artist, mother, grandmother photo taker
Tucson, AZ
Joined March 2024
- Tweets74.6K
- Following733
- Followers3.2K
- Likes1.7K
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
🚨 WOW! Vivek Ramaswamy wins 100% PERCENT of Ohio counties in the governor GOP primary — and with nearly all of the vote counted, he has 82.5% of the vote
His opponent didn’t stand a CHANCE! 👏🏻
Time to keep Ohio red 🔥
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
Speaking as a computer scientist...
Note also that the numbers you referenced aren't all just 64-35, they're all 64.6 + or - 0.2, and 35.4 + or - 0.2. That's even more unlikely.
This is what happens when you don't pay attention in math class. Likely some corrupt programmer put in a random factor that he thought would alter the numbers, without making it look like it altered the numbers. Like (brain-dead example) "If this ballot was for the opponent, and the random number generator is greater than 0.6, then change it.". But he didn't bother to do the math, or he would have realized that if you use whatever that random element is, over enough cases, then the result converges on 64.6 and 35.4.
At least if I was going to vet the program that did this, then that's what I'd most expect to find. This is a typical undergrad mistake. Just because your algorithm has a randomizing element, that doesn't mean that the result isn't going to converge, over a large enough number of trials.
Also note that this kind of manipulation almost always leaves a footprint in the data. Statisticians who specialize in analyzing voting results know what properties honest results should have. Unless the corrupt programmer really knew what he was doing, they'll spot the strange results, and the nature of the strangeness will give them a strong clue as to what the programmer did.
HOLY CR*P 🚨 How is this even possible??
All of California’s major candidate election results are the EXACT SAME percentages for Democrats and Republicans
Governor 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Lieutenant Governor 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Secretary of State 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Controller 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Treasurer 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Attorney General 64% (D) vs 35% (R)
Supreme Court Justice: Joshua Groban 72% (D) vs 28% (R)
Supreme Court Justice: Kelli M. Evans 72% (D) vs 28% (R)
These don’t look like real election results, they look like a computer algorithm
Our elections are fake
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
This man is a Computer Scientist and he looked at my post regarding California’s identical election results for top government positions
🚨 He CONFIRMS from a computer scientist programming perspective how the results ARE FROM AN ALGORITHM, NOT REAL VOTE TOTALS 👇 IT’S RIGGED
Speaking as a computer scientist...
Note also that the numbers you referenced aren't all just 64-35, they're all 64.6 + or - 0.2, and 35.4 + or - 0.2. That's even more unlikely.
This is what happens when you don't pay attention in math class. Likely some corrupt programmer put in a random factor that he thought would alter the numbers, without making it look like it altered the numbers. Like (brain-dead example) "If this ballot was for the opponent, and the random number generator is greater than 0.6, then change it.". But he didn't bother to do the math, or he would have realized that if you use whatever that random element is, over enough cases, then the result converges on 64.6 and 35.4.
At least if I was going to vet the program that did this, then that's what I'd most expect to find. This is a typical undergrad mistake. Just because your algorithm has a randomizing element, that doesn't mean that the result isn't going to converge, over a large enough number of trials.
Also note that this kind of manipulation almost always leaves a footprint in the data. Statisticians who specialize in analyzing voting results know what properties honest results should have. Unless the corrupt programmer really knew what he was doing, they'll spot the strange results, and the nature of the strangeness will give them a strong clue as to what the programmer did.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
36 states held governor races. Of the 32 with county maps, 29 moved toward Democrats.
In 15 states, every single county shifted blue: 1,304 of 1,304. What are the odds? 🤔
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
KANSAS: THE 15% GAP, COUNTY BY COUNTY
The 15% gap held across the Senate map. Here’s Kansas, all 105 counties. 94% of counties fell within range: 99 of the 105.
Below the formula: Seward, Ford, Finney. Meatpacking counties in southwest Kansas.
Above the formula: Wallace, Sheridan, Jewell. Three of the reddest ranch counties in the state, about 90% Trump.
What the formula tells us: If a county is below the formula, the proportion of Democrats to Republicans who voted was higher than in 2024. If it’s above the formula, the proportion of Republicans to Democrats was higher than in 2024.
Why this matters:
This isn’t a statewide average hiding the normal county to county variation underneath. The same 15% shows up in counties with hundreds of voters and counties with hundreds of thousands of voters. The few that break from it break in predictable directions.
One rule works at the state level and the county level. That’s not what scattered voter decisions usually look like.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
TEXAS: THE 15% GAP, COUNTY BY COUNTY
The 15% gap held across the Senate map. Here’s Texas, all 254 counties. 97% of counties fell within range: 246 of the 254.
Below the formula: Starr, Zapata, Maverick, Webb, Hidalgo, Cameron, Duval, Jim Hogg. Border counties along the Rio Grande.
What the formula tells us: If a county is below the formula, the proportion of Democrats to Republicans who voted 🗳️ in that specific county was higher than in 2024. If it’s above the formula, the proportion of Republicans to Democrats was higher than in 2024.
Why this matters:
This isn’t a statewide average hiding the normal county-to-county variation underneath. The same 15% shows up in counties with dozens of voters and counties with more than a million. The few that break from it break in predictable directions.
One rule works at the state level and the county level. That’s not what scattered voter decisions usually look like.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
To everyone asking who is behind this account: I am an independent citizen with financial and legal experience. I am not a career politician or a corporate pollster.
When I noticed a strange consistency in the election data, I analyzed it and posted what I discovered.
I have proudly supported President Trump since the day he came down the escalator. To know that a pattern I shared is of interest to him is a humbling and surreal honor.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
A sign test of the Senate races
If 2026 had been a typical midterm, a near-sweep like this would happen about once in 3,800 tries.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
THE 15% BAND
Look at this chart.
59 races. Senate and governor.
States ordered from reddest to bluest in 2024.
The solid lines are 2024.
The dashed lines are 2026.
The shaded bands are what moved.
One formula fits all of it:
Republican 2026 = 0.85 × Trump 2024
Democrat 2026 = Harris 2024 + 0.15 × Trump 2024
For every 1,000 Trump points, 850 stayed Republican. 150 landed on the Democratic side.
The numbers:
Senate: Republicans kept ~85% of Trump’s share
Governor: ~86%
Variation explained: 88%
What makes it strange:
It didn’t matter how red the state was. Wyoming, Ohio, Illinois, Massachusetts: same 15% (p = 0.69). The Democratic gain was sized by Trump’s vote, not Harris’s. The Harris part is zero.
The 0.85 beat both standard election-swing models in every set of races.
Drop any single state and the multiplier stays between 0.846 and 0.853.
Why seats flipped:
At 0.85, any state where Trump got under about 58.5% falls below 50%. Texas, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, South Carolina, North Carolina: all under that line. All flipped.
What this means:
Midterms are messy. This one isn’t. Two sets of races, different candidates, different campaigns, and the same 15% decrease almost everywhere.
A pattern this even demands answers at the ballot level: paper ballot hand counts, poll-book check-ins against votes counted, and voter files showing who actually turned out.
The numbers raise the question.
The ballots can answer it.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
Very soon you will understand exactly why Maduro was captured and happily sings in a Brooklyn gaol❗️
Did you know 15 Venezuelan whistleblower engineers, who worked on the Smartmatic/Dominion systems, gave statements to U.S. agencies about how the worldwide voting machine scam worked❓
This is all going to be rather important. 😎
Enjoy ‘The Show’❗️
🎬 📽️ 🎟️ 🎞️ 🍿
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
🚨 BREAKING — MAJOR LEAKER CAUGHT: SecWar Pete Hegseth has revoked former Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall access to classified intel after he LEAKED "classified information" surrounding Air Force One's capabilities to the Fake News
FAFO! 🔥
Now PROSECUTE him for betraying America.
DOW: "Safeguarding classified information is a non-negotiable duty. Those who violate that trust forfeit the privilege of access and any role requiring it."
Every leaker must be caught and rooted out 👏🏻
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
Sooooo...this was probably coming for a while...
There were signs that @SusieWiles47 was actually "controlled opposition" for a while... @realDonaldTrump would make decisions and they would be instantly and irreversibility changed without the President's knowledge - I know this because I've spoken directly with people who have met with the President...
With @StephenM there is a chance to make up lost ground, move forward with investigations, institutional changes and policies that will continue to strengthen America...
Source: The beginning of the end for @SusieWiles47 came yesterday when the president shouted Wiles out of a staff meeting. After that, there was no coming back.
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
🚨🚨 DEMOCRACY FILES / THE ILLEGITIMACY PLAYBOOK, PART 15: HEGSETH'S IMPEACHMENT IS THE TROJAN HORSE. TRUMP IS THE REAL TARGET. 🚨
There is one fundamental principle of American military command:
Our military answers to civilian authority. And at the top of the chain of commands sits the President of the United States.
In other words, Pete Hegseth answers to President Donald Trump.
Pete Hegseth's articles of impeachments are that he is following unlawful orders issued by President Trump himself.
Senator Mark Kelly, the ringleader of the Seditious Six, says this explicitly.
According to Kelly, six of the eight articles of impeachment against Hegseth concern his alleged compliance with illegal orders from President Trump.
Read that again.
Six of eight articles are premised on that President Trump himself issued illegal orders.
Ask yourself this question:
If Hegseth needs impeachment for following Trump's alleged unlawful orders...
...
What does that imply about President Trump himself?
Exactly.
The goal of removing Hegseth has always been to remove Trump from office.
Hegseth is the opening move.
His entire downstream chain of command will be next.
This will be a single-handed turnover of the entire military structure, remade in the image of those who have been plotting against Trump all along.
Then the ultimate target: President Trump himself.
When I told you Hegseth was the only obstacle in a coup, I meant it.
Don't take my word for it. Watch them, in their own words:
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
🚨🚨 THE DEMOCRACY FILES / ILLEGITIMACY PLAYBOOK, PART 16: HOW THE MIDTERMS WERE PULLED OFF 🚨
Among today's talk of voter fraud, a critical role is overlooked: the importance of NGOs in early voting.
Below, I show the receipts where NGOs directly take a role in making the midterms happen.
It's been a long week, and I'm too tired to type up a summary.
Just know the two main points:
Republicans have an institutional blindness. They believe getting voters is all about branding and messaging. They pay enormous sums to consultants and TV ads and have endless conferences on what the right "message" is.
Democrats, meanwhile, have built an entire and expensive institutional machinery around getting people physically to the polls. And they were more motivated in 2026 than any other year.
I do NOT deny the existence of voter fraud. Saying the data doesn't show that others claim to show, is not equivalent to saying there is no fraud.
As I've said in several posts today, the election system in the United States is structurally set up such that citizenship verification is an honor system. The biggest swings in 2026 were among young people and Hispanics.
And 2026 was a concerted effort by NGOs like none other. Watch them in their own words how they pulled it off:
Kimberly Reeves retweeted
If this is proven true arrests need to be made!!
🚨TRUMP SHARES DEMOCRAT 85/15 CHEATING ALGORITHM USED IN THE MIDTERMS
By Jonathan Gregory @TrumpNews_Baby
Washington, DC - November 7, 2026
Donald Trump has shared the Democrats cheating algorithm they used in the midterms. The method is known as the 85/15 Algorithm. For every 1000 Trump votes 150 are algorithmically switched to Democrats. The same pattern appears in every state that went blue. The numbers match the final certified totals in multiple jurisdictions where the reported results diverged from the early returns.
The algorithm produces a consistent transfer that favors one party across different states and different races. Officials who certified the midterm results must now address how the identical ratio appeared in every state that flipped. The shared data places the precise formula into the public record for independent review. Voters who watched early leads disappear can now compare the 85/15 ratio against the published county returns.
The pattern repeats wherever the final margin required the additional votes. Americans who demand accurate elections now have the specific algorithm that Trump identified. The full set of midterm results must be reexamined against the 85/15 transfer rate. The consistent appearance of the same ratio across every blue state leaves the certified outcomes open to immediate challenge. The numbers do not vary by state size or by the type of race.
