On Wed, 27 Dec 2000 01:23:54 GMT, Gene Gallagher
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rich Ulrich wrote:
< snip ... >
Gene>
> This CNN article was the first of several quoting Peyton
> and Hansen's separate analyses that Bush would probably win a recount.
> The models described aren't on their web pages, but earlier versions
> are:
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/12/01/jackson.factcheck/index.html
>
> Based on the counts coming out of Fl, it appears that the Gore
> voters are far more prone to having their ballots rejected by
> the machines.
Thanks. The CNN article was awfully terse. Google led me to not-much
for Peyton Young, but here is a useful Bruce Hansen page, at
http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~bhansen/vote/vote.html
I don't know what he is using for Precinct counts, but it must be far
less pro-Gore than I had seen assumed previously.
He is using a 20% recovery rate of "undercounts" which is not assuming
much.
- TERRIBLE IRONY - If these guys are correct, then Bush made a
terrible ass of himself, and Baker and Cheney even more so -- with all
their ill-chosen, hostile language, and their lawyers filing specious
arguments against counting votes -- when they could have won by
asking for the total recount, which seemed like the obvious thing for
them, at the start.
I guess they were all misled, scared off by the initial 19-vote Gore
gain? - That was based on 47 (I think) recovered undervotes, out of
80-some, in the original 1% sample of ... Broward County? West Palm
Beach?
I did read later that it was not a *random* sampling, since 3 of the
4 precincts used in that 1% sample were named by the Democrats
who asked for the recount. (Other explanations?)
Logic says that most of the precincts should recover from the
undervote for the two candidates in proportion, pretty-much, to the
original split. When a recount shows extra votes, one way or the
other, that should raise suspicions.
How close and careful and honest is the recount?
This year, in Florida, pretty good, both the aborted, official ones,
and the new ones started by the media under the sunshine laws.
Thus, if extra votes are recovered for A, that might suggest that B
was successful in biasing the count in the earlier round.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
