Since you insist on reposting this video, I'll re-post my comments.
"So, considering i have no idea who he is.. him constantly saying 'that's what i think based on what I'm seeing'.. doesn't fill me with confidence. Unless he is some internationally renowned statistician. And even then, opinions don't mean much. I need evidence.
For instance at this time stamp he seems to think that the distribution "should be higher".. which is him, an anonymous youtuber, just having issues with how the actual data models, compared to what he believes it should? /z86WQbiWaAE?t=4859
At 1:36:00 he forces us to sit through 2 minutes of him silently re-sizing graphs, before claiming that his eye-balling of the graph suggests that the distributions of votes aren't correct. His argument is that he's expecting a consistent vote across precinct between mail in and election day votes.
And sure.. you'd expect the same average vote percentages between the two on any normal election. This wasn't a normal election. One party was vehemently anti-lockdown/anti-mail in/anti-early vote, and his 'pre-investigation' modelling suggested that party did less mail-in voting.
The other party was very covid conscious, pro-mail in, pro-early vote.. and surprisingly, they weighed their votes heavier in that category.
I'm still not sure on what point he is trying to prove. But having an issue with voter preference during a pandemic being suggestive of a nationwide election fraud.. I mean, different strokes for different folks, good for him streaming for 12 hours for his huge viewer base.
I don't get why you'd take this as any source of knowledge or information? He's just making up some graphs on excel and claiming it doesn't look right.. his argument for Trump's election day votes being removed is him roughly drawing a line in paint saying "if the standard deviation of election day votes ends here, then the other end should be higher, which is significant amount of votes missing".
