Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

probablydance.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 467 posts

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#131

Post by tptacek »

guscost wrote: post #128
tptacek wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The premise of this analysis appears to be that mail-in ballots are a uniform sampling of Democrats and Republicans. But of course, in 2020, that's not at all the case; the Republicans made a campaign issue out of not voting absentee, and of attempting legally to reject absentee ballots under a number of conditions. As a result: mail-in ballots are sharply more Democratic than Republican this year. Further, any analy…

Sure, but the analysis is supposedly showing even vote-by-mail trending toward R in other states, explained by the hypothesis that mail from more outlying areas tended to arrive later. The observed discontinuities in the contested states could be explained simply by the sequence in which these states processed their mail-in ballots (i.e. ballots mailed from cities were processed later), but the fact that so many of t…

It's not at all fishy. You could --- and places like DDHQ did --- scrape the SOS sites to know almost exactly where the ballots were coming in. The central premise of this analysis is not just that the mail-in process was partisan-neutral, but that it had the effect of randomizing the returns statewide. Of course, it did nothing of the sort.

Again, what you really saw here was that the election day vote trended sharply more R, because R voters were encouraged not to use mail-in votes, while the entire D campaign apparatus was --- like it has been since Obama --- designed to get people to commit their votes early with mail-ins. The mail-ins took longer to count, because unlike in Florida, they couldn't be counted early. So what you were watching as time went on was large tranches of mail-in ballots that took forever to count coming in from D-heavy areas (or from areas where Biden outperformed Clinton, and where the mail returns were, like everywhere, more D than the election day returns).

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#132

Post by bootcampwhere »

sanp wrote: post #107
guscost wrote: post #94

Here’s someone who did analysis of 2020 NYT time-series data, and is trying to make a case that the currently-contested states show odd patterns. Note that this would be circumstantial evidence at best , but still a little fishy when compared with the timeline: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1325592112428163072.html I made a GitHub repo of this analysis ported to Python3, with a quickstart and a matplotlib script…

This is extremely poor analysis. All the "anomalies" are explained by the fact that the ballots came from Dem heavy areas...

Even, "extremely poor" is generous. It's not so much an analysis as a lay person's take on a data analysis.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#133

Post by torstenvl »

guscost wrote: post #94

Here’s someone who did analysis of 2020 NYT time-series data, and is trying to make a case that the currently-contested states show odd patterns. Note that this would be circumstantial evidence at best , but still a little fishy when compared with the timeline: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1325592112428163072.html I made a GitHub repo of this analysis ported to Python3, with a quickstart and a matplotlib script…

If all the ballots were shuffled in the mail across the timespan in which they were counted, that would make sense.

However, they are not, so the assumptions underlying the analysis do not hold.

For one thing, many states did not begin counting these ballots until Election Day, per state law. For another, the entities performing the unofficial counts were not necessarily the entities receiving the ballots. The author clearly conflates these two points when he says that Milwaukee ballots heading to the county to be counted were received after the deadline. They were received by the precinct at the appropriate time, and then transported to the county for final tabulation - again, presumably, in compliance with state law.

(EDIT: Notably, the video clearly shows the ballots being transferred by law enforcement, so it's patently dishonest to suggest that was the time they were received through the mail.)

If a state performs constant counts and constant updates as they receive individual ballots from across the state, then you should get a more-or-less constant D:R ratio.

If you count mail ballots in batches of updates from different counties and within counties from different precincts, then you will see the D:R ratio generally shift, with precincts and counties with higher populations (ergo higher batch processing times) coming later.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#134

Post by mquirion »

guscost wrote: post #94

Here’s someone who did analysis of 2020 NYT time-series data, and is trying to make a case that the currently-contested states show odd patterns. Note that this would be circumstantial evidence at best , but still a little fishy when compared with the timeline: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1325592112428163072.html I made a GitHub repo of this analysis ported to Python3, with a quickstart and a matplotlib script…

This is a really poor understanding of several things, including, for instance, how the USPS actually handled the ballots. This "randomly shuffled" thing is flat wrong.

There's actually a lot of really good data about how many mail ballots were requested in each state and the return rate. Many of the states even have data about which party did a better job returning the ballots.

https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html

Several of the "modelers" out there used such data to basically know by ~1am Wednesday morning that Biden would likely win PA, for instance. It was just a matter of time.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#135

Post by dd36 »

rayiner wrote: post #110
TheDong wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federal law impacts all citizens. It doesn't just make laws concerning the states. Why should a man in wyoming's opinion on what federal laws I should live under count 70x as much as mine? Why should a minority of the country make a decision that impacts the majority of people?

Because federal law is only supposed to be a very small part of the law that applies to people.

Hence the Senate. The President doesn’t legislate.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#136

Post by jessedhillon »

TheDong wrote: post #61
tastyfreeze wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they are all states that should have an equal say in what president is elected. A republic of states is beholden to the states. Each state is beholden to its population.

Federal law impacts all citizens. It doesn't just make laws concerning the states. Why should a man in wyoming's opinion on what federal laws I should live under count 70x as much as mine? Why should a minority of the country make a decision that impacts the majority of people?

> Why should a man in wyoming's opinion on what federal laws I should live under count 70x as much as mine?

Because ideally, that distribution will give you pause when considering vesting power into the federal government.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#137

Post by birken »

sweettea wrote: post #116
tptacek wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The premise of this analysis appears to be that mail-in ballots are a uniform sampling of Democrats and Republicans. But of course, in 2020, that's not at all the case; the Republicans made a campaign issue out of not voting absentee, and of attempting legally to reject absentee ballots under a number of conditions. As a result: mail-in ballots are sharply more Democratic than Republican this year. Further, any analy…

No, the premise is that mailin ballots should have a roughly uniform D/R ratio, no matter what timeslice of a state you look at. Of course they skew, but the idea is that the first mailins counted should have basically the same ratio as the last. Which appears true in most states, but not some, for unknown reasons. (The skew it proposes as normal, R later in time due to receiving R ballots on a later distribution, ex…

Interesting enough, the mail-in ballot returns on a per-precinct basis were actually shockingly consistent, even over time, likely proving by this method that there wasn't any voter fraud.

The thing is though, if you look at the returns on a state level over time, what you are actually seeing is the results from all sorts of different types of votes in different places over time, so you won't see any consistent pattern. But if you break down the votes to the specific places then you see exactly what you'd expect to see.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#138

Post by JamesBarney »

rayiner wrote: post #110
TheDong wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federal law impacts all citizens. It doesn't just make laws concerning the states. Why should a man in wyoming's opinion on what federal laws I should live under count 70x as much as mine? Why should a minority of the country make a decision that impacts the majority of people?

Because federal law is only supposed to be a very small part of the law that applies to people.

In 18th century theory. In 21st century practice it's incredibly influential.

Do we tax more for social security or cut benefits, do we extend medicare to 55 year olds or delay it until 70, can my daca friends get a job, can Icontinue to operate a company(Obamacare), not to mention war. It's far more influential than my city( or state government.(I live in Houston, this would probably be less true in states like New York or California which has have a larger government)

Another proxy for influence is money, and I contribute far more to the federal government than I pay in state and local taxes, which reflects the very large impact it has on our lives.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#139

Post by bfrog »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #89
maxerickson wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So take a step back. Why would (the people of/in) California and Texas and so on choose to support such a republic? As it is you've defined a circle. "It's a republic so it should be run based just on the borders of the constituents".

Yes that is how it should be. Each state has different interests. By having electoral votes based on population we are not avoiding the problem of population centers directing the country. How is electing a president different than votes for a constitutional amendment? Each state gets one vote there.

Tax revenues which pay for federal services like the armed forces, led by the president, aren't equally contributed by each state. The day that happens is the day Wyoming's vote can be equal to California. It'd also be the day California succeeds from the union.

Re: Looking for Voter Fraud (In Old Elections) with Data Visualization

#140

Post by guscost »

tptacek wrote: post #131
guscost wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the analysis is supposedly showing even vote-by-mail trending toward R in other states, explained by the hypothesis that mail from more outlying areas tended to arrive later. The observed discontinuities in the contested states could be explained simply by the sequence in which these states processed their mail-in ballots (i.e. ballots mailed from cities were processed later), but the fact that so many of t…

It's not at all fishy. You could --- and places like DDHQ did --- scrape the SOS sites to know almost exactly where the ballots were coming in. The central premise of this analysis is not just that the mail-in process was partisan-neutral, but that it had the effect of randomizing the returns statewide. Of course, it did nothing of the sort. Again, what you really saw here was that the election day vote trended sharp…

> The mail-ins took longer to count, because unlike in Florida, they couldn't be counted early. So what you were watching as time went on was large tranches of mail-in ballots that took forever to count coming in from D-heavy areas (or from areas where Biden outperformed Clinton, and where the mail returns were, like everywhere, more D than the election day returns).

So if I understand correctly, you're saying that there's a gradual (in PA) or not-so-gradual-at-first-but-then-gradual (in MI) shift from in-person ballots to mail-in ballots, which explains these trends? That does seem possible.

Another possibility is that the USPS processed the mail-in ballots from big cities differently from those from towns with smaller mail volume.

Post reply on HN