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

Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 536 posts

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#181

Post by oceanplexian »

worstspotgain wrote: post #162
oceanplexian wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it might be quite ironic but if people want to vote in a dictatorship, don’t they have the right to under a true democracy?

No, that's a meta-democratic vote, not a democratic vote. Many constitutions disqualify insurgents and revolutionaries from running for office for this reason. At a minimum you'd have to follow the super-majority process for amending the constitution if there is one. In practice, it's no different from having a revolution. Might as well wear the shoe if it fits. Congrats to the generalissimo dictator!

In this case the question would be, do citizens in a democracy have the right to dissolve their government peaceably, provided they meet whatever threshold is required in that system (Could be a super majority, for the sake of argument)? I’d argue it must be or it’s not really a democracy.

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#183

Post by sam36 »

notjoemama wrote: post #84

I recall having read about elections in Africa and the troubles they faced. I can't find it now, but there was one particular website offering a very detailed but rigorous approach to determining the legitimacy of elections. I'll offer this article from the BBC as a stand in for the criteria (from 2016): https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-37243190 Vote rigging: How to spot the tell-tale signs 1. Too many voters 2.…

[flagged]

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#184

Post by culi »

stateofinquiry wrote: post #154
culi wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'd never heard of the National Lawyer's Guild. According to Wikipedia: "The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) is a progressive public interest association of lawyers, law students, paralegals, jailhouse lawyers, law collective members, and other activist legal workers, in the United States." "Activists" not generally compatible with "impartial". Some coverage of the situation I found very helpful is available here: https…

> I'd never heard of the National Lawyer's Guild

This is surprising! I certainly have. Have you heard of the Carter Center? I hadn't till now.

> "Activists" not generally compatible with "impartial".

Hmmm I don't think I agree with this logic. Or, imo, if you took it seriously, you'd have to excuse the Carter Center just as well. Regardless, I don't see how your link supports this statement. It just seems to be an AI summary of a bunch of different articles?

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#185

Post by reducesuffering »

alephnerd wrote: post #164
reducesuffering wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter (Alperovitch / Silverado Policy, someone influential enough to be sanctioned by Russian gov.) and HN is what surfaced the Russian invasion months before it happened. No academic book or Axios or Politico article was there to inform you conclusively that early. Lesswrong and HN were also much earlier (Jan '20) to the Covid epidemic, a major geopol issue, than your sources. I appreciate the recommendations, but…

> Twitter (Alperovitch / Silverado Policy, someone influential enough to be sanctioned by Russian gov.) and HN is what surfaced the Russian invasion months before it happened The CSIS [0], Atlantic Council [1][2], Politico [3], and the IISS [4] warned about an impending Russian Offensive in violation of the Minsk Agreements months before Feb 2022. > Alperovitch Alperovitch had the benefit of having cofounded Crowdstr…

C'mon, you can't believe that any of those 5 sources offers the same conclusive Russian invasion information in advance as Alperovitch. Alperovitch was certainly using adjacent sources, but synthesized a strong assertion (rather than reporting potential concerns) in advance of the others. Therefore, his novel analysis (on Twitter!) was more useful than any of those, some of which are just reporting the concerns around Putin's essay or Donbas-related rotations a year before.

Essentially what I just said: "No academic book or Axios or Politico article was there to inform you conclusively that early."

And you admit Alperovitch's Twitter is useful for his NSC and geopol access.

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#186

Post by CSMastermind »

oceanplexian wrote: post #149
worstspotgain wrote: post #139

This should remind us that "One Person, One Vote" can all too easily slip into "One Person, One Vote, One Time." For Venezuela that one time was in ~1998.

I guess it might be quite ironic but if people want to vote in a dictatorship, don’t they have the right to under a true democracy?

Twitter has been saying, "you can vote yourself into a dictatorship but you have to shoot your way out."

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#187

Post by culi »

dralley wrote: post #167
culi wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find much about the Carter Foundation, but Edison Polling—the organization that released the exit poll that showed the opposition winning— does have a long history of criticism for being US-backed and consistently producing results that favor US interests. Meanwhile, the most respected pollster in the country, Hinterlaces, released an exit poll that estimated right around the actual results (54% vs 51%) https…

All of this seems irrelevant when the official Venezuelan percentages released add up to 109%. They didn't even try to make it look right, even in the most basic ways.

Where are you getting 109% from?

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#189

Post by feedforward »

RND_RandoM wrote: post #42

Didn't they show the distribution of votes on the TV and the sum there was 106%?

That would make this whole article bogus.

Actually it didn't add up to 106%, although the reality doesn't matter. That the mud the CIA, NED etc. throw on Venezuela is all that matters.

Re: Suspicious data pattern in recent Venezuelan election

#190

Post by worstspotgain »

oceanplexian wrote: post #181
worstspotgain wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's a meta-democratic vote, not a democratic vote. Many constitutions disqualify insurgents and revolutionaries from running for office for this reason. At a minimum you'd have to follow the super-majority process for amending the constitution if there is one. In practice, it's no different from having a revolution. Might as well wear the shoe if it fits. Congrats to the generalissimo dictator!

In this case the question would be, do citizens in a democracy have the right to dissolve their government peaceably, provided they meet whatever threshold is required in that system (Could be a super majority, for the sake of argument)? I’d argue it must be or it’s not really a democracy.

They have the "right" to have a revolution too - many countries treasure the revolutions they had. They can amend the constitution and make another democracy. They can also amend the constitution and make a dictatorship. Or just have a dictatorship without bothering. Those do not need constitutions at all.

To have a vote that turns a democracy into a non-democracy is a meta-democratic vote, not a democratic vote. Abusing a democratic system to surreptitiously make a non-democratic system is just a caveat that dictators find convenient to use.

Post reply on HN