We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
I read the above two charts as saying in chart 1) that clinton's lead is positively correlated both with ward size and count method (machine).
Flipping count method virtually eliminates any correlation between Clinton's lead and ward size.
Ergo - Clinton's lead is actually correlated with ward size, but because that also correlates with count method, it has been confused with the correlation with count method.
Therefore there is no count method fraud.
But why is there such a strong correlation between ward size and clintons's lead? Can it be explained by demographics, or is it easier to stuff (and hide the stuffing) of a ballot box with extra ballots in a larger ward?
However, for the correlation between Clinton's lead and count size to be so "smooth", the amount of stuffing would also have to be proportionate to ward size. Do we really think that a fraudster would be that resourceful and clever?
I vote demographic factors...as the more likely explanation, but which ones? Gender, education, income, race, class.....??? Do we have enough demographic data to come to a conclusion? Index of Frank's Diaries
Flipping count method virtually eliminates any correlation between Clinton's lead and ward size. Ergo - Clinton's lead is actually correlated with ward size, but because that also correlates with count method, it has been confused with the correlation with count method.
Above Below Total Black 3 11 14 Red 6 30 36 Total 9 41 50
Above Below Total Black 2.52 11.48 14 Red 6.48 29.52 36 Total 9 41 50
Above Below Total Black 0.09 0.02 0.11 Red 0.04 0.01 0.05 Total 0.13 0.03 0.16
Bottom chart shows clinton doing worse in predominantly Democratic wards - as one would not expect
therefore the vote switch hypothesis is not supported? Index of Frank's Diaries
Undeclared voters -- those not registered with any party -- can vote in either party primary....Additionally, as of 2002, 25.6% of New Hampshire residents are registered Democrats and 36.7% are Republicans, with 37.7% of New Hampshire voters registered as "undeclared" independents. This plurality of independents is a major reason why New Hampshire is considered a swing state in general U.S. presidential elections.
Wilcoxon rank sum test data: (Clinton..d - Obama..d)[machines] and (Obama..d - Clinton..d)[!machines] W = 234, p-value = 0.7086 alternative hypothesis: true mu is not equal to 0 95 percent confidence interval: -0.10751315 0.07106908 sample estimates: difference in location -0.0175131
data: (Clinton..d - Obama..d)[machines] and (Obama..d - Clinton..d)[!machines] W = 234, p-value = 0.7086 alternative hypothesis: true mu is not equal to 0 95 percent confidence interval: -0.10751315 0.07106908 sample estimates: difference in location -0.0175131
