文学城论坛
+A-

教授已经在文章里解释了

CheGuevara 2024-07-15 18:33:48 ( reads)

“It was a stolen election. Based on the actual votes, Al Gore should have won going away, except for the discarding of ballots cast by Black voters who were 95% for Gore. I proved this in my report to the United States Commission on Civil Rights. One out of every nine to 10 ballots cast by a Black voter was thrown out, as opposed to one out of 50 cast by a white voter.

“Most of those were not so-called hanging chads. They were over-votes because Black people were told punch in Gore and then write in Gore, just to be sure, and those ballots were all discarded. Political scientists have since looked at the election and proved I was right. Al Gore, based on the intent of the voters, should have won by tens of thousands of votes.”

He adds: “I contend I was right about 2000 or at a minimum there was no right prediction. You could argue either way. I contend – and a lot of people agree with me – that I’m 10 out of 10. But even if you say I’m nine out of 10, that’s not bad.”

跟帖(7)

成功的花儿

2024-07-15 18:47:04

没有什么被偷的,他就是为了辩解自己预测的准确性。你不是在贴子里说2000年他说是小布什嬴吗?不是的!

CheGuevara

2024-07-15 18:58:03

改成戈尔了

成功的花儿

2024-07-15 19:03:13

希拉里与戈尔是同一种情况,如果您认为对戈尔的预测是对的话,对川普的预测就是错的,不管怎样都是9/10准确率!

数学博士

2024-07-15 20:00:21

希拉里输与戈尔输完全两码事, 根本不一样

成功的花儿

2024-07-15 20:21:43

请读新闻吧,人家新闻采访都是说他十次对九次的,没有一个新闻说他是连续九次都对的,新闻里也提到了希拉里与戈尔

成功的花儿

2024-07-15 20:23:21

既然是数学博士不要想当然!

成功的花儿

2024-07-15 20:25:36

其实十次对九次有很多解读的,如果去掉很明显谁都能确定的,对于不明显的,也许他的准确率只有50%