To top it all off, you completely ignored the premise of the article, which is that the Census numbers always over-report the number of voters, except for 2020, where they under reported by 2%.
In the census tables those other years, how many people were recorded as not having answered the question of whether or not they voted? Because I'm not prepared to give conclusions on incomplete data.
Your argument, and by extension Foletado's argument, it that the unanswered population accounts for the discrepancy between the Census and FEC vote totals. For that to be true to be true there would have to be a large spike in unanswered population relative to total votes from 2016 to 2020. Since there is not then there is reasonable evidence that the excess FEC vote totals are fraudulent, phantom voters, as the democrats are unlikely to waste time faking those Census statistics.
In the census tables those other years, how many people were recorded as not having answered the question of whether or not they voted? Because I'm not prepared to give conclusions on incomplete data.
No data for that before 2012, as far as i can tell.
year, unanswered, %census, %FEC
2012: 27,601 20.76% 21.38%
2016: 32,662 23.75% 23.90%
2020: 36,404 23.54% 22.99%
Note that the number of unanswered decreases relative to the number of votes from 2016 to 2020.
The number of people that did not answer is uncorrelated to the Census-FEC number.
Okay, so, what's the point then? Why does the data have to be the same each year?
Your argument, and by extension Foletado's argument, it that the unanswered population accounts for the discrepancy between the Census and FEC vote totals. For that to be true to be true there would have to be a large spike in unanswered population relative to total votes from 2016 to 2020. Since there is not then there is reasonable evidence that the excess FEC vote totals are fraudulent, phantom voters, as the democrats are unlikely to waste time faking those Census statistics.