dlakelan (dlakelan) wrote in dataheads,
dlakelan
dlakelan
dataheads

Don't have the time

I don't have the time to analyze this, but here's an interesting point.

The largest counties were more likely to vote kerry, but also more likely to have etouch voting. If etouch voting randomly exchanged bush/kerry votes with a small percentage (either due to normal malfunctions or due to malice) then the NUMBER of votes randomly exchanged towards bush would be more than the number randomly exchanged towards kerry, because the likelihood of an etouch voter intending to vote kerry was considerably higher.

This doesn't require malice, just normal malfunctions of touch screens when tens of thousands of people go to use them.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment
It would have to be a small percentage, or it would be noticed. If it were say 1 percent, then the largest counties together are say a million votes, one percent is only 10k votes, randomly switched, with a bias of .6 in favor of kerry, it's too few to matter.