“SO YOU’RE SAYING THERE’S A CHANCE?” Just How Lucky is Arizona Squatter-Governor Katie Hobbs?

We are expected to believe the following set of facts regarding the recent gubernatorial race in AZ:

Official Arizona Gubernatorial Results

So across Arizona, 51.2% of voters favored Katie Hobbs.

That came from reading 1,328,695 ballots that went straight through the machines, and another 214,371 ballots that had to be adjudicated (because of whatever causes adjudications: imperfect ovals, stray marks, and so on and so forth).

Let us treat this like a coin-flipping contest with two rules:

  1. Every time we flip the coin and it comes up Heads, we give Katie Hobbs a vote. But we are using a specially-weighted coin that comes up “Heads” 51.2% of the time (not just 50%). This reflects the extra edge Katie has in Arizona (per official results).
  2. We are going to flip the coin 214,371 times.

We should expect Katie to win 51.2% X 214,371 = 109,758 times.

Imagine Katie is so lucky she wins many more times than expected: 133,850.

How far a departure from the expected outcome is that?

133,850 actual wins – 109,758 expected wins = 24,092 variance from expected outcome

So Katie won an extra 24,092 times. Precisely how lucky is Katie?

To know that, we must calculate the Standard Deviation, which is the probability of a Heads X the probability of a Tails X the number of flips, and then that quantity square-rooted.

51.2% X 48.8% X 214,371 = 53,562

And the square root of 53,562 is roughly 231.

So a Standard Deviation = 231

How vast is Katie’s luck?

24,092 (Katie’s variance from expected) divided by 231 (the size of a Standard Deviation) = 104

For Katie to win 24,092 times more than expected in this coin-flipping contest is an event of 104 Standard Deviations (also known as “a 104-sigma event”).

Expressing the odds of such an event is not easy.

Here are the odds for/against events of lower Standard Deviations:

Standard Deviations express the odds OF an event occurring and (thus) the odds AGAINST it occurring

Here is how to read that (remembering that “Sigma” means “Standard Deviation”):

The odds of a 1 – Sigma event are 33.5%.

So the odds of it happening are about 1 in 3.

The odds of a 2 – Sigma event are 4.7%.

So the odds of it happening are 1 in 21.

The odds of a 3 – Sigma event are .277%.

So the odds of it happening are 1 in 361.


The odds of an 8 – Sigma event are .00000000000000125%.

So the odds of it happening are 1 in 800 trillion.

The odds of a 10 Sigma event are 1 in 65 million trillion.

And so on and so forth, until we get all the way to Katie Hobbs’ luck:

The odds of an event of 104 Standard Deviations can be written 1 in:





In sum, if we are to believe the official narrative:

Katie Hobbs has the support of 51.2% of Arizonians. Half-filled in ovals and stray marks caused 214,371 ballots to need to be adjudicated. Katie won not 51.2% of those, but 62.4%. The odds of that kind of luck are 1 in 4 trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion.

So your saying there’s a chance?

  1. “Let us treat this like a coin-flipping contest”
    I agree with your conclusion, but I believe the argument is flawed because it is a false analogy. Adjudicating ballots is nothing like a flipping a coin.
    And if these adjudications were legit, then they should have landed with Kari by lopsided margins, which demonstrates the flaw in the argument. I do not believe this is a 50-50 proposition.

    1. You’re missing his point. He extrapolates an average based on her total votes. She averaged 51.2% of 1.543 million total voters. However, she average 62.4% of the 214,xxx adjudicated votes? It’s doesn’t make sense. Especially considering we know most of the adjudicated ballots came Election Day, due to the tabulator issues, which were heavy Lake (R) voters.

      But even if you ignore that and pretend the 214,xxx ballots that had to be physically determined by a person were from the entire voting period, and went to Katie Hobbs 62.4% of the time when she only averaged 49.4% of 650,000, it still make zeros sense.

      It’s impossible statistically, as was Bidens if you really dig into the data. You need to understand stats which you clearly don’t. People vote very similarly across the country, not just in AZ. To have such a small subset of the total votes, 214,xxx go 62.4 percent to Hobbs is like winning the Mega Millons lottery twice a week, every week, for an entire year. 51.2% should be steady across all 1.534 million votes.

      Meaning if you broke out the entire 1.534 million votes into 3 buckets of approximately 510,000 votes, Katie Hobbs percentage across all three should be similar (i.e. 51.2%, 50.2%, and 52.2%). To have won 62.4% of such a small subset of the overall total votes (14%) is just not possible.

      Furthermore, when looking into voter demographics, FL is very similar to AZ. Statistically speaking, it’s impossible to have the results in FL favor Rs so heavily and not see similar voting trends in AZ. There are simple reasons people are questioning these results and it has nothing to do with politics. It’s about our transparency in elections.

      Not allowing the people to audit these results make it even worse. And if you say 2020 was audited, then you only watched MSM and have no clue what was allowed to be looked at and what wasn’t. There was a significantly reduced scope of limitations.

      1. Dumbs? Was it 214,000 adjudicated votes or 214,xxx? After all, 214,xxx could mean just 214 votes, all coming from the same precinct, full of TRUMP HATERS. Which means the distribution assumption of the “model” is WRONG.
        Mr. Dumb

        1. I’m currently generating over $35,100 a month thanks to one small internet job, therefore I really like your work! I am aware that with a beginning cdx05 capital of $28,800, you are cdx02 presently making a sizeable quantity of money online.

          Just open the link——————————->>> http://Www.Coins71.Com

    2. I make over thirty k a month working part-time. q10 I kept hearing from other people telling me how much money they could make online, so I decided to find out. rf1 Well, r4 it was all true and it completely changed my life.s

      This is where I started… http://ezywork1.blogspot.com

      1. That would be a great idea if they were facts, but either Patrick is playing us or he is himself being played. The numbers he is using don’t exist, and his math is based on the assumption that voting percentages are the same across the state and the adjudicated ballots are selected randomly, both of which are false. Garbage in, garbage out,.

        1. So, basically you are saying Hobbs voters are consistently so stupid they can’t fill out a ballot correctly…you are also missing the point. Using the aggregate #s, one can run this method to determine the size of the anomaly as a start for an investigation. When you add in the fact her votes came later, it’s a no brainer there is fraud here.

  2. Dr B

    We are holding mock paper count elections. Honing the process. To rebut our election commission who says paper counting would be a nightmare. Time to make it real !

    Come be our guest of honor as we fine tune our series of mock paper-counted elections.

    telegram @papervote

  3. We need a lot more information to know if Patrick is on to something here.

    Yes, if elections were decided with coin flips using a weighted coin that gives one candidate a tiny edge, and if the same coin was used across the entire state, and if the adjudicated ballots were representative of the whole set of ballots cast, there is no way there would be such a big discrepancy in vote percentages between the 2 candidates, in the two sets of votes, by chance.

    However the adjudicated ballots were NOT selected randomly, so there could be several legitimate reasons why they are not representative of the total pool of votes. Voters are people, not coins to be tossed, and their demographics vary across districts, and there was some variability of the quality of the printed ballots andor sensitivity of the vote counting machines across districts. So if there was a poorly printed form or poorly calibrated vote counting machine in a heavily democratic district, then the adjudicated votes would lean democrat and would not be representative of the whole collection of ballots. Or if there are a lot of elderly or disabled people who vote democrat and have some dexterity issues with filling out ballots, again the adjudicated ballots would skew democrat. Finally, is Patrick even doing his calculations using valid data, or did he get it from some third party who has manipulated it to manufacture a false story?

    I’m withholding judgement until I know more.

  4. Patrick, you really, really, really need a fact checker!!!! (It can’t all fall on me!)

    Across Arizona the total number of gubernatorial votes cast were Hobbs: 1,287,891 Votes (Leading by 17,117) and Lake: 1,270,774 Votes, for a statewide total of about 2.56 million votes cast https://results.arizona.vote/#/state/33/0. The numbers you are using (1.5 million), more or less match just Maricopa county. I’ve searched the Arizona government website for get more information on the numbers you cite for vote adjudication, and I can’t find anything. However, according to another source (https://www.abc15.com/news/state/audit-of-maricopa-county-finds-disaffected-republicans-a-major-factor-in-gop-statewide-losses) there were about 18,000 adjudicated gubernatorial ballots in Maricopa county, which contains well over half the state’s population, so the notion that there were 214,000 adjudicated votes statewide is laughable. Whoever gave you those numbers just made them up.

    This is getting ridiculous, and it would be hilarious if it weren’t for the vast number of people who actually believe this bullshit.

    1. That´s what I thought too. 214,000 ballots is a whole lot of adjudicating.
      And even if it were true, you can´t just assume the distribution is always 49.4 to 50.6. Dumb.

      1. Yep.
        You know, I repeatedly harrassed Patrick about false videos he was posting about Ray Epps, and I don’t know if he listened, but I do know he slyly took those videos down with no apology and explanation. I’m betting the same happens with this one.
        Of course, if this post disappears, this comment will as well, lol

        1. 3 days since I made this prediciton. However I noticed on Rumble Patrick is shown making the same statistical argument, but with completely different numbers – probable the correct total of 2.5 million votes cast statewide; and now claiming 400,000+ adjudicated, which once more seems to be an imaginary number. I also see Lake challenged the vote in front of a Republican-appointed judge who ruled against her. There are hours of trial testimony on Youtube, and I don’t have time to watch and see if the number of adjucated ballots is testified to.

        2. No, you’re simply an insufferable blowhard and sophist, like so many of the “fact checking” services. Epps is undoubtedly guilty of more than many people rotting in prison (some without a speedy trial) for the most minor of offenses.

          1. Patrick posted two videos where he showed someone who WAS NOT Epps, ranting on the capitol steps, trying to rile up the crowd. Several people, not just me, pointed out his error, so he first added a weasly disclaimer that he “believed” the person was Epps. However he later took down those videos with no comment. This is factual.

            In this post, he does a mathematical exercise to show that Hobbs could not have won. However he is using false numbers and wrong assumptions. By now, I assume a few people he actually listens to have told him, including some other posters here, so again, a factual error, so I’m still counting down for this post to be pulled.

            See you on the other side.

    1. The 1.5 million total is about right for just Maricopa, but the 214,371 number for adjudicated ballots, seems to have been pulled out of thin air (or some orifice). Another source suggests there were about 18,000 adjudicated ballots for Maricopa (which would extrapolate to about 30,000 for the state if the rate were the same) and most of them couldn’t be processed by the machines because they were either deliberately spoiled by the voters, or left blank for Governor, so the number of actual certified votes for either candidate that came though adjudication, would be in the hundreds, or at most low thousands, but not hundreds of thousands.

      Patrick’s essay is complete garbage. He continues to disappoint. He needs a fact checker, and to disassociate himself from the liars who provide him with false data.


      1. You are relying on The Audit Guys who basically verified garbage in, garbage out. They had no way of knowing if the “legally registered voters” were dead or moved, and someone else filed their ballot. The peeps who manually went house to house found a large number of ballots being sent to vacant lots as just one example. IMO-their ‘audit’ was seriously flawed. Plus the Scottsdale Paradise Valley area is more Republican and were anxious to vote for Trump and Lake. Something very hinky with their conclusion.

  5. Does anyone really believe that Biden got 12 Million more votes than Obama did in 2008 yet Obama won hundreds of more counties?

    Regardless,i think a growing number of people who actually DID vote for Biden are realizing they owe their fellow countrymen an apology,although most are too proud to apologize.

    Luckily,you can vote with your wallet and attention every day by boycotting apple,google,facebook,,amazon,microsoft,paypal,CNN,,MSNBC,MSM and other big tech/media/finance/pharma (including not owning their stocks) to counter their censorship and corruption.

    Imagine if a million or more people sold their shares of big tech/media/pharma stocks/ETFs & mutual funds to counter censorship and corruption and invested in pro-freedom companies,like Rumble,as one example.

    That could send a LOUD message and change the world .

    We The People can take simple,peaceful actions to make positive change immediately WITHOUT waiting for help from politicians.

    Money talks and it can be used for positive change in contrast to all the bad things it is also used for.
    In a sense,this is like using one of the devil’s weapons against the devil.

    I believe Rumble is a great example for a pro-freedom stock for people to engage and invest in because the shareholders can also directly contribute to the success of the company by posting content,especially video content that currently is lacking from Rumble,like music,do-it-yourself,educational videos and other categories .

    IMO,things won’t change much until enough people unite behind principles like truth/freedom/goodwill/integrity/humility/Non-Aggression Principle/Golden Rule and become an economic and ethical force. Peace.

    1. The USA population grew by 27 million between 2008 and 2020, so yeah, Biden could get millions more votes than Obama without winning more counties. A lot more democrat votes come from huge urban counties and there is an ongoing migration (more by liberals) to urban areas, so of course he could lose votes in a ton of tiny (by population) shrinking rural counties and more than make up for it by gaining votes in a small number of massive counties.

      1. Sorry, it grew by 25 million. Turnout also went up from 62.5% in 2008 to 66.8% in 2020. So both candidates would get millions more votes than their counterparts 12 years earlier.

      2. As someone who did not vote for Biden or Trump,there is no way I am going to accept the huge discrepancy regarding Obama winning hundreds of more counties than Biden as simply migration by “liberals” to urban areas.

        The bottom line is we have no way of knowing if our votes were counted accurately or how many fraudulent votes were committed in any election.I think the only solution are elections that overcompensate in favor of proving accuracy,legality and transparency of the votes to settle the issue so people can stop arguing about that and start debating specific policies and positions.

        And I doubt that most politicians of either party would agree with that because I don’t believe they have any interest in actually being a “public servant”,but in reality are actually self servants and crony servants.

        Regarding the election in Arizona in 2022, it’s pathetic that people are so biased that they believe it acceptable for vote counts to take a week, just as long as their favorite team wins.

        When the Constitution of the USA was written there were no political parties.
        I think it was MUCH better that way.

    1. Margaret,maybe you should run for office at this point as you seem to have an equal amount of integrity as our current “representatives”,which is close to zero.
      However,anyone can change for the better and I hope you do too.

      I sincerely wish you well in your journey.Peace

  6. Pollsters do not interview 1.3m actual voters of all demographics across the entire state. They interview a few hundred, maybe a few thousand and extrapolate their prediction from their small sample size. Statistically, the perceived accuracy of their prediction is a function of their sample size. The bigger, the better. A poll with 1.3m respondents (like the results of the ballots not needing adjudication, above) would be expected to be extremely accurate to the point of almost exactness. Any batch of ballots randomly selected for non partisan factors, such as stray marks or partially filled ovals or bleed through or whatever, as opposed to demographics or location, would be expected to match almost exactly our huge 1.3m sample poll. So, those ballots should have broke 50.6% for Lake. Patrick was being overly generous by using the “official” final results for his calculation.

    I stopped trusting election results in 2018 when Katie Porter lost on Election Day only to be declared the winner over a week later, after the mail in ballots that arrived after Election Day broke in favor of Porter by a totally implausible degree. Do they really think we are that stupid? I guess they do.

  7. Maybe this can be explained in basic terms. The premise is flawed? It is not merely a coin toss. Democrats are so incompetent that they can’t even fill out an election ballot correctly. Republicans, on the other hand, are not inflicted by the same disability. Hence the difference.

  8. Looks to me like box 3 got flipped to Hobbs, which was the purpose of shrinking the ODF in the first place. Lake won the nonadjudicated ballots, which either implies they cheated or the Hobbs voters were significantly more likely to make a mistake than Lakes supporters. I would like to see the Std deviation on that idea.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous Article

Patrick Byrne Testimony to J6 Committee

Next Article

The Unbearable Lightness of Being... a Mainstream Journalist (Michelle Smith, Associated Press)

Related Posts