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.

Politics : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (5020)	12/6/2000 12:29:55 PM
From: TraderGreg	Respond to of 6710

<<Since you know a lot about statistics, and I don't, you can tell me whether I am right or wrong when I say that to manually recount mostly black precincts which voted heavily for Gore is more likely to give more votes to Gore than if you manually recount the entire county. >> The answer to that depends on what the hand count is identifying. IF the hand count is ADDING votes that were missed by machine and you assume the cause of that miss was not related to specific sections of the ballot but just random user error, then each candidate would be expected to receive votes in direct proportion to their vote totals before.So, a 60-40 prior total spread should produce added votes in that same ratio. IF the hand count is not related to an undervote, but due to a mistabulation(highly unlikely on a machine vote) the each candidate would be expected to LOSE votes in direct proportion to their vote totals. Recounts that produce switches might take a 70 to 30 spread and narrow it to say 69-31 or 68-32. TG