Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This! This! This all day long. Without comment [View all]american_ideals
(613 posts)51. Neither. Just OP's conclusion isn't supported.
OP is using poll data and vote outcomes to determine if there was voting irregularity.
What I am saying is if poll data was distorted, the probability of voting irregularity calculated above is wrong.
There may have been voting irregularity. (The OPs argument doesn't show there was.). But we KNOW there was voter suppression and propaganda and enormous amounts of dark money. Let's work on those three known problems. If voter irregularity is confirmed, we can work on that too.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
106 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Not to mention .16% is probably based on the 5 states being independent events.
Lucky Luciano
May 2017
#13
I was referring to bias in the means but such covariance could cause problems too.
american_ideals
May 2017
#105
I'm saying is you can do the coin flip test five times and the odds are you will get 50% all five.
L. Coyote
May 2017
#86
Yup, its hopeless. Some people have no understanding that the factors that make a poll wrong
progree
May 2017
#92
That is a quite remarkable misunderstanding of basic high school (let alone graduate) statistics.
BzaDem
May 2017
#97
I wonder what the percent chance was that Trump would cheat by messing with vote totals.
Squinch
May 2017
#53
that's what they said in 2000; they haven't fixed this yet? these polls used to be very accurate...
TheFrenchRazor
May 2017
#73
True, but how can any election be fair if their can be no recount and voting
The Wielding Truth
May 2017
#26
She used a straight forward calculation of win probabilities from 538 for FL, MI, NC, PA and WI
LonePirate
May 2017
#56
I agree, I could tell Nate Silver was really unsure about what might happen
Quixote1818
May 2017
#57
I will check him out because this seems to be bothering some and they gaslight reflexively
LaydeeBug
May 2017
#40
Those States were Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida, what was the other?
kairos12
May 2017
#8
When same guy wins lottery five times, probability is very low. That's what the OP is saying.
L. Coyote
May 2017
#87
I live in York PA and I have said many times that when I vote I touch a name on the screen and then
JoeOtterbein
May 2017
#19
the machines are a joke; no one would accept them for anything else important. nt
TheFrenchRazor
May 2017
#75
I'm not so hot on math tonight but wouldn't .01 be one percent and the 16 would be 16 one hundredths
keithbvadu2
May 2017
#21
You obviously know very little about statistics, too little to criticize math teachers.
L. Coyote
May 2017
#88
Sorry, a probability of 0.0016 is not 16 ten thousands of 1%. And yes, I have an MSEE
progree
May 2017
#90
Putin probably didn't need to; the Republicans already rigged them in red states
Liberty Belle
May 2017
#23
Oh, I think the Russians and Republicans coordinated with one another for sure.
LaydeeBug
May 2017
#35
You should delete this thread. It makes DU look stupid, i.e., suffering
KingCharlemagne
May 2017
#37
I think Hillary's campaign also suffered from over-confidence. She repeated Gore's
KingCharlemagne
May 2017
#43
YOU should delete your post. where is the evidence that the vote counts were legit? oh yeah, the vot
TheFrenchRazor
May 2017
#77
You should delete this post. It makes DU look like people don't read the OPs.
L. Coyote
May 2017
#94
Not a statistician. The question of hacking of certain types of voting machines
Enoki33
May 2017
#61
I've been saying this since the election results came in but couldn't figure
Maraya1969
May 2017
#62
This is absurd, and shows a basic lack of understanding of high school probability and statistics.
BzaDem
May 2017
#96
You are confusing "exit polls" with "statistics". Exit polls use statistics, but a problem with
BzaDem
May 2017
#102
Explain Minnesota - a state Hillary narrowly WON (by 1.5%). When Minnesota's that tight,
Midwestern Democrat
May 2017
#99