Hope you cats remember what a limited hangout is....,
electoralsystemincrisis | In Electoral System in Crisis, is a 39-page independent in-depth
examination of the accuracy and security of U.S. electronic voting
equipment. This research has been invited for publication in the Journal
of the International Association of Official Statistics (IAOS).
Due to the unusual time constraints of the election cycle, and the
right of the public to have access to this information, the authors are
taking the unusual step of publishing ahead of time online. The full
report is now available online at the website of the lead author; and will be posted in a number of locations including the forum of The American Association for Public Opinion Research, and the forum of Social Research Methods. Below is an exerpt of our findings. We encourage everyone to download and read the full report.
The majority of the data we examined suggests that the two candidates
currently slated to accept their party’s nomination in the 2016
presidential primary races, received a different number of votes than
what has been officially reported.
On the Republican side,
statistical analysis indicates that Donald Trump probably received more
votes than what has been reported and certified. Because he was able to
overcome his opposition, even with the irregularities, his selection as
the presumptive Republican nominee is supported by the data.
As we
stated in the opening, this is not the case on the Democratic side. The
overwhelming majority of the almost two dozen states that we analyzed,
demonstrate irregularities. We found suspect statistical patterns in the
2016 Democratic presidential primary in Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware,
Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New
York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and West
Virginia. These irregularities were significant, as we demonstrate in
Louisiana, sometimes as large as 36% and could change the outcome of the
election.
In almost every instance the discrepancies favored
Hillary Clinton. In all likelihood the current results have assigned her
a greater percentage of the vote than she may have actually received,
while simultaneously under-reporting Bernie Sanders’ legitimate vote
share.
We intend to report on the percentage that the race may be off, based on a statistical analysis of as many states as possible.
