Flutterby™! : Voting irregularities

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Voting irregularities

2003-10-10 15:31:21.352325+00 by Dan Lyke 3 comments

I don't have time to run the numbers today, but here's an interesting look at correlating candidates with counties using Diebold voting machines (via Ethel the Blog) in the recent California gubernatorial election. Anybody with a little more time wanna check the sources and the math?

[ related topics: Politics Mathematics California Culture ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: Voting irregularities made: 2003-10-11 18:52:27.10285+00 by: TheSHAD0W

Erm... I suspect it's more because people in "Democratic counties" were more likely to get confused and select multiple choices. No way to tell without re-examining the ballots.

#Comment Re: Voting irregularities made: 2003-10-11 19:14:32.479205+00 by: Dan Lyke

Dang, the "#" part of that link isn't working, so scroll down to the next entry, the one about the vote irregularities in Tulare county.

#Comment Re: Voting irregularities made: 2003-10-12 18:05:23.325918+00 by: Larry Burton

I have neither the time nor the inclination to crunch any numbers but these accusations are something that I knew were going to occur at every controversial election after the 2000 mess in Florida. I really don't think Diebold would risk losing the voting machine business, or for that matter the banking business, that would result in uncovering this sort of hanky-panky. The only motivation for a business to get involved in politics is to promote their business. Being discovered in this sort of endeavor would destroy Diebold's business. The risk isn't worth the potential benefits.

Neat conspiracy theory, though.