5 ms·

Absolutely fascinating research! I wonder if someone has some free time to run the models on several recent elections that were filled with fraud. I'm interest

by Jerry2 10y ago

Absolutely fascinating research! I wonder if someone has some free time to run the models on several recent elections that were filled with fraud. I'm interested in: Austrian presidential elections [0], Turkish elections [1] and Democratic party primaries [2][3]. Each of them was analyzed for voting fraud and fraud was found in each of them (some were full of massive vote fraud like Turkish elections). PS: What's with all the downvotes? Is the evidence of massive voter fraud in the West so unsettling that you have to downvote me? [0] >Austria presidential poll result overturned http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36681475 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36681475 [1] >Turkey Elections Massive Vote Fraud https://erikmeyersson.com/2015/11/04/digit-tests-and-the-peculiar-election-dynamics-of-turkeys-november-elections/ https://erikmeyersson.com/2015/11/04/digit-tests-and-the-pec... [2] >Hillary Clinton Favored By Election Fraud In Democratic Primaries http://www.inquisitr.com/3127046/hillary-clinton-favored-by-election-fraud-in-democratic-primaries-federal-lawsuit-filed-against-officials-to-protect-california-primaries/ http://www.inquisitr.com/3127046/hillary-clinton-favored-by-... [3] >Election Fraud Watch 2016 (J: awesome blog that tracks election fraud in primaries) https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/ https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/

tripzilch 10y ago
> Is the evidence of massive voter fraud in the West so unsettling that you have to downvote me? Not downvoting you. But if fraud turns out to be the case, I'm going to be unsettled as hell. It should be unsettling if you live and/or care about democracy in the West, obviously. I doubt we disagree about this though :) But even if no fraud is suspected or if it finds nothing, this is data science. Unlike say medicine or food science, there's no shortage of data (in theory). So if there's a country that we can reasonably be sure about their democracy is entirely above the table[0], throw it into the test and use that to calibrate the others. One problem I believe is that there is no such thing as "the test" :-) This research was done based in a particular system of elections--if you look beyond your own democratic system (or the way you've learned in school how it's supposed to work), you'll know how insanely different they all are. The fact that we actually use a single word "democracy" to describe them all is pretty crazy, now that I think about it. Both the numbers themselves (what aggregate counts are available) and the specific way of fraud suspected (which you kind of need for a statistical hypothesis) depend heavily on the democratic system involved. For instance that messy thing with the US elections a while back, second term of Bush IIRC, whether there was fraud or not, it was fought over a couple of hundreds of votes in one district or county, was it not? To disappear or push a few hundred votes one way or another requires a different type of fraud, and therefore statistical testing, than say, the type of fraud that makes a whole country of several hundred million almost always divide their votes between two options so close to 50/50 that a few hundred votes can swing the outcome in the first place. And that's just one country. So much different creative ways to mess up whatever is locally deemed to constitute democracy, you probably need at least an equal amount of different creative ways to statistically test whether they're fraudulent or not. [0] come to think of it, maybe there is a shortage of data ...
conistonwater 10y ago
Wasn't [2] already refuted? E.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/upshot/exit-polls-and-why-the-primary-was-not-stolen-from-bernie-sanders.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/upshot/exit-polls-and-why-...
- Jerry2 10y ago
  Refuted? Which instance? There was so many of them. Go check out this series of posts to see corruption in action: https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/ https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/
  - conistonwater 10y ago
    As the NYTimes article points out, a discrepancy between exit polls and results (the main claim of the article you linked to) is not evidence of fraud, rather of the quality of exit polling, which is subject to a number of biases. If those biases are not correctly eliminated, the results will differ. Also, with due respect, that blog looks rather crackpotty. As if anyone should be surprised that a leftie social democrat wouldn't do well in a US election.
sampo 10y ago
Austria is actually not suspecting any fraud. About 100 000 postal ballots were counted not fully following the protocol demanded by law, and the elections were decided by a difference of about 30 000 voted. They have no evidence or suspicion of actual fraud, but the legitimacy of the result can still be questioned, so they decided to re-run the elections.
exabrial 10y ago
The Sanders movement, even though I disagreed with his platform, was true grassroots democracy: Common people getting organized and trying to make a change. I don't care if I get down voted into oblivion for saying this next part: When looking at the spread between the types of polls, there is a massive difference between the voting elite and the people's will. I don't advocate against the electoral college, but what was supposed to be system that prevented buyouts has proven to be completely forsale by the Clintons. I didn't see massive pro-Clinton rallies. We had quicker investigations into Samsung VS Apple for inconsequential things. No one has been held accountable and no explanations have been given for massive breaches of protocol other than its a plot by the Repuglicans. I'm tired of everything from the Clinton family. My state KS has a good chance to throw electoral votes at Gary Johnson. Please California if you are listening, don't reward this family for their actions.
- zghst 10y ago
  I'm with you buddy
- fidget 10y ago
  Rallies aren't a very good indicator of popular support. Having 4 million or so more votes is.
  - empath75 10y ago
    See also: Howard Dean, 2004
- tanderson92 10y ago
  The electoral college plays no role in the primary nominating process.
- empath75 10y ago
  If you really think that Clinton didn't get the votes she got fairly, you're living in a bubble. Sanders supporters have this problem of forgetting that women and minorities exist. (I can't stand the Clintons, but I don't think they cheated)
nzjrs 10y ago
You are off the mark with Austria I'm afraid.
podmosk 10y ago
(another author here) I doubt you will find this specific anomaly in US or even Turkey (at least I see nothing in my graphs for 2014 Turkey presidential elections). I'd say this type of falsification is a reminiscence of the purely fictional Soviet elections with their 99% turnout and 99% for the only official candidate. A similar pattern is seen, e.g., in Azerbajcan 2013 presidential election (dozens of precincts reporting identical, albeit in this case non-round, percentages for the incumbent).

by Jerry2 10y ago

tripzilch 10y ago

> Is the evidence of massive voter fraud in the West so unsettling that you have to downvote me? Not downvoting you. But if fraud turns out to be the case, I'm going to be unsettled as hell. It should be unsettling if you live and/or care about democracy in the West, obviously. I doubt we disagree about this though :) But even if no fraud is suspected or if it finds nothing, this is data science. Unlike say medicine or food science, there's no shortage of data (in theory). So if there's a country that we can reasonably be sure about their democracy is entirely above the table[0], throw it into the test and use that to calibrate the others. One problem I believe is that there is no such thing as "the test" :-) This research was done based in a particular system of elections--if you look beyond your own democratic system (or the way you've learned in school how it's supposed to work), you'll know how insanely different they all are. The fact that we actually use a single word "democracy" to describe them all is pretty crazy, now that I think about it. Both the numbers themselves (what aggregate counts are available) and the specific way of fraud suspected (which you kind of need for a statistical hypothesis) depend heavily on the democratic system involved. For instance that messy thing with the US elections a while back, second term of Bush IIRC, whether there was fraud or not, it was fought over a couple of hundreds of votes in one district or county, was it not? To disappear or push a few hundred votes one way or another requires a different type of fraud, and therefore statistical testing, than say, the type of fraud that makes a whole country of several hundred million almost always divide their votes between two options so close to 50/50 that a few hundred votes can swing the outcome in the first place. And that's just one country. So much different creative ways to mess up whatever is locally deemed to constitute democracy, you probably need at least an equal amount of different creative ways to statistically test whether they're fraudulent or not. [0] come to think of it, maybe there is a shortage of data ...

conistonwater 10y ago

Wasn't [2] already refuted? E.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/upshot/exit-polls-and-why-the-primary-was-not-stolen-from-bernie-sanders.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/upshot/exit-polls-and-why-...

Jerry2 10y ago
Refuted? Which instance? There was so many of them. Go check out this series of posts to see corruption in action: https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/ https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/
- conistonwater 10y ago
  As the NYTimes article points out, a discrepancy between exit polls and results (the main claim of the article you linked to) is not evidence of fraud, rather of the quality of exit polling, which is subject to a number of biases. If those biases are not correctly eliminated, the results will differ. Also, with due respect, that blog looks rather crackpotty. As if anyone should be surprised that a leftie social democrat wouldn't do well in a US election.

sampo 10y ago

Austria is actually not suspecting any fraud. About 100 000 postal ballots were counted not fully following the protocol demanded by law, and the elections were decided by a difference of about 30 000 voted. They have no evidence or suspicion of actual fraud, but the legitimacy of the result can still be questioned, so they decided to re-run the elections.

exabrial 10y ago

The Sanders movement, even though I disagreed with his platform, was true grassroots democracy: Common people getting organized and trying to make a change. I don't care if I get down voted into oblivion for saying this next part: When looking at the spread between the types of polls, there is a massive difference between the voting elite and the people's will. I don't advocate against the electoral college, but what was supposed to be system that prevented buyouts has proven to be completely forsale by the Clintons. I didn't see massive pro-Clinton rallies. We had quicker investigations into Samsung VS Apple for inconsequential things. No one has been held accountable and no explanations have been given for massive breaches of protocol other than its a plot by the Repuglicans. I'm tired of everything from the Clinton family. My state KS has a good chance to throw electoral votes at Gary Johnson. Please California if you are listening, don't reward this family for their actions.

zghst 10y ago
I'm with you buddy
fidget 10y ago
Rallies aren't a very good indicator of popular support. Having 4 million or so more votes is.
- empath75 10y ago
  See also: Howard Dean, 2004
tanderson92 10y ago
The electoral college plays no role in the primary nominating process.
empath75 10y ago
If you really think that Clinton didn't get the votes she got fairly, you're living in a bubble. Sanders supporters have this problem of forgetting that women and minorities exist. (I can't stand the Clintons, but I don't think they cheated)

nzjrs 10y ago

You are off the mark with Austria I'm afraid.

podmosk 10y ago

(another author here) I doubt you will find this specific anomaly in US or even Turkey (at least I see nothing in my graphs for 2014 Turkey presidential elections). I'd say this type of falsification is a reminiscence of the purely fictional Soviet elections with their 99% turnout and 99% for the only official candidate. A similar pattern is seen, e.g., in Azerbajcan 2013 presidential election (dozens of precincts reporting identical, albeit in this case non-round, percentages for the incumbent).