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.
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
Not necessarily. As far as mathematical trend would go, yes. But future trends are only predictions. They do not always equate to reality. It can't necessarily be assumed that the increased voter count will be directly correlated to the frequency of them answering a question about whether or not they voted.
A potential explanation could be that more people were genuinely enthusiastic about voting than in years past, thus could potentially explain how more people answered the question about whether or not they voted. It's a plausible scenario.
In any case, there is a volume of the population that declined the answer the question of whether or not they voted. They cannot be assumed to have definitely not voted no matter what the prior year's statistics were.
In any case, there is a volume of the population that declined the answer the question of whether or not they voted. They cannot be assumed to have definitely not voted no matter what the prior year's statistics were.
Nor can they be assumed to have voted, as you are doing. The most likely scenario is that the is no significant change in the ratios of voters to non voters in the unanswered population.
I'm not assuming. I'm saying the fact is the possibility exists that they may have voted, as well as may not have voted. So therefore the total number of people that possibly may have voted (according to the US census) is between 154,628,000 and 191,032,000 people. Thus, we can't assume that there were more ballots counted than number of people who voted, because we cannot, narrow down the exact number of people to have voted.
Test your logic against nearly any other year. Let's use 2004 as it was a relatively calm election, and assume that the number of people who would not answer whether they vote is around 20% of the number that claimed they voted. Yes, I am making up that number because that question was never asked, but from above you can see that 20% is reasonable. As usual numbers are in thousands.
From above:
2004 125,736 122,295 3,441
and the theoretical unanswered population: 25,147
If your method works then we have a range between 125,736 and 150,883. This is obviously wrong because the actually number of votes according to the FEC was 122,295. In fact for any year except 2008 (barely) and 2020, your method would have the actual number of votes outside of your calculated range. This is entirely because the census number of people voting is ALWAYS greater than the actual number of votes except for 2020. It means there was not just 4 million votes made up but more likely 6 to 12 million votes made up, especially if we compare 2020 to the Bush and Clinton elections.
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.
Not necessarily. As far as mathematical trend would go, yes. But future trends are only predictions. They do not always equate to reality. It can't necessarily be assumed that the increased voter count will be directly correlated to the frequency of them answering a question about whether or not they voted.
A potential explanation could be that more people were genuinely enthusiastic about voting than in years past, thus could potentially explain how more people answered the question about whether or not they voted. It's a plausible scenario.
In any case, there is a volume of the population that declined the answer the question of whether or not they voted. They cannot be assumed to have definitely not voted no matter what the prior year's statistics were.
Nor can they be assumed to have voted, as you are doing. The most likely scenario is that the is no significant change in the ratios of voters to non voters in the unanswered population.
I'm not assuming. I'm saying the fact is the possibility exists that they may have voted, as well as may not have voted. So therefore the total number of people that possibly may have voted (according to the US census) is between 154,628,000 and 191,032,000 people. Thus, we can't assume that there were more ballots counted than number of people who voted, because we cannot, narrow down the exact number of people to have voted.
We only know that it is at least 154,628,000.
Test your logic against nearly any other year. Let's use 2004 as it was a relatively calm election, and assume that the number of people who would not answer whether they vote is around 20% of the number that claimed they voted. Yes, I am making up that number because that question was never asked, but from above you can see that 20% is reasonable. As usual numbers are in thousands.
From above:
2004 125,736 122,295 3,441
and the theoretical unanswered population: 25,147
If your method works then we have a range between 125,736 and 150,883. This is obviously wrong because the actually number of votes according to the FEC was 122,295. In fact for any year except 2008 (barely) and 2020, your method would have the actual number of votes outside of your calculated range. This is entirely because the census number of people voting is ALWAYS greater than the actual number of votes except for 2020. It means there was not just 4 million votes made up but more likely 6 to 12 million votes made up, especially if we compare 2020 to the Bush and Clinton elections.