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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (39530)	4/15/2004 4:25:06 AM
From: Michelino	Respond to of 793845

Margin of error is a moral unto itself. And that is why the truth is the exact opposite of your assumption that somehow using the popular vote would contribute to more recounts! Recounts are LESS likely to affect the results of the nationwide popular vote than the results of the Electoral College. For example, a shift in even 50,000 votes in Florida would not have changed who was the nationwide winner when the margin of victory was over 500,000 votes, (as was the case in the last presidential election.) But a recount that corrected even 1000 votes would have changed the EC results of 2000! That how regression to the mean works. The popular vote total is a MUCH more robust measure. This obviously needs repeating: The electoral college results are far less stable than the popular vote. For example, if in 2000 I let you drop a 100,000 votes anywhere you wanted in the whole country, you could have not affected the outcome of the winner of the popular vote. But using the same number of votes in key states you could make MASSIVE swings it the Electoral College totals Your conclusions have no sense and no science. The innumeracy of the right is quite frightening at times.