Screencaps are not from a public site, but underlying data given is real, public, and verifiable.
Originally posted Jan 5th - https://t.co/Vim3JlOtlZ
FULTON CO.
We're looking at "book votes." That is, people who are marked as having voted in the voter rolls. This is how Floyd County was detected - you had an excess of voters in the book vs. what was recorded on machines.
Screencaps are not from a public site, but underlying data given is real, public, and verifiable.
Fulton has 10K+ excess votes. This has been blamed on stale record keeping. At a precinct level, there are 14700 "excess" votes and 3900 "missing" votes.
This is a map of where the lowest vote increases relative to 2016 are. In other words, these are areas that simply didn't have much vote growth vs. 2016 (possibly didn't grow much in population).
The south cluster is 95%+ Black whereas the north cluster is 85%+ white. So, very different demographics.
We are asked to take @gasecofstate 's word that this is up-and-up with zero way of verifying it.
1) A centrally managed process of fraud (e.g., possibly as seen in the infamous suitcase video
If you find this compelling, please RT and spread far and wide.
More from Economy
1/ Trend Factor: Any Economic Gains from Using Information over Investment Horizons? (Han, Zhou, Zhu)
"A trend factor using multiple time lengths outperforms ST reversal, momentum, and LT reversal, which are based on the three price trends separately."
https://t.co/udkvsdw2Lz
2/ This resembles combining multiple measures of ST reversal, momentum, and LT reversal (forecasts determined by walking forward rather than using signs from the full sample).
Unlike normal moving average signals, these are *cross-sectional.* More below:
https://t.co/wkIFLg9jtK
3/ Unsurprisingly, the Trend factor formed by this approach outperforms benchmarks in terms of both Sharpe ratio and tail metrics. It's combining momentum with two factors that are negatively correlated to it AND using multiple specifications.
More here:
https://t.co/x8Tloz3iyL
4/ "Average return and volatility of the trend factor are both higher in recession periods. However, the Sharpe ratio is virtually the same.
"Interestingly, all of the factors still have positive average returns.
"Momentum experiences the greatest increase in volatility."
5/ "In terms of maximum drawdown and the Calmar ratio, the trend factor performs the best.
"The trend factor is correlated with the short-term reversal factor (35%), long-term reversal factor (14%), and the market (20%) but is virtually uncorrelated with the momentum factor."
"A trend factor using multiple time lengths outperforms ST reversal, momentum, and LT reversal, which are based on the three price trends separately."
https://t.co/udkvsdw2Lz
2/ This resembles combining multiple measures of ST reversal, momentum, and LT reversal (forecasts determined by walking forward rather than using signs from the full sample).
Unlike normal moving average signals, these are *cross-sectional.* More below:
https://t.co/wkIFLg9jtK
1/ Cross-Sectional and Time-Series Tests of Return Predictability: What Is the Difference? (Goyal, Jegadeesh)
— Darren \U0001f95a (@ReformedTrader) June 18, 2019
"The difference between the performances of TS and CS strategies is largely due to a time-varying net-long investment in risky assets."https://t.co/CSIn3ujN2R pic.twitter.com/XHnVmIart4
3/ Unsurprisingly, the Trend factor formed by this approach outperforms benchmarks in terms of both Sharpe ratio and tail metrics. It's combining momentum with two factors that are negatively correlated to it AND using multiple specifications.
More here:
https://t.co/x8Tloz3iyL
1/ An Executive Summary (in Tweet form) of our new paper
— Adam Butler (@GestaltU) March 27, 2019
Dual Momentum \u2013 A Craftsman\u2019s Perspective
Download here: https://t.co/Y9GlGNohBg
Everything that follows in this thread is based on HYPOTHETICAL AND SIMULATED RESULTS. pic.twitter.com/9m5YJnTdtq
4/ "Average return and volatility of the trend factor are both higher in recession periods. However, the Sharpe ratio is virtually the same.
"Interestingly, all of the factors still have positive average returns.
"Momentum experiences the greatest increase in volatility."
5/ "In terms of maximum drawdown and the Calmar ratio, the trend factor performs the best.
"The trend factor is correlated with the short-term reversal factor (35%), long-term reversal factor (14%), and the market (20%) but is virtually uncorrelated with the momentum factor."
1/ To add a little texture to @NickHanauer's thread, it's important to recognize that there's a good reason why orthodox economists (& economic cosplayers) so vehemently oppose a $15 min wage:
The min wage is a wedge that threatens to undermine all of orthodox economic theory.
2/ Orthodox economics is grounded in two fundamental models: a systems model that describes the market as a closed equilibrium system, and a behavioral model that describes humans as rational, self-interested utility-maximizers. The modern min wage debate undermines both models.
3/ The assertion that a min wage kills jobs is so central to orthodox economics that it is often used as the textbook example of the Supply/Demand curve. Raise the cost of labor and businesses will buy less of it. It's literally Econ 101!
4/ Econ 101 insists that markets automatically set an efficient "equilibrium price" for labor & everything else. Mess with this price and bad things happen. Yet decades of empirical research has persuaded a majority of economists that this just isn't
5/ How can this be? Well, either the market is not a closed equilibrium system in which if you raise the price of labor employers automatically purchase less of it... OR the market is not automatically setting an efficient and fair equilibrium wage. Or maybe both. #FAIL
The min wage is a wedge that threatens to undermine all of orthodox economic theory.
1/4 Most people, especially academic economists, think that the controversy over the minimum wage is a contest over facts. It's not. It's a contest over power, status, and wealth. It is just like the contest over racial and gender justice.
— Nick Hanauer (@NickHanauer) January 17, 2021
2/ Orthodox economics is grounded in two fundamental models: a systems model that describes the market as a closed equilibrium system, and a behavioral model that describes humans as rational, self-interested utility-maximizers. The modern min wage debate undermines both models.
3/ The assertion that a min wage kills jobs is so central to orthodox economics that it is often used as the textbook example of the Supply/Demand curve. Raise the cost of labor and businesses will buy less of it. It's literally Econ 101!
4/ Econ 101 insists that markets automatically set an efficient "equilibrium price" for labor & everything else. Mess with this price and bad things happen. Yet decades of empirical research has persuaded a majority of economists that this just isn't
5/ How can this be? Well, either the market is not a closed equilibrium system in which if you raise the price of labor employers automatically purchase less of it... OR the market is not automatically setting an efficient and fair equilibrium wage. Or maybe both. #FAIL
