Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : G&K Investing for Curmudgeons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (8346)	11/13/2000 4:40:07 PM
From: FaultLine	Respond to of 22706

It's impossible to prove that the ballot is the sole cause of the voters' confusion. Mike, you weren't taking good notes on this last week were you? We are going to have a quiz next week and everyone knows how to do this except you... --cfl@ltb&hputssomeitoastupor.com

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (8346)	11/13/2000 4:58:11 PM
From: EnricoPalazzo	Respond to of 22706

It's impossible to prove that the ballot is the sole cause of the voters' confusion Of course it isn't the sole cause. Failing eyesight, arthritis, a head cold, etc. may have also contributed. It's really indisputable that it played a very large role, though. For instance, of the 4 precincts they counted, Palm Beach found about 120 "overvotes." Of the 120 possible "overvote" combinations in a ballot with seven options, two would make sense if the voters were confused by the ballot: Buchanan-Gore and Gore-Person below him. Look at the following (4-5 and 5-6 would be expected): Gore/ 4 <======== Buchanan/ Lieberman ======> 5 David Duke Prez A/ 6 <======== Prez B/ VP A ======> 7 What did we find? Of those roughly 120 overvotes, 80 count 'em) were for 4-5, and 20 were for 5-6. That leaves about 20, which we can explain by random error (very few combos had more than 1), or just silliness (one guy voted for everybody). and check out: amazon.com ardethan@howtoliewithstatistics.com