Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 9:50:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 2:58:21 GMT
link
Holy Cow! Just when you think this election couldn't get any crazier. The University of Michigan Center for Computer Security has suggested possible electronic voter irregularities in WI, PA, & MI. There are 3 of the 4 states Hillary was predicted to win and lost by a narrow margin. These states are the reason Hillary lost the election. The Clinton campaign is being urged to pay for a recount in these 3 states. At this point Hillary leads in the popular vote by 1.7 million votes. In CA alone there are still 2m votes to be counted. The the vast majority of these votes will go to Hillary which will push her lead over Trump close to 3m if not over. Because of the lead in the popular vote by Hillary. Because of the small margin of victory by Trump in these three key states. And because of the feeling Bush stold the election from Gore, who also won popular vote. I think the votes should be recounted to eliminate the speculation of "possible electronic voter irregularities ". Yes I want Hillary to win but there is no guarantee if the votes are recounted the outcome would change. But I think it's a big mistake to leave "possible electronic voter irregularities " hanging out there. I don't want to see another Bush/Gore. As a country we are more divided today then we were 16 years ago and we just don't need this. In my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on Nov 23, 2016 3:18:50 GMT
I agree.. recounts give us confidence in system.. (though personally..I think there should be a paper trail on all voting machines).
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 9:50:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 5:16:49 GMT
The only thing I would say about Nate Silver is his 538 along with other polls got the election wrong.
At this point his record of "getting it right" is not really.
So in spite of Nate's comment I would like to see the vote count in the three states in questions redone to put the suggestion of possible irregularities to bed.
|
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Nov 23, 2016 5:44:04 GMT
Why does Nate Silver talk about running regression analysis, but the tables he presents are for ANOVAs? Regression would be the correct way to control for variables like race and education, but those analyses are not regression. |
|
M in Carolina
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,128 
|
Post by M in Carolina on Nov 23, 2016 6:10:11 GMT
I also think that since recounts *can* be done more easily and quickly these days, that we should have it done. Especially because our election has been so nasty. I lived in Chicago for 8 years. The stories of political misdeeds in Chicago are legendary. I just found this article about The 1960 election. The joke is that the even the dead vote in Cook County. I myself was the victim of voter fraud. When dh and I moved to Schaumburg in Lake County from McHenry County, we got our new driver's licenses at the Secretary of State. When you do that, you can choose to be registered to vote at the same time. So we do that. But when it's time for the primary, we don't get our cards. So we call and are told we "aren't registered". So we couldn't vote. Later, when I was in the hospital again, I was talking to one of the orderlies who was taking me around for all the tests I needed. He volunteered with the Republican party there and was talking about voter fraud. I told him what had happened, and he said that we weren't the only ones. But we were Tammy Duckworth's district, and the Republican running against her was the sleaziest of sleazes. So for the first time I voted Democrat. I think she's awesome. So I'm actually glad I didn't vote for him in the primary before the stories of how horrible he was came to light. In my district, our ballots were filled in with pen like a scantron sheet, and then it got fed into this computer printer/fax machine looking machine. So I guess if most of the states have those machines, recounting will be a lot easier than counting buckets of chads... |
|
|
|
Post by peasapie on Nov 23, 2016 7:17:26 GMT
Why does Nate Silver talk about running regression analysis, but the tables he presents are for ANOVAs? Regression would be the correct way to control for variables like race and education, but those analyses are not regression. Because the intercept is the mean of the reference group. Regression and anova are two sides of the same coin, so inference can be drawn from one to the other, don't you think? |
|
TheOtherMeg
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,541
Jun 25, 2014 20:58:14 GMT
|
Post by TheOtherMeg on Nov 23, 2016 8:31:16 GMT
I agree.. recounts give us confidence in system.. (though personally..I think there should be a paper trail on all voting machines). I am an election official in my (Ohio) county. The voting machines absolutely have a paper trail. In fact, after the polls close, two tapes (printouts on what looks like adding machine paper) are run on each machine before each disc is removed and sealed in a locked, signed, and numbered pouch. One tape is signed by the precinct officials and sealed in an envelope. It, along with all the election paraphernalia, is taken straight to the county Board of Elections. The discs are collected and verified at the BoE immediately, and the data is sent to the state ASAP. It's a controlled kind of crazy excitement because everyone is keeping track of which counties have reported. Very exciting if you're into the process. The other tape, which is not signed by the precinct officials, is taped to a window or glass door of the polling location so it can be seen from the outside. This is done before the precinct officials and materials leave the polling location. Anyone can drive around to polling locations on election night and see exactly how voters in each location voted. (Vote totals for each candidate/issue only, no voter info.) Locations that have multiple precincts voting there (churches or schools that are large enough to handle it) have multiple tapes taped to the glass. I know this isn't how it's done everywhere. Even in Ohio, different counties use different systems. However, AFAIK, all systems have a paper trail and/or some way to verify results. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 9:50:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 8:53:40 GMT
I just saw a spreadsheet showing the total votes for Clinton and Trump broken down by state.
For the three states in question Trump beat Clinton by a total of 101,000 votes for all three states.
The three states in question have a total of 46 electoral votes. If a recount is done and it's found that Clinton won all three states she would then win the election.
How ironic. These three states were states she needed to win. She lost them by a total of 101,000 votes but yet is winning the popular vote by over 2M votes.
Based on this slim difference in totals now I really think there should be a recount.
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Nov 23, 2016 12:58:09 GMT
Why does Nate Silver talk about running regression analysis, but the tables he presents are for ANOVAs? Regression would be the correct way to control for variables like race and education, but those analyses are not regression. Can you help me understand what you just said? I'm totally lost, but interested. |
|
|
|
Post by scrapsotime on Nov 23, 2016 13:47:57 GMT
Why does Nate Silver talk about running regression analysis, but the tables he presents are for ANOVAs? Regression would be the correct way to control for variables like race and education, but those analyses are not regression. Can you help me understand what you just said? I'm totally lost, but interested. I'm glad I wasn't the only one. Way over my head. |
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Nov 23, 2016 16:24:44 GMT
Why does Nate Silver talk about running regression analysis, but the tables he presents are for ANOVAs? Regression would be the correct way to control for variables like race and education, but those analyses are not regression. Can you help me understand what you just said? I'm totally lost, but interested. There are different types of analysis of data to control for the impact variables (race, gender, education, type of voting) have on a dependent variable - in this case who one voted for. There are a variety of potential issues with these analyses. Why use less than 30 counties (they apparently used 28), when Wisconsin has 72 counties? In order to run a robust test, you want a minimum sample size of 30. Why not run it on the whole state, rather than just the larger counties if you want more confidence in your results? There is no justification given for limiting the sample. And who is to say that the demographics of people who live in large cities is identical to those who live in the smaller cities? How many variables did the look at and how many tests did they run? Given error in statistics, 5 out of 100 analyses run on a set of data will end up being significant purely by chance. That is why it is important to determine the analyses you are going to run ahead and time and limit it to that, rather than run series of tests to see if something/anything shows up significant. Maybe the stats reported mean something, but there isn't enough information given to determine that. It appears to be a case where someone throws out just a bit of data in a way that isn't easily understood by the lay public, hoping that they will just swallow it whole since they don't have the information to evaluate it. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 29, 2024 9:50:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2016 16:29:25 GMT
link
Last night when I posted the number votes Hillary lost by in three must win states, states that now have been suggested may of had some voter irregularities I just gave the total difference for all three states. Here is the breakdown per state based on the breakdown on the attached Vote Tracker. *Michigan - 16 Electoral votes Trump: 2,280,524 Clinton: 2,270,996 dif: 9,528 *Wisconsin - 10 Electoral votes Trump: 1,404,536 Clinton: 1,382,011 dif: 22,525 *Pennsylvania - 20 Electoral votes Trump: 2,930,082 Clinton: 2,861,117 dif: 68,965 Again it's been suggested there may have been electronic voter irregularities in these three states. The difference in total votes between Clinton and Trump is small enough that this suggestion should be checked out. These 3 states have a total of 46 electoral votes. Trump currently has 306 electoral votes and Clinton has 232. Moving the 46 electoral votes from one candidate to the other would change the outcome of the election. I'm not sure why the Clinton Campaign has not asked for a recount in these states in light of the suggestion. But I also think that because of the small difference in votes the states should automatically do a recount. I mean the difference in votes is small enough that it would fall in the margin of error range. And yes even after a recount the totals might not change or change enough to change the outcome of the election. But at least we would know. And we can then go back and stare in wonder at Trump as he explains how Presidents don't have conflict of interests especially when it comes to running a business and the country at the same time.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Nov 23, 2016 16:35:43 GMT
Why does Nate Silver talk about running regression analysis, but the tables he presents are for ANOVAs? Regression would be the correct way to control for variables like race and education, but those analyses are not regression. Because the intercept is the mean of the reference group. Regression and anova are two sides of the same coin, so inference can be drawn from one to the other, don't you think? Y'all are so sexy when you talk smart. |
|
Southern Side eyed Pea 
