Display:
Yeah, it takes too much effort to make the vote counts match in this way.

Maybe New Hampshire just won the lottery, or something.

The probability of the hand count being exactly the most likely value assuming the vote percentages of the machine count are "correct" is smaller than 1 in 250 given the sample size. Now, if you run 50 primary contests, what is the likelihood that at least one will be this "lucky"? Actually 1 in 6.

So something of this sort should be expected to happen ever 24 years :-)

[there are several assumptions in this which overestimate the probability of occurrence. For example: assuming the "correct" probabilities are the hand-counted ones and the machine-counted ones are the ones drawn randomly from the distribution, this is less likely than 1 in 500 and assuming 50 primaries every 4 years it would be a 44-year event].

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2008 at 07:36:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In case it's not clear from my (long) comment below, I don't believe the data or calculations yielding the "exact match" percentages are reliable.  Their numbers don't match the NH Secretary of State's numbers, so the percentages they talk about are meaningless.
by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Sun Jan 13th, 2008 at 08:09:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In another comment I point out that a 7 to 13-vote difference would render the coincidence statistically insignificant. So there goes that.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jan 13th, 2008 at 08:38:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series