Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Live free or Diebold

By Libby

The questions over the New Hampshire results linger and while I don't really understand how they arrive at these numbers, the conclusions are difficult to ignore.
To my complete (and continuing) amazement, the "diebold effect" on Hillary's votes remains after controlling for any and all of those demographic variables, with a p-value of <.001: that is, there are less than 1:1000 odds for this difference occurring through chance alone, and that's after adjusting for variability in Hillary's votes due to education, income, total population, and population density.

While this "diebold effect" varies in magnitude depending on the exact covariates used, it seems to center around an additional 5.2% of votes going for Clinton from Diebold machines. The same analysis shows a Diebold disadvantage for Obama of about -4.2%, significant with a p<.001, using the same covariates.
I remain concerned about making an issue of this in New Hampshire, not because I don't think it's possible that the Diebolds screwed up but because I fear in such a sparsely populated state, the anomalies won't be dramatic enough to cause great concern. I fear that, in turn, will diminish the impact of future problems that I'm sure will arise in other states where the outcome is more important to the final national tallies.

However, it's a moot point now. Kucinich has coughed up the cash and a recount of the Diebold ballots will begin shortly. I can only hope the results are shocking enough to garner enough of a public outcry to kick this cursed company out of our electoral system.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share


Blogger nolocontendere said...

I think there's great danger that the recount is going to be fixed also, which will have a negative effect on looking closely at other states. The problem is going to be that basically the votes are gone, and they'll only have the rigged results to look at again. That's no recount but will be held up as vindication of the corrupt process by the vile MSM.

1:30:00 AM  
Blogger Libby Spencer said...

That's my fear too Nolo. It's such a small state and it would be easy to get away with there. It depends on whether they have paper ballots to look at or just printouts.

But I think they actually have paper ballots that were scanned but even if they uncover anomalies, the numbers won't be so large as to alarm enough people.

I thought we should have investigated in 06. I'm sure they let us take that one to set us up for 08. There were anomalies in those races too but nobody looked too closely because we won.

10:05:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home