General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Analysis Of Kentucky Election Results Indicates Fraud [View all]Rilgin
(787 posts)If I read this article correctly, the bias you are referring to is something about expected voting patterns in large districts. The article claims fraud because the large urban districts did not conform to predictions.
Your criticism is that the predictions are really just predictive opinions so the deviation from the opinion does not prove fraud.
This particular vote was Kentucky. My question is whether the "bias" that the claim is based on is observable in other states. If most of the country's urban districts have previously exhibited this bias, the fact that this election did not exhibit this bias does seem at least probative of fraud.
If you could explain the "bias" for me in simple language that I could understand and answer whether other districts in other states do conform with this predictive bias, this would be very appreciated.