EXCLUSIVE: New Report on 2020 Election Shows Nearly Impossible “Statistical Contrasts” that “Merit Closer Investigation”

Another statistical report released this week shows the nearly impossible probabilities in the 2020 election results. 

Experts this time performed a Contrast Analysis review of the 2020 Presidential results and many items stand out that just don’t make sense.

S. Stanley Young, PhD, FASA, FAAAS and Ray Blehar, Analyst created a report labeled: 2020 Presidential Election Contrast Analysis.

This is the first report of its kind that we are aware of.

In the report the experts share the following all based on publicly available data used in conducting this analysis:

Following the 2020 election, the reliability of voting results in several states (particularly swing states) has come under question. To assist in identifying statistical anomalies, we put together a summary sheet of some worthwhile state-related data for 2016 and 2020. (Feel free to download this Excel document in tabular form, where you can sort by any column, with a single click.)

One method of identifying possible unreliable voting results is to examine publicly available voting totals using a method called contrast analysis.  One way of doing a contrast would be to look at the Biden versus Trump 2020 vote results, and compare that to Clinton versus Trump in 2016. For example, in California the totals and the contrast were: In other words, in California, Biden beat Trump by 5± million votes (2020), whereas Clinton beat Trump by 4± million (2016). Doing the arithmetic, the contrast is 833,843 votes. (Statisticians call this the Difference of the Differences, or DoD.)

Note that Trump increased his California vote total by 1.5± million votes. However, Biden increased the Democrat candidate’s vote total by 2.3± million. Where did California find 3.8± million more votes in 2020 than in 2016? Easy, you say: California’s population has increased.

That’s a good thought, but between 2016 and 2020, the Census Bureau says that the population of California increase by less than 700,000 people. (Note that this includes children not old enough to vote, non-citizens, non-registered citizens, etc.). However, as mentioned above, the 2020 vote total for the Democrat candidate increased by 2.3± million votes. On the face of it, that significant vote increase does not appear to be logically explainable.

A statistical contrast is not proof of voting fraud, but a large contrast does point to situations that might merit closer examination.

Here are the results of some states:

Many individuals approached us and argued Trump won California.  They say his support in the Golden State was historical and there was evidence of this everywhere.

The above data shows that he gained 2 million votes and most people believe Biden wasn’t even close to Hillary’s totals.  (Hillary would no doubt agree with that.)  So it looks like there is some support for further investigation in California.

We reported previously on Colorado.  Their numbers make no sense as well:

COLORADO TOO! Colorado’s 2020 Election Results Are Also Suspect – Biden’s Numbers Raise Serious Red Flags and Alleged Turnout Is More Like Saddam’s Iraq than the US

We also reported extensively on Virginia, this state too deserves investigation:

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Multiple Reversals and Proportional Vote Entries In Virginia on Election Night after 11 PM Indicate Election Fraud Occurred in This State Too

Below is the analysis there is much more to look into:

2020 Presidential Election … by John Droz, jr.

Photo of author
Joe Hoft is a Radio Host at TNTRadio.live, Author, Former International Corporate Executive in Hong Kong for a Decade, and a Contributor at TGP since 2016. Joe is the author of five books, including his new bestseller, "The Steal: Volume II - The Impossible Occurs" which addresses the stolen 2020 Election and provides an inventory of issues that prove that the 2020 Election was uncertifiable and never should have been certified for Joe Biden.

You can email Joe Hoft here, and read more of Joe Hoft's articles here.


Thanks for sharing!