because the most common number of votes was in between 1 and 2 hundred, the ward sizes are all somewhat consistent so this is a pretty bad application of benfords and a waste of energy. I ran the Clinton numbers from 16 and they showed the same thing, but when you look at the vote counts it makes sense, the democrats tend to get 4-600 votes per ward while trump got about 1-200 in each. Benfords should only be used when you have a mix of values with different orders of magnitude: ie some in the 10's, some in the 1000's and some in the 100,000,000's.
because the most common number of votes was in between 1 and 2 hundred, the ward sizes are all somewhat consistent so this is a pretty bad application of benfords and a waste of energy. I ran the Clinton numbers from 16 and they showed the same thing, but when you look at the vote counts it makes sense, the democrats tend to get 4-600 votes per ward while trump got about 1-200 in each. Benfords should only be used when you have a mix of values with different orders of magnitude: ie some in the 10's, some in the 1000's and some in the 100,000,000's.
Pretty good work, but, keep in mind that comparing to 2016 for validation assumes 2016 was without fraud.