3 ms·
It's too bad they don't disaggregate the data by state, instead assuming states which voted particular ways are equivalent. I guess that the Benford Law analysi
by anonymouskimmer 4y ago
It's too bad they don't disaggregate the data by state, instead assuming states which voted particular ways are equivalent. I guess that the Benford Law analysis wouldn't be as easy if they did due to the fewer number of counties to analyze per state?
So I wish they had instead grouped counties by how they voted (since certifying votes is done on the county level, typically), and run the analysis that way.
I'd also like to see an analysis based on county size (by population density, and by absolute population). As you get non-random effects based on density.
It's also interesting that in certain cases they use a 10%-level for confidence.
Edit to add a question: Does the registered voting population of these districts follow Benford's Law?
- gdavisson 4y agoI don't know about that particular analysis, but there've been a number of such claims that don't stand up (mostly because, as you ask, the districts themselves don't follow Benford's law). See, for example, "Inappropriate Applications of Benford’s Law Regularities to Some Data from the 2020 Presidential Election in the United States" by Walter R. Mebane, Jr. [0], and "Why do Biden's votes not follow Benford's Law?" by Matt Parker [1]. This fits the general pattern that there's been a lot of suspicion raised about fraud in the 2020 election, but none of it actually seems to pan out. [0] http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etx0k1nLn78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etx0k1nLn78
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoIt seems like the Benford's Law distribution should be adjustable by the specifics of its input data.