Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Interesting 18181 Repetition in US Voting Machines

Options

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Bit of a coincidence all right innit?

    From one of your links:
    For 5 republican winners to have the same number of votes is insanely impossible. It's like someone winning a nationwide lottery 3 times in a row. It cannot happen.
    This guy, who opens with saying that he knows a little about statistics has revealed that he knows less than he thinks. Of course it can happen. Just hasn't happened anywhere yet as far as I know.

    It's one of those things that on its own would be a mere odd happening of curiosity and only takes on significance when you mix in everything else of hearsay and circumstantial conjecture that have been floating around for the past few US elections. There's a Lionel Hutz quote that's rather appropriate at this juncture (the one about having plenty of hearsay and conjecture and those being kinds of evidence) so depending on your own views of the conduct of US elections (both presidential and local) this is either just a simple coincidence or indicative of something more sinister that you already believed happened.


  • Options
    #3
    mycroft
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Its one of those odd ones, if you were going to go to the immense hassle and grief of faking an election you'd hardly use the same margin or number or whatever each time.

    Its a statistical anominaly


  • Options
    #4
    Hobbes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Or you could use the argument "Well if I was ever going to fake an election, do you honestly think I would make such a mistake?". To get away with it that is ;)


  • Options
    #5
    MeatProduct
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭MeatProduct


    I have to admit that I do believe there is foul play involved, even though it is so blatant. Sure it's not like it's going to be investigated anyway.

    I wonder if we'll ever know the "true" results from the 2004 US elections. How many states used the diebold machines? The republicans seem to have taken pride in that they actually won the popular vote this time but can we be sure they did?

    Nick


  • Options
    #6
    toiletduck
    Registered Users Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭toiletduck


    *sigh* will the lefties just accept that Bush won and move on?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Hobbes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    That argument doesn't really sit well though. There is an awful lot of discrepancies then compared to say 2000 election. Would you prefer they would be fully investigated and proven he won fair and square or to say "Just get over it"? what if it was Kerry who won in similar circumstances? Do you think people should just get over it then?

    It has nothing to do with parties and more to do with having free and fair elections.

    [edit] I'd say the numbers are a concidence. concidences happen a lot more then people realise. If it isn't then it would have to be some kind of buffer overflow or something. Odd, but certainly not the most sinister part of the election.


  • Options
    #8
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    mycroft wrote:
    Its one of those odd ones, if you were going to go to the immense hassle and grief of faking an election you'd hardly use the same margin or number or whatever each time.

    No, but a computer program might, if it was being run on multiple machines...

    Even if there was some unfair play in the election (and I really doubt it, but don't rule it out), it is almost impossible to prove.

    And all we end up with is yet another argument that shouldn't be needed as to why all electronic-voting systems should have VVAT (Voter Verified Audit Trail) systems....to be able to answer the question one way or another.


    jc


  • Options
    #9
    MeatProduct
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭MeatProduct


    Hobbes wrote:
    That argument doesn't really sit well though. There is an awful lot of discrepancies then compared to say 2000 election. Would you prefer they would be fully investigated and proven he won fair and square or to say "Just get over it"? what if it was Kerry who won in similar circumstances? Do you think people should just get over it then?
    Honestly I can say that my views would be the same if Kerry had won in such circumstances. In the "land of the free" where democracy reigns I would think it very important to take every measure to ensure and prove to the public (that care) that freedom and democracy were upheld in the voting system. This should be resolved at home before they go start spreading their "freedom" around the world. How can this be in ernest if a cloud hangs over their own democracy?

    Nick


  • Options
    #10
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,580 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    There was as I recall a similar "discrepancy" in the Venezeulan recall that got Hugo Chavez "elected" - the opposition noted that automated voting machines were indicating identical votes against Chavez in several districts, possibly indicating a cap on the amount of yes votes counted by the machines. Carters group were the only international observers that time, and as I recall they got some maths kids to prove that it was statistically likely that results like that could occur.

    If it can happen in a democracy as internationlly respected as Venezeula, it can surely happen in a country as populous as the U.S.
    This should be resolved at home before they go start spreading their "freedom" around the world. How can this be in ernest if a cloud hangs over their own democracy?

    Ireland still has people sleeping on the streets. How dare you go around telling third world people they need to combat poverty? The hypocrisy makes me sick...yadayadayada.


  • Options
    #11
    MeatProduct
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭MeatProduct


    Sand wrote:
    Ireland still has people sleeping on the streets. How dare you go around telling third world people they need to combat poverty? The hypocrisy makes me sick...yadayadayada.
    True, but the actions of Ireland in this regard are not ending people's lives.

    Nick


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    mycroft
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Hobbes wrote:
    That argument doesn't really sit well though. There is an awful lot of discrepancies then compared to say 2000 election. Would you prefer they would be fully investigated and proven he won fair and square or to say "Just get over it"? what if it was Kerry who won in similar circumstances? Do you think people should just get over it then?

    Uh huh and I agree, the depth of horror about diebolt and their system is difficult to shake off, but at the same time for those conpiracy theorists who are looking for a conspiracy and not facts they actually increase the signal to noise ratio for those of us concerned with a traceable system as part of electronic voting. People jibbering about this sort of thing discredit those with actual real reasons for concern.

    Sand are you suggesting that Jimmy Carter wanted to twist the election results of venezuala? Errrr why? The Carter institution is one of the most respected international NGOs dedicated to ensuring independent verible results occur, are you offering a report about statistical anonminals in the Venezualan election proof that he was "bought" by Chavez?


  • Options
    #13
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,580 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    True, but the actions of Ireland in this regard are not ending people's lives.

    Sure they are. Were prioritising government jets, berties makeup, nurses wages, new schoolrooms and so on over ensuring that nobody sleeps on Ireland streets at night. And weve the cheek to go around giving advice to the truly poor on how they should be combatting poverty. All whilst moaning about the price of a pint that we think better spent on getting **** faced than immunising an entire family from river blindness. Sure, were not ending anyones lives. Much as youd bear no responsibility if someone was dying on your doorstep and you didnt bother your arse to call an ambulance until youd gotten through coronation street, fair city and eastenders first?

    Of course Im guilty as the rest. My point is that we can throw about accusations of hypocrisy all we like. Even now, Im being a hypocrite criticising you for doing it when Im happy to throw around an accusation or ten when it suits me. Civillisation is built on deceit, fudge and hypocrisy.To pretend that the U.S. shouldnt campaign for democratic empowerment of people abroad - even if only in pretty speechs - until theyve ironed out every single issue in their own....

    Well, then Ireland shouldnt donate a penny abroad until everyone in Ireland is comftably middle class.

    Anyway ...this is hopelessly offtopic, and probably more suited for humanities anyway. Feel free to PM if you want to continue it.
    Sand are you suggesting that Jimmy Carter wanted to twist the election results of venezuala? Errrr why? The Carter institution is one of the most respected international NGOs dedicated to ensuring independent verible results occur, are you offering a report about statistical anonminals in the Venezualan election proof that he was "bought" by Chavez?

    No, Im actually citing the Carter report to underline that statistical oddities such as repeated results can apparently occur in a smaller voting population - like Venezeula - without a hint of international criticism, doubt, or indeed anything less than total support for the legitmacy of Chavez from his international political sympathisers who joyously welcome every step he takes toward populist dictatorship.

    Carried to its logical conclusion, the voting population of the U.S. which is larger, means that repeated results in the U.S. cant be an issue of concern surely, given theyre more statistically likely all things considered. Bush legitmacy therefore cant be questioned anymore by his detractors on these grounds than they would question to outcome of Chavez.


  • Options
    #14
    mycroft
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Sand wrote:
    No, Im actually citing the Carter report to underline that statistical oddities such as repeated results can apparently occur in a smaller voting population - like Venezeula - without a hint of international criticism, doubt, or indeed anything less than total support for the legitmacy of Chavez from his international political sympathisers who joyously welcome every step he takes toward populist dictatorship.

    Carried to its logical conclusion, the voting population of the U.S. which is larger, means that repeated results in the U.S. cant be an issue of concern surely, given theyre more statistically likely all things considered. Bush legitmacy therefore cant be questioned anymore by his detractors on these grounds than they would question to outcome of Chavez.

    Uh huh so people on both sides who have yet to bother to do any basic research on statistical anominals spot alledged anominals and freak out.

    Its safe to say then you've proved that people on both sides of the spectrum include a high degree of stupidity....


Advertisement