NC Renegades

From the novel “Lucifer’s Hammer” concerning whether to keep the San Juaquin power plant operational after an apocalyptic hit by a comet. The character of Senator Jellison, with his dying breath, implores them to “give my children the lightning again.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We are at the precipice of worldwide destruction. It does not matter if the collapse of the world’s economy is the impetus for World War III or if war causes the economy to collapse. As much as I see hope of a Trump victory with his unity team of Tucker, Vivak, RJK Jr, Gabbard, Vance and Musk, the realist in me does not see a light at the end of the tunnel. In the United States, debt, corruption, immorality and a divided nation cannot be overcome by the corrupted cries for “democracy”. We were given a Republic that was based on morality.

Let’s be honest: this country is at war and it is the timeless war of good vs. evil. My goal in this war is to give our children Liberty and a better future. Evil has shown us how fragile these two goals are by attacking our children through education and gender ideology. Their future is bleak without God, education, morality and a good work ethic.

So how do I foresee a better future? Firstly, we must build upon a firm foundation to edify our people and government. I do not see how that goal can be achieved as the country is now organized. A breakup into smaller countries will allow a new beginning for some regions. Which will be the best region after the breakup? Whichever region includes Texas.

The reason is simple: I want my children to have the stars. Lightning (energy) is a key component for the future. Here are other key components:

1. Education based on Science, Technology and Math. Our children have been used as pawns to loot their future. Poor educational curricula, propaganda and poisoned nutrition are used to make and control feeble minds and bodies.
2. Work ethic. How many workfare / government jobs are destructive instead of constructive? If you end your day of work and cannot point to any productive end product, you are part of the problem. Consider the streamlining of Twitter after Elon Musk took over: 80% of the workforce was dismissed and the end product was improved. Imagine the potential of a workforce directed to constructive and productive goals.
3. The restoration of public virtue.
4. Starships, benevolent AI, cheap means of transportation, boring technology, battery storage, improved networks and communications, medical breakthroughs and robotics.
5. Hope.

Obviously item 4 is encompassed by Elon Musk’s series of achievements. A proven track record of success leads to item 5. There is nothing wrong in rewarding success, a work ethic and supporting a better future with structured goals.

So what do I want? I want the nation to divide into smaller geographic regions. Whichever region has Texas (or Elon Musk) will guide that region into economic success and give our children the ability to reach for the stars. It also allows him to run for President of that new country.

I pray that the Lord shows me the path that He has laid out for me. I pray for a moral and righteous country that will show the world what mankind is capable of becoming with the help of God.

David DeGerolamo

h/t Carolyn

h/t Jan

According to Grok:

The current population of Cherokee County, NC, as of the latest projections for 2024, is estimated to be 30,459.

I asked Grok how many people were registered to vote in Cherokee County but it declined and sent me to the North Carolina State Board of Elections site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

After downloading the voting information from the state for Cherokee County, I put it into an Excel Spreading and sorted by voter status. There are 21,762 “active” voters in the county.

I asked Grok “What was the average percentage population voting in presidential elections from 1900 thought 2000”?

Calculating the average voter turnout for U.S. Presidential Elections from 1900 through 2000 involves looking at the percentage of the voting-age population that voted in each election:

• 1900: 65.2%
• 1904: 65.4%
• 1908: 65.8%
• 1912: 58.8%
• 1916: 61.6%
• 1920: 49.2% (This low turnout is often attributed to the first election where women could vote, which might have affected the percentage due to organizational unpreparedness.)
• 1924: 48.9%
• 1928: 56.9%
• 1932: 56.9%
• 1936: 61.0%
• 1940: 62.5%
• 1944: 55.9% (Lower due to World War II)
• 1948: 51.1%
• 1952: 63.3%
• 1956: 60.6%
• 1960: 63.8%
• 1964: 61.8%
• 1968: 60.9%
• 1972: 55.2%
• 1976: 53.6%
• 1980: 52.6%
• 1984: 53.1%
• 1988: 50.1%
• 1992: 55.9%
• 1996: 49.0%
• 2000: 51.2%

To find the average turnout over this period:

1. Sum all the percentages: 65.2 + 65.4 + 65.8 + 58.8 + 61.6 + 49.2 + 48.9 + 56.9 + 56.9 + 61.0 + 62.5 + 55.9 + 51.1 + 63.3 + 60.6 + 63.8 + 61.8 + 60.9 + 55.2 + 53.6 + 52.6 + 53.1 + 50.1 + 55.9 + 49.0 + 51.2 = 1,585.3
2. Divide by the number of elections (26):
   1,585.3 / 26 ≈ 60.97%

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Grok:

If you’re interested in the percentage of registered voters who turned out to vote in those elections, those figures would be higher since they only account for people who could legally vote by being registered. However, exact figures for registered voter turnout for each year might not be as readily available or standardized historically due to changes in voter registration laws and practices over time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Grok:

For a rough projection: If we consider that about 70% of eligible voters are registered and take into account the historical turnout’s lower bound within that group, you might see around 40-50% of the total eligible population voting. This number implies a turnout of 57-71% of registered voters, assuming the 70% registration rate holds.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Based on 70% of registered voters actually voting, that means statistically 15,233 people should be voting in Cherokee County. When I went to vote yesterday in early voting for Trump, over 4000 people had already voted. In 2-1/2 days of early voting, over 25% of the active voters have already voted here based on historical data.

Since I had already received information that 70% of the population is eligible to vote and 70% of eligible voters actually vote, I applied this to the population and number of votes cast in the 2020 presidential election. I then asked for a p value based on 21 previous election ending in 2020 with a standard deviation 0.0358 compared to the 86.11% value of eligible voters voting in 2020.

From Grok:

If you have 20 data sets of data with a standard deviation of .0358 for an average of 0.7, what is the p value that a different set will be an average of .8611?

Answer
To find the p-value for an average of 0.8611 given a dataset with an average of 0.7 and a standard deviation of 0.0358, follow these steps:

Calculate the p-value:

For a two-tailed test (assuming we’re interested in both tails for significance), you look for the probability associated with z≥∣4.5∣.

Using the standard normal distribution table or a calculator:

The cumulative probability for z=4.5 is extremely close to 1, practically ≈1.

The probability of z>4.5 or z<−4.5 (for a two-tailed test) is:
P(Z>4.5)≈0P(Z<−4.5)≈0

Since we’re considering both tails:p≈2×P(Z>4.5)≈2×0≈0

Interpretation:

A p-value of approximately 0 indicates that it is extremely unlikely (almost impossible, for practical purposes) to see an average of 0.8611 if the true population mean is 0.7 with a standard deviation of 0.0358. This suggests that such an occurrence would be considered highly significant or anomalous.

Remember, in practical terms, a p-value close to zero (like this) often indicates that either:

• The sample is from a different population with a different mean than expected.
• There’s an error in the data or assumptions (like the standard deviation or normality of distribution).

Given the context provided, if you’re working with real data, this extreme result might suggest reviewing your data collection method, assumptions about the population, or considering if there’s an external factor affecting this particular result.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In order words, the number of people who voted in the 2020 presidential election is not statistically possible.

The 2024 election is a cover up. It’s a cover up of the Barack Obama mystery identities, both his and Michelle’s. He’s a Kenyan president and if Kamala is somehow elected it will be the second president whose eligibility was never verified. It’s a cover up of the treason of elected officials, all of them, because they continue to play this ridiculous game where the opposition, even when in full power, are unable to secure the rights of the people. It’s somehow impolitic to do so.

It’s a cover up of the stolen election of 2020, which has now been verified by the audit in Arizona. There’s a court case involving the semis full of ballots, nine of them, that a judge is supposed to rule on and force the United States Post Office to turn over records of the particulars of that. This is no longer a question of a stolen election, something that could be proven by the open election interference admitted to by Mark Zuckerberg and other media outlets that branded certain claims “misinformation” when it was proven they were true.

It’s a cover up of our politicians being unable to prevent a stolen election and unable to determine the truth. The sole focus of our elected officials is to get to another Continuing Resolution (CR) which is code for spending our tax dollars without accountability for the insane insertions of text that are little else than a slap in the face of the hard working people that make it all possible.

The 2024 election is following familiar patterns for cheating already in Georgia, where the Republican officials are much more interested in cheating than following the law. The Biden Administration’s DOJ has sued Virginia to keep ineligible voters on the rolls. If the American people ever needed justification for disobedience, this certainly seems like enough. But wait, there’s more!

Please Read the Whole Article Here…