4chan Anon confirms Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai's observations after measuring Biden performance in same counties -- TOTALLY FUBAR
(media.patriots.win)
🚔 PARTY OF CRIME 🚔
Comments (406)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
Sure.
I think his intent was to formulate a proxy for republican sentiment and then compare the actual votes in these two categories (straight and split ballots) to that proxy.
The proxy is the fraction of straight ballots voted as R. So that is the X axis, and the Y axis is the difference between the rates of straight ballots voting R and split ballots voting trump.
That's how I understand his graph.
This would work if the two measures were independent, but they aren't, because as you pointed out, among the set of votes for Trump, if the voter doesnt split the ballot they must have voted straight. So the greater the fraction of straight votes, the fewer remaining opportunities to pick up a split vote.
So I think this analysis is wrong.
However, maybe there's different approach that forms a proxy and looks for unexpected deviations. Of course, maybe not, because if the 'steal' was done right it would apply the same effect equally to straight and split tickets.
I tried a few other plots, but I'm a little tired so I'm not sure I have thought them through completely.
One thing I tried was using the actual overall rate of trump votes (straight + split) as the proxy and then looking at the breakdown between straight and split. This shows another clear linear relationship, as the overall popularity of trump increases, the fraction of straight ticket votes to split ticket increases linearly.
In that case the Y axis is straight_r_count / total_votes - split_r_count / total_votes and the X axis is (straight_r_count+split_r_count) / total_votes
I'm not sure whether or not this is significant. (but i am tired :) . If you look in the github this plot is '/tmp/fig3.png' and the matlab code is in /tmp/plot.m. the input CSV file is in tmp/oakland-mi-subset.csv which selects some of the columns from the 2 sheets.
Whether this is some social effect of independent voters or nevertrumper or got knows what.. or a "steal",,, i don't know.
I think my original assumption for Y was probably wrong, actually. The more I watch the video, the more I think that Y = (trump_votes_among_mixed_ballots / mixed_ballot_votes) - straight_r_votes / total_votes.
In that case, Y is "somewhat" more independent than I thought, because the percentage of Trump votes among mixed ballots -- the first half of Y -- is independent from X. Either way, subtracting X still creates the downward-right line.
As far as alternative graphs go, maybe the best way to get at what Ayyadurai was "trying" to do might be:
X = straight_r_votes / total_votes
Y = (trump_votes_among_mixed_ballots / mixed_ballot_votes) - (trump_votes_among_straight_r_ballots / straight_r_votes)
Here, Y would be totally independent of X, and we'd probably expect to see points clustered around a relatively horizontal line...and we can compare how that varies from county to county (keeping in mind that Wayne County is an outlier from all the known cheating, and from having very few points on the right side of X).
EDIT: I don't think we can do that with the data you have though, because it looks like the data you have doesn't account for "straight R with exceptions." The data you have seems to imply "every straight R voted for Trump," so the second part of Y might as well be " - 1.0," which is useless. That would go along with what another poster said, but it seems to contradict what Ayyadurai was getting at, and it definitely contradicts things like this:enter text
Based on the data you actually have, what you actually looked at seems like a reasonable approach. We can't really make inferences from a single county though; we'd have to see how they compare across counties, keeping in mind that Wayne County is the most wretched hive of scum and villainy. If we see that the slopes are consistent across most counties, but they're suddenly way different in another [which isn't undersampled], that would be a red flag.
I'm way too tired to do it myself though, and I should do some actual work...
My understanding was that you can't vote straight with exceptions. You can either vote straight or choose. So the data has 1 sheet for straight ticket votes and a second sheet for selection for president but those are mutually exclusive
Interesting. I wonder if that's a limitation in the data. There's another article on this describing the difference between straight, split, and mixed-ticket voting, where "split" is "straight with exceptions": enter text
Assuming the article above is accurate, that would mean split and mixed ticket voting both fall under the non-straight section of your data, in a way we can't differentiate.
Or, maybe the articles I've found are just wrong? I don't think the rules could've changed at the last minute, because IIRC people were already voting by the publication date of the article above.