024 16:34:11 GMT
That’s not what correlation is. With Bevo’s supplied data, there was almost the same percent growth of democrat voters in Georgia between Zuckerbuck counties and non-Zuckerbucks counties. Non-Zuckerbuck counties grew by over 30%. There was not enough of a difference to credit Zuckerbucks. It clearly isn’t Zuckerbucks that caused the increase, so I was offering another logical explanation why democrat votes would increase… that there are more people in Georgia. Zuckerbucks counties vs non Zuckerbucks is irrelevant when determining the Zuckerberg effect on the election in Georgia. Zuckerbucks boxes votes vs non Zuckerbucks boxes votes would have some relevance.
Instead of using some sort of correlation to try to plead your case. Why don't we just look at the actual data between 2016 and 2020 which is very compelling.
2016 to 2020 GA:Democrat voter increase +31.2% GA: Republican voter increase +17.8%
US:Democrat voter increase +23.4% US:Republican voter increase +17.8%
Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Zuckerberg spent far more in Georgia than any other state Funding per\capita Georgia 4.2 NJ 2.3 No others over 2 National Average 0.87
The fact that non-Zuckerbucks counties grew almost as much Zuckerbucks counties is irrelevant? It shows Georgia was growing in democrat votes with or without Zuckerbucks. I think that is very relevant. Edit: Also, I know words and math aren’t your strong suit, and I think I know what you meant, but this line is too hilariously wrong to ignore at face value: Georgia had a substantially higher percentage of votes for democrats compared to the rest of the nation. Georgia had 49.47% vote for democrat. The nation was 51.3%. I’m too lazy to do the math right now but the “rest of the nation”,which excludes Georgia, had to be higher than Georgia.
|
|