Is It Time For Algorithms That Flag Potential Election Fraud? -- Please Answer Both Questions.

[Poindexter]

Is It Time For Algorithms That Flag Potential Election Fraud? -- Please Answer Both Questions.

Algorithms exist for almost everything else from credit card theft to consumer preferences. So why not for election fraud? Not to change or negate counts, but to flag highly unlikely results for further investigation.

An article I read a few days ago got me to thinking about this... it said something to the effect that new ballots were discovered in Florida that favored democrats 3 to 1 in an area that was previously 2 to 1.

There may very well be legitimate reasons for the shift. But if not, how likely is that due to chance?

Please provide your intuitive responses to the following two questions before I post the answers (or you calculate them). Elections are not random processes like drawing colored balls from urns and this is an artificial oversimplification. But it does serve a useful purpose that I'll explain after replies are posted.

Again, I'm looking for intuitive responses only. Please do not calculate anything.

Situation: CNN County has an endless supply of voters and they favor democrats 2 to 1. Voting has ended. 500,000 votes were cast that favored democrats almost exactly 2 to 1.

Question 1: 1,000 more votes are found. Assume all 1,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 1,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

Question 2: 10,000 more votes are found. Assume all 10,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 10,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

 

[smallfil]

Is It Time For Algorithms That Flag Potential Election Fraud? -- Please Answer Both Questions.

Algorithms exist for almost everything else from credit card theft to consumer preferences. So why not for election fraud? Not to change or negate counts, but to flag highly unlikely results for further investigation.

An article I read a few days ago got me to thinking about this... it said something to the effect that new ballots were discovered in Florida that favored democrats 3 to 1 in an area that was previously 2 to 1.

There may very well be legitimate reasons for the shift. But if not, how likely is that due to chance?

Please provide your intuitive responses to the following two questions before I post the answers (or you calculate them). Elections are not random processes like drawing colored balls from urns and this is an artificial oversimplification. But it does serve a useful purpose that I'll explain after replies are posted.

Again, I'm looking for intuitive responses only. Please do not calculate anything.

Situation: CNN County has an endless supply of voters and they favor democrats 2 to 1. Voting has ended. 500,000 votes were cast that favored democrats almost exactly 2 to 1.

Question 1: 1,000 more votes are found. Assume all 1,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 1,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

Question 2: 10,000 more votes are found. Assume all 10,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 10,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

Not very likely on both questions. At a minimum, you would expect close to a 2 to 1 rate favoring the Democrats. If it is 3 to 1 then, it smacks of ballot stuffing!

 

[kingjelly]

Question 1: 1,000 more votes are found. Assume all 1,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 1,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

Probability is 100% if some douche cons stuffed all the dem votes in the closet.

 

[piezoe]

Is It Time For Algorithms That Flag Potential Election Fraud? -- Please Answer Both Questions.

Algorithms exist for almost everything else from credit card theft to consumer preferences. So why not for election fraud? Not to change or negate counts, but to flag highly unlikely results for further investigation.

An article I read a few days ago got me to thinking about this... it said something to the effect that new ballots were discovered in Florida that favored democrats 3 to 1 in an area that was previously 2 to 1.

There may very well be legitimate reasons for the shift. But if not, how likely is that due to chance?

Please provide your intuitive responses to the following two questions before I post the answers (or you calculate them). Elections are not random processes like drawing colored balls from urns and this is an artificial oversimplification. But it does serve a useful purpose that I'll explain after replies are posted.

Again, I'm looking for intuitive responses only. Please do not calculate anything.

Situation: CNN County has an endless supply of voters and they favor democrats 2 to 1. Voting has ended. 500,000 votes were cast that favored democrats almost exactly 2 to 1.

Question 1: 1,000 more votes are found. Assume all 1,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 1,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

Question 2: 10,000 more votes are found. Assume all 10,000 voters who cast them are a random sample of the CNN County population. What is the probability that those 10,000 votes favor democrats 3 to 1 or better?

You are trying to suggest voter fraud. But your reasoning is flawed. You can't assume that any particular non-random sample of ballots not drawn randomly from a randomized population of all ballots will be representative of the entire population of ballots. And these additional mail in and/or provisional ballots being counted now do not represent a random sample drawn from the entire randomized population of votes. It would be like taking the top ten cards from a new, unshuffled box of cards and expecting them to represent the entire deck. Go back to statistics 101 and start over.

There are no found votes, they weren't lost in the first place.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Algorithms sound like a typically racist republican plot to suppress minority voting. Frankly, the heavy use of obscure math terms in the above post fairly reeks of white privilege. I'll stick with the human touch.



ps. NASA could not have reached the moon without black women to do the difficult equations for the lame Nazi rocket scientists.

 

[Slartibartfast]

You are trying to suggest voter fraud. But your reasoning is flawed. You can't assume that any particular non-random sample of ballots not drawn randomly from a randomized population of all ballots will be representative of the entire population of ballots. And these additional mail in and/or provisional ballots being counted now do not represent a random sample drawn from the entire randomized population of votes. It would be like taking the top ten cards from a new, unshuffled box of cards and expecting them to represent the entire deck. Go back to statistics 101 and start over.

There are no found votes, they weren't lost in the first place.

He literally, (seriously, no leg-pull) did not grasp the difference between net and gross profit multiple times. Don't ask the impossible with statistics. Unless it is Trump U taught stats, he can do those.

 

[TJustice]

Piezoe is trying a form of academic bullying we see over and over from lefties. The bullying rarely stands up under scrutiny.
He has no idea what is going on in this voting arena but he just spouted some general concepts from statistics. A real statistician would have been much more guarded and presented important caveats.

For instance if the previous returns and this return were large enough...
You could compare previous mail in ballot ratios.
Then see how well the old ratios stood up with this years elections where you already had full returns.

If you find the other areas did not see much of a change in their voting ratios and there was nothing new going on in this outstanding area you could draw inferences... which might need to be rebutted.... if you cared about logic and truth at all.

You are trying to suggest voter fraud. But your reasoning is flawed. You can't assume that any particular non-random sample of ballots not drawn randomly from a randomized population of all ballots will be representative of the entire population of ballots. And these additional mail in and/or provisional ballots being counted now do not represent a random sample drawn from the entire randomized population of votes. It would be like taking the top ten cards from a new, unshuffled box of cards and expecting them to represent the entire deck. Go back to statistics 101 and start over.

There are no found votes, they weren't lost in the first place.

 

[piezoe]

He has no idea what is going on in this voting arena

And neither do you of course. But unlike you, I do understand statistics.

 

[smallfil]

What about an algorithm that compares the current voting rolls to those death people in Coroners office list and to illegals (foreigners) arrested by INS. Imagine if you had an algorithm that pulls out those names and compiles that list. Those dead people and illegals (foreigners) can be easily purged from the voting rolls ensuring only US citizens can vote! Now, how cool would that be?

 

[gwb-trading]

What about an algorithm that compares the current voting rolls to those death people in Coroners office list and to illegals (foreigners) arrested by INS. Imagine if you had an algorithm that pulls out those names and compiles that list. Those dead people and illegals (foreigners) can be easily purged from the voting rolls ensuring only US citizens can vote! Now, how cool would that be?

Imagine if ALL states required a SSN to be submitted when registering to vote.