Actually, let’s talk about this a little more because I’ve spent the last 2 years thinking about how I would do it if I were, say, a hostile foreign power.https://twitter.com/EmilyGorcenski/status/1033056465567862784 …
-
-
So if I were to hack the vote—and I pause here to inform my monitors that I have no such plan—I would begin by manipulating votes within this bubble of extra voters.
Show this thread -
To put it another way, suppose Smallville has a pretty consistent turnout for midterm elections of between 13 and 17% of voters. But this year, thanks to civic engagement, they get 22%. That’s at least 5% of all eligible voters you can fuck with, or a full ~33% of votes
Show this thread -
Now, we assume the extra votes will be more heavily distributed against Trump, right? But what if they’re not? What if we make them not? How can we even tell?
Show this thread -
Our alternative hypothesis is that we’re going to see a change in distribution. But what if we don’t? The best we can do is fail to reject the null hypothesis. So if I were hacking votes, in a contested or pro-Trump precinct, I’d make the votes look distributed like 2016.
Show this thread -
And if you do this there is *absolutely no way to catch it*
Show this thread -
Not through statistical means, at least. Your priors are too damn strong.
Show this thread -
The best way to get away with things is to go unnoticed. And the best way to go unnoticed is to have no meaningful change that can be detected. This means that a ton of votes don’t need to be swapped. Just a handful per precinct.
Show this thread -
When we think of election impropriety we think of dictators stuffing the ballot box to get 99% of the votes. It’s much more damaging, tho, if you can ensure that a 3 pt margin remains a 3 pt margin.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.