Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Clintons votes in Diebold counted has a quite larger difference then anything else.

However, several others are off by more than the statistical significance even in the hand-counted districts, including Clinton.

Choosing pairs of two likesized precincts in the same county, you get pairs where the demograpic differences should not be that large.

That's a definitely false assumption. Almost all counties include urban, suburban, smalltown and rural precints.

As for the linear fits: the odds of the result are less interesting than the odds of the  linear part of the result, and they don't even give an R-squared. (It seems to me a superposition of a ringing-off sinusoid and a linear would be amuch better fit for Clinton.) I should again re-state the point that there is no control for systematic errors.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Jan 13th, 2008 at 12:45:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Should have started with a disclaimer of statistics not being my best subject...

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Jan 13th, 2008 at 05:13:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series