3 ms·

Has anyone done a study that maps voting machine software used vs. "polling error" in key states?

by ericb 6y ago

daxfohl 6y ago
Before 2016, polls were much more accurate. And paper ballots were the norm. So there's that.
- bpodgursky 6y ago
  ? A huge percent of ballots this year were mail-in, and all paper. And the polling error was worse in 2020 that 2016.
  - ericb 6y ago
    If I were going to try an influence an election via voting machine software, I would affect only some percentage of votes so it wouldn't be too obvious--if there was also mail in ballots, it wouldn't matter. I might also target only key locations--those on the margins where it wouldn't be suspicious. If I were to do this in favor of the Republican candidate, you'd probably find that mail-in votes even in non-pandemic years skewed more Democratic. You'd also find that polls seemed to indicate that Republican voters were "shy" and it keeps messing up the polls.
  - baldeagle 6y ago
    Were the mail in returns against the poll? Or only the in-persons? I know in my area of Texas, the mail-in returns were more Dem than the polls, but the in-persons were much more Rep. Could it be that one side focused on in-person voting and self selected into in person votes.... perhaps. Could it be hacking or other fraud, not very likely. Such accusations need a lot of support of proof, because faith in democracy depends on faith in elections. I don't think we're seeing enough proof anywhere. (I would look to any place that has a mandatory recount where ballots are hand counted). I don't think any Texas races were that close though.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > And the polling error was worse in 2020 that 2016. reply The votes haven't even been finished counting in 2020, and that there are shifts over time in the ratios is a well-noted phenomenon. While we're well past the point where that realistically effects the outcome, assessments of polling errors that don't effect the overall outcome may easily be premature (and those started getting made before the race was called, based on the then-current state of the count as if it was final.)
- majormajor 6y ago
  So you don't trust the results of the 2016 election? You think Trump stole it? (As far as I can tell, actually, 2012 pre-election polling was off by a few percentage points too, and showed Romney leading for most of October...)
  - ericb 6y ago
    > You think Trump stole it? Not the parent, but I think there's a difference between looking at a few datapoints that make you curious and jumping to "Trump stole it." As for 2012, who's to say they back the same party each time, or even that it is the same attacker? Certainly most on Hacker News know software can have vulnerabilities. In other words, there should be many scientific steps between "that's odd" to "hypothesis proven" otherwise it's just a conspiracy theory.
  - daxfohl 6y ago
    I'm merely quoting the article re pre/post 2016 polling accuracy. I'm not implying and wouldn't guess Trump stole it. If it was rigged, my guess would be that Putin rigged it without even caring whether Trump wanted to be president or not.
  - mjevans 6y ago
    I think the Electoral College 'stole' it, from the popular vote. I blame a combination of: advertisements :: all political ads should probably just be banned period misinformation on social media :: probably _some_ of which are foreign powers trying to divide the population of other nations Lack of IRV :: I'd prefer any IRV system over what we have now, though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method seems like a winner focused variation of eliminate the 'biggest looser' first and yield the winner IRV. The Electoral College :: for distorting the entire process and being non-necessary in the modern world. In the late 1700s when it was created the speed of communication was horseback letters and trans Atlantic sailing ships. It made sense to select a representative who would then travel in person to the core of politics, learn more, and possibly change their mind if the interests they represented were better served by another choice. The hyper-politicized, party focused, blindly following electors of today may as well not exist. To solve voter representation and choice I believe the US needs: 0) Go all mail in ballots everywhere, like Washington State https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx 1) IRV, preferably "beatpath method, beatpath winner, path voting, and path winner" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method 2) Remove the electoral college. Step A.1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta... Step A.2) Require all votes are counted everywhere. B) Constitutional amendment removing the Electoral College; and while we're at it, mandating IRV of some sort (and hopefully enumerating academic criteria of the method rather than enumerating specific methods). 3) A ban on all political ads and limits on campaign finance and PACs. 4) More voter (general populace) education, an informed public is an implicit requirement for a functional democracy. Probably also better info-graphics presenting 'the books' (money in, money out) about who's paying for what results.
- matthewbauer 6y ago
  2018 polls were pretty accurate IIRC. Lots of theories going around about how Trump uniquely screws up polling. Not a ton of evidence, but it is really surprising both 2016 and 2020 were off in the same direction. It could happen due to random chance of course. Too bad we probably will never see Trump on the ballot again to get any more data on this phenomenon.
  - peteradio 6y ago
    Buck up, he's got two politically active children! Maybe its genetic?
tshaddox 6y ago
I don't know, but I believe that the models used by major forecasting organizations like NYT and FiveThirtyEight do attempt to control for voting method.

Has anyone done a study that maps voting machine software used vs. "polling error" in key states?

by ericb 6y ago

Has anyone done a study that maps voting machine software used vs. "polling error" in key states?

daxfohl 6y ago

Before 2016, polls were much more accurate. And paper ballots were the norm. So there's that.

bpodgursky 6y ago
? A huge percent of ballots this year were mail-in, and all paper. And the polling error was worse in 2020 that 2016.
- ericb 6y ago
  If I were going to try an influence an election via voting machine software, I would affect only some percentage of votes so it wouldn't be too obvious--if there was also mail in ballots, it wouldn't matter. I might also target only key locations--those on the margins where it wouldn't be suspicious. If I were to do this in favor of the Republican candidate, you'd probably find that mail-in votes even in non-pandemic years skewed more Democratic. You'd also find that polls seemed to indicate that Republican voters were "shy" and it keeps messing up the polls.
- baldeagle 6y ago
  Were the mail in returns against the poll? Or only the in-persons? I know in my area of Texas, the mail-in returns were more Dem than the polls, but the in-persons were much more Rep. Could it be that one side focused on in-person voting and self selected into in person votes.... perhaps. Could it be hacking or other fraud, not very likely. Such accusations need a lot of support of proof, because faith in democracy depends on faith in elections. I don't think we're seeing enough proof anywhere. (I would look to any place that has a mandatory recount where ballots are hand counted). I don't think any Texas races were that close though.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > And the polling error was worse in 2020 that 2016. reply The votes haven't even been finished counting in 2020, and that there are shifts over time in the ratios is a well-noted phenomenon. While we're well past the point where that realistically effects the outcome, assessments of polling errors that don't effect the overall outcome may easily be premature (and those started getting made before the race was called, based on the then-current state of the count as if it was final.)
majormajor 6y ago
So you don't trust the results of the 2016 election? You think Trump stole it? (As far as I can tell, actually, 2012 pre-election polling was off by a few percentage points too, and showed Romney leading for most of October...)
- ericb 6y ago
  > You think Trump stole it? Not the parent, but I think there's a difference between looking at a few datapoints that make you curious and jumping to "Trump stole it." As for 2012, who's to say they back the same party each time, or even that it is the same attacker? Certainly most on Hacker News know software can have vulnerabilities. In other words, there should be many scientific steps between "that's odd" to "hypothesis proven" otherwise it's just a conspiracy theory.
- daxfohl 6y ago
  I'm merely quoting the article re pre/post 2016 polling accuracy. I'm not implying and wouldn't guess Trump stole it. If it was rigged, my guess would be that Putin rigged it without even caring whether Trump wanted to be president or not.
- mjevans 6y ago
  I think the Electoral College 'stole' it, from the popular vote. I blame a combination of: advertisements :: all political ads should probably just be banned period misinformation on social media :: probably _some_ of which are foreign powers trying to divide the population of other nations Lack of IRV :: I'd prefer any IRV system over what we have now, though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method seems like a winner focused variation of eliminate the 'biggest looser' first and yield the winner IRV. The Electoral College :: for distorting the entire process and being non-necessary in the modern world. In the late 1700s when it was created the speed of communication was horseback letters and trans Atlantic sailing ships. It made sense to select a representative who would then travel in person to the core of politics, learn more, and possibly change their mind if the interests they represented were better served by another choice. The hyper-politicized, party focused, blindly following electors of today may as well not exist. To solve voter representation and choice I believe the US needs: 0) Go all mail in ballots everywhere, like Washington State https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx 1) IRV, preferably "beatpath method, beatpath winner, path voting, and path winner" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method 2) Remove the electoral college. Step A.1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta... Step A.2) Require all votes are counted everywhere. B) Constitutional amendment removing the Electoral College; and while we're at it, mandating IRV of some sort (and hopefully enumerating academic criteria of the method rather than enumerating specific methods). 3) A ban on all political ads and limits on campaign finance and PACs. 4) More voter (general populace) education, an informed public is an implicit requirement for a functional democracy. Probably also better info-graphics presenting 'the books' (money in, money out) about who's paying for what results.
matthewbauer 6y ago
2018 polls were pretty accurate IIRC. Lots of theories going around about how Trump uniquely screws up polling. Not a ton of evidence, but it is really surprising both 2016 and 2020 were off in the same direction. It could happen due to random chance of course. Too bad we probably will never see Trump on the ballot again to get any more data on this phenomenon.
- peteradio 6y ago
  Buck up, he's got two politically active children! Maybe its genetic?

tshaddox 6y ago

I don't know, but I believe that the models used by major forecasting organizations like NYT and FiveThirtyEight do attempt to control for voting method.