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

411–420 of 467 posts

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

#411

Post by tptacek »

rootusrootus wrote: post #343
js2 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AK is even crazier. It doesn’t start counting its absentee ballots till a week after the election which is why it’s been stuck at 56% votes counted since Election Day.

I'm guessing that's why it hasn't been called yet, despite trending very red. It'll probably still end up in Trump's column, but with such a disparity in voting methods by party it's more uncertain than usual.

Alaska will vote for Trump, but Alyse Galvin told me the other day that internal polls show her still in the running for the at-large House seat. We'll know more tomorrow.

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

#412

Post by GauntletWizard »

Schiendelman wrote: post #323
MagnumOpus wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to. In the US you can lose the nation by 3 million votes as long as you win 3-4 swing states in the presidential or senate vote -- be it your brother making 538 votes disappear or your staffers creating 203 ballots with your name on it...

It’s really really difficult to do either of those things, especially in vote by mail. In Washington, for instance, I can see who is registered, who voted in a given election, and match that to the vote totals.

I live in Washington state. There is someone registered to vote on my street who has voted, consistently, since 2012 - The year the resident by that name moved out. We have raised the issue to the Secretary of State’s office, and they have sent out a mailer for the resident to confirm their address.

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

#413

Post by trott »

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…

> https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1325592112428163072.html

Do you know why the scatter plots for SD and CA are showing a few fractional counts? Shouldn't they all be integers?

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

#414

Post by [deleted] »

hiram112 wrote: post #405
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he has been strongly encouraging his supporters to vote in person He also attempted to sabotage the USPS, and cast doubts on mail-in ballots as a whole, with the obvious intent of suppressing opposition voters, and/or having reason to question the election after the fact. The only party with anything to gain from suppressing voters are the Republicans. Look at the map of states that didn't ratify the 24th amendment…

> The only party with anything to gain from suppressing voters are the Republicans. > And just this election, the Republicans put up fraudulent, illegal mail-in ballot drop boxes. So which one is it?

[deleted]

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

#415

Post by Izkata »

gwd wrote: post #239
btilly wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, as media reassure us, today voting fraud simply cannot happen: you'd need a whole conspiracy of dozens of people, a real, as one could call it, machine. This I find impossible to believe. How hard is it to intercept mail-in ballots, sign them, then mail them in? Who knows that you did so? I personally find it very implausible that in both elections that Trump was in he produced results about 3% better th…

> How hard is it to intercept mail-in ballots, sign them, then mail them in? Who knows that you did so? Well first of all, the person who was supposed to get the mail-in ballot in the first place. In Michigan, you can check to see whether they've received your mail-in ballot. Don't you think that if 100k Republicans in Michigan didn't receive their ballot at all, but checked and found that they had been registered as…

> Don't you think that if 100k Republicans in Michigan didn't receive their ballot at all, but checked and found that they had been registered as having voted, we'd be hearing about that?

The most common claim I've been seeing is that dead people are voting Democrat, not that living people's votes were stolen.

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

#416

Post by chillwaves »

jbjohns wrote: post #331
matwood wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3-4 swing states is still a national level. You're also talking about 20k-100k type numbers. This isn't someone winning by 100 votes. What's funny about this situation is that Biden is on track to win most of these states by a larger margin than Trump did against Clinton. She did ask for a recount, but I don't remember her ever going on and on about fraud.

Not fraud but she did write an entire book blaming Russia, and a whole host of other things.

Might have something to do with all the provable connections to Russia the Trump campaign had. People are sitting in jail for lying about contacts with Russia.

You really can't pretend these are similar situations.

And it's also a huge difference between undermining the entire process vs claiming that Russia conducted psyops on American voters in favor of Trump.

Trump is saying you cannot trust the vote counting. That's a big deal.

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

#417

Post by chillwaves »

jcadam wrote: post #329
MagnumOpus wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to. In the US you can lose the nation by 3 million votes as long as you win 3-4 swing states in the presidential or senate vote -- be it your brother making 538 votes disappear or your staffers creating 203 ballots with your name on it...

People are being willfully obtuse when they say the kind of fraud being alleged isn't possible. A certain political party spent that last six months forcing rule changes on swing states vis a vis mail in voting that you can't compare this year's election to any that came before. Most of the fraud allegations (at least the ones where the numbers would be large enough to make a significant difference) revolve around th…

Can we not go down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole? Until any of these allegations have been verified, I don't see the point in speculation.

> kicking out GOP poll watchers (and only GOP poll watchers)

Zero evidence anywhere this happened. Much evidence to the contrary.

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

#418

Post by matwood »

tptacek wrote: post #401
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16,000 votes is only a half a percentage of people in AZ committing voter fraud, and that's assuming they each only submit one fraudulent ballot. Apparently people have been caught submitting dozens of ballots in the names of people they didn't have any right to. If 0.02% of people did that, it flips the state. You can also make the "doesn't make sense" argument about voting itself, since exactly zero of the states w…

What do you think a fraudulent ballot is? You can't just make a person up; there are voter rolls. Whatever means you find of coming up with a name and address that will be accepted as a vote, you have to do it (here, hypothetically) 16,000 times. If you use real people's names, which you have to because, again, voter rolls, many of them have already shown up to vote. The epollbook shows that on the screen, and you're…

It's unfortunate that people will simply not listen to reason. You have gone above and beyond explaining the realities of mass voter fraud, but it goes against the outcome people are searching so they ignore you. You have more patience than I have.

> It's so much more of a shitshow than you can possibly imagine, but I came away from it feeling paradoxically better about the process.

This is the first time I really dug into the process, and I agree. I voted absentee, and that process plus what I saw on TV around the counting process made me much more confident in how things work.

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

#419

Post by EricDeb »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #332
EricDeb wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump also barely won MI, WI, and PA last time. No was nitpicking vote result curves at that time.. I'm sure they were equally as strange.

You were expecting Trump to question the results in states he won? An accusation of hypocrisy doesn't tell you which time they were wrong to do it.

They are wrong to do it because it convinces millions of uneducated Americans that it's all rigged and their vote doesn't matter. Here are investigators debunking most of the voter fraud allegations thus far. https://twitter.com/Ike_Saul/status/1324435797374808066

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact-check-biden-vote-spi...

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

#420

Post by majormajor »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #410
cycomanic wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in rural areas think similarly due to a similar environment. What a rural area desires in the nation's leader does not necessarily align with city voters. You must see the danger of minority having the majority of the voting power. Say Louisiana and the mid-west would decide that a fascist leader would be best for the country. How the hell do residents in the cities stand up against that in any way but force.…

Ok, accepting it can go both ways. Why would you want one small portion of the country deciding the direction of the country instead of each state having an equal say? Isn't an equal say more fair for all states?

Because state sizes are massively lopsided.

Split California into 6 states and they could still each have more population than many other ones. In your system, they not have 6 times as much total power.

How does THAT make sense?

Post reply on HN