Yeah, 70%+ turnout of 18-20 year olds is highly suspect, especially when the next bracket of 20-30 drops significantly.
The thing to be careful of on this graph though is that this represents how many registered voters turned out. So it could be that not many 18-20 year olds registered, but those that did register were very motivated to turn out on Election Day.
Overall it makes these numbers hard to evaluate for authenticity based on that fact alone. For instance it says that 50% of people over age 100 who were registered actually voted, but there could be like 8 people registered and four of those voted. It doesn’t really give you any aggregates, only percentages, which are kinda useless without any numbers to back them up.
Yeah, 70%+ turnout of 18-20 year olds is highly suspect, especially when the next bracket of 20-30 drops significantly.
The thing to be careful of on this graph though is that this represents how many registered voters turned out. So it could be that not many 18-20 year olds registered, but those that did register were very motivated to turn out on Election Day.
Overall it makes these numbers hard to evaluate for authenticity based on that fact alone. For instance it says that 50% of people over age 100 who were registered actually voted, but there could be like 8 people registered and four of those voted. It doesn’t really give you any aggregates, only percentages, which are kinda useless without any numbers to back them up.
I am not looking at turnout magnitude. I am looking at how is almost exactly the same for every county.
minimum 50 per age group. so the 100+ year olds are not included in this graph because too noisy as you pointed out.
but doesnt it raise an eyebrow if the age distribution matches almost exactly across these random 9 counties?