Get the links out, sure. But, we are a long way from done. We have proven nothing.

I ran this for Nebraska and checked the official numbers from the sec of state's office. The numbers we are using aren't a perfect match and it is important to check those totals - see if they match the sec of state's official numbers. If they don't, document it. We need to understand the difference - might be as simple as a different point in time that the data was last updated. (It's not huge, but it needs to be explained.)

Since the data is so close between the NYT and the sec of state, if there is data manipulation, we can be fairly confident it happens within the state's system.

Go deeper. When I reviewed the NE district and precinct numbers, those numbers tie to the state numbers. Meaning, the precinct, district and state data is consistent within the state (and reasonably close to the NYT data we are using.)

So that would suggest one of three things:

1. the negative vote lines we are seeing can be explained by someone who is knowledgeable about this data source. We need to find those data experts and have them tell us why those negative vote values are there. Could be legit.
2. the negative vote lines will not be provable using the source data - that is the paper ballots, the mail in ballots, the scanner tape, etc. So, we need to understand the audit process each precinct goes through during the post audit. If you know someone who volunteers in this area, buy them lunch. Have them tell you what they do. Look at your state's website. They typically want transparency of process. Then, logically, walk it thru - if they follow the processes, would they notice the totals changed for their precinct? If so, we are very likely just not understanding the data. If not, then, we gotta think about how to involve them. Local media. Someone who isn't going to shut it down.
3. The NYTimes is fucking w Trump and his people.

Good resource from an organization most states belong to on good practices for post-voting audits. This work is done in preparation for state certification - and they are in the midst of doing so now. Time is of the essence.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/post-election-audits635926066.aspx

Get the links out, sure. But, we are a long way from done. We have proven nothing.

I ran this for Nebraska and checked the official numbers from the sec of state's office. The numbers we are using aren't a perfect match and it is important to check those totals - see if they match the sec of state's official numbers. If they don't, document it. We need to understand the difference - might be as simple as a different point in time that the data was last updated. (It's not huge, but it needs to be explained.)

Since the data is so close between the NYT and the sec of state, if there is data manipulation, we can be fairly confident it happens within the state's system.

Go deeper. When I reviewed the NE district and precinct numbers, those numbers tie to the state numbers. Meaning, the precinct, district and state data is consistent within the state (and reasonably close to the NYT data we are using.)

So that would suggest one of two things:

1. the negative vote lines we are seeing can be explained by someone who is knowledgeable about this data source. We need to find those data experts and have them tell us why those negative vote values are there. Could be legit.
2. the negative vote lines will not be provable using the source data - that is the paper ballots, the mail in ballots, the scanner tape, etc. So, we need to understand the audit process each precinct goes through during the post audit. If you know someone who volunteers in this area, buy them lunch. Have them tell you what they do. Look at your state's website. They typically want transparency of process. Then, logically, walk it thru - if they follow the processes, would they notice the totals changed for their precinct? If so, we are very likely just not understanding the data. If not, then, we gotta think about how to involve them. Local media. Someone who isn't going to shut it down.

Good resource from an organization most states belong to on good practices for post-voting audits. This work is done in preparation for state certification - and they are in the midst of doing so now. Time is of the essence.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/post-election-audits635926066.aspx