To the contrary, votes are more likely to be lost in counties with less money for election infrastructure and less qualified polling volunteers. Thus, lost votes will most heavily affect poorer voters.
Lost votes should not substantially alter the outcome of an election, because they should have the same ratio as existing votes.
-
-
-
This is a mute point since we vote by district. Stefan is correct that any lost votes should have roughly the same ratio as the existing ballots within the same district.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So, would you like our soldiers in other countries to vote, and then not even count, because you find it's taking too long for them to be counted? Let the process happen. Then, the Republicans can waste tax payer dollars on investigations into voter fraud that is non-existent.
-
That would actually be very good.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
that is both bad math and bad sociology
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This man wrote a critical thinking "textbook," everyone.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Stefan, stooping to this level of stupid is amazing, even for you. Selectively targeting specific, gerrymandered precincts for exclusion / omission would significantly impact results. Also, it's ALWAYS THE SAME (blue) FL counties in and around the major pop areas. Be best.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Because lost ballots would totally be appropriately sized random population samples........ what a preposterous thing to say!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The only way this would be accurate would be if all districts had the same ratios of D/R voters. And we know that's not the case.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Wouldn't that only follow if they were lost geographically proportional from the same precincts?
-
Conceivably. I was involved in a county-wide recount once. The race was very close. We found 28 uncounted votes because of errors in marking the ballot. There were 14 for each candidate.
-
But mathematical probability isn't certainty in the real world, right? I have terrible number sense, so it's a real question.
-
If you have say 10 states that "found" votes, and they were all leaning Republican before, and then the lost votes tipped it towards Democrats, that would be highly statistically unlikely *if the votes were randomly lost* If they're not randomly lost, that's evidence of fraud.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If you ignore why the votes were “lost” in the first place i guess this makes sense.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Unless the votes were lost or not counted specifically in neighbourhoods where the voters are more likely to vote for a certain party but WHO KNOWS maybe your conspiracy theory is right!
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Not necessarily. Trump flipped a fair amount of Bernie supporters after Hillary won the primary. Many Voters are willing to vote against their registered party if they are incensed enough. Moreover, Independents could easily sway a county one way or another. Heck, look at AZ
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.