mug     



Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Search




Advanced Search


Active Users
Currently 1 user(s) logged on.



Follow us on Twitter! or join our Facebook group!

Mathematical Illiteracy Demands a Recount

by: FXF

Sat Aug 28, 2010 at 13:57:49 PM EDT


(I've said that recounts don't change these elections by three figures unless there was a clear screw-up somewhere... this diary breaks that throwaway line out into a real argument. - promoted by odum)

The chance that the recount of the 5-way primary election for the Democratic nomination will change the results is virtually nil unless systematic fraud was done by people trying to prevent Racine's election. Since nobody thinks that was the case, what the recount is going to to do is to clean up all the little random errors that creep into the process:

* hand counted ballots that are accidentally put into the wrong pile

* rejected ballots that clearly indicate a preference

* errors of transposition of numbers

* errors of transcription of numbers for one candidate into an other candidate

FXF :: Mathematical Illiteracy Demands a Recount
Errors of the last two types are highly unlikely given the closeness of the outcome. Before transmitting the official results on Wednesday, clerks around the state knew the importance of triple checking their work. Furthermore, the double blind entry of data at the state election office assured the state that it was identifying and resolving those issues right away.

Indeed, after all this careful work Shumlin's lead increased by around a dozen votes. And the final results, when you look at them by county and town, all fit into patterns that don't raise any red flags where one might say "golly, did Lamoile county mix up Matt Dunne's results with Susan Bartlett's?

Now the question becomes how many of the other two types of errors were there? Well, the state bar for demanding a recount is for the vote differential to be under 2%. This implies that the state anticipates a 1% error rate in vote counting and reporting -- because a 1% error can turn a 2% victory into a tie.

This in turn means that there may be around 750 errors out there. Random errors -- we've already decided that nobody thinks there was fraud anywhere.

How will random errors distribute themselves?

Randomly.

This means that each candidate's error rate will be in proportion to the votes they attracted. Doug and Peter would both be expected to have around 180 errors. If they broke 50-50, they both wind up in the same place. But they won't break 50-50 because of the other candidates in the race. Instead the votes Peter loses will go proportionally to Doug, Deb, Matt and Susan. And the votes Doug loses will go to Peter, Deb, Matt and Susan.

It's the involvement of the other 5 candidates that make the recount extremely unlikely to change the outcome if the errors are random.

Since nobody in the Racine camp is pointing out to problems with the vote totals out of a particular county or town, I'm not sure why they think there is more than a one-in-a-thousand chance that the random errors will break in Doug's favor. In effect, they are saying that in 180 flips of their own coin they are going to come up heads 2/3rds of the time, and that when Peter flips his coin 180 times he's going to come up tails 2/3rds of the time and so will Deb, Matt and Susan -- and that the benefit of all the 'tails' flips will be in Doug's favor.

That's a very, very, very, very, very, very steep hill of probability to climb.

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Raise Your Voice!
I count ballots by hand in my town (0.00 / 0)
I've done it for over 20 years.

This diary is excellent. It puts into probability terms what I know but would not have been able to explain in such detail.

Thanks.

The recount requst is a huge mistake, whose only purpose will be to bting "closure" for Doug and some of his supporters who urged him to do this.

He could still change his mind...


No mistake (3.67 / 3)
A recount is not only not a mistake, it is absolutely essential to a Democratic victory.  Without a recount there will be those who voted in the Democratic primary who will not vote in the general as they are suspicious of the count.  A recount keeps them in the fold.  A recount also keeps the Democrat's momentum going as the media will be focused on the recount and not on Dubie.  There will be a change in the vote totals.  There always is a change.  If just one vote changes to Doug or away from Peter in each district, we have a new winner.  We need to have the security of knowing that the votes have been counted correctly, the enthusiasm to keep the focus on our Democrats and the endurance to get a large turnout in the general election.  This recount can be a positive if we stay together and remember that our target is to elect a Democrat as Governor.  Nothing else is particularly important at this time.

[ Parent ]
Great point (2.33 / 3)
Nice work FX, your point about how a 5 way race is exponentially less likely to come out with significant changes transcends politics and ascends into the lofty realm of statistical geekiness.  

Thank you; I think this is a very helpful diary (3.00 / 1)
and reassures us that the vote tally is unlikely to change.  That being said, the fact that so many people are calling for it (did I hear something about 85% of voters on last nights news?) including supporters of candidates other than Doug Racine, we should adopt a positive perspective on the recount and assume that it will further validate Peter Shumlins presumed candidacy and allow that large segment of voters to invest themselves more enthusiastically  in the general campaign...which to my mind has already begun.

Complaining about the recount is not going to change the fact that it is, in fact,  happening now.  It only represents an obstacle if we choose to dwell on it as such.


A recount has not been requested yet. (0.00 / 0)
Can't be requested until Tuesday. It doesn't have to be requested.

I'm assuming there will be one and that we'll all be in "political purgatory" (as vtdigger.com called it) until it's over. There are worse places than purgatory, but I have no doubt that the odds of electing a non-Dubie are measurable less now. Which deeply sucks.

There was a real failure of leadership among the candidates, IMO, all of them, in failing to have a political game plan agreed to for this contingency, which was obviously a possibility. I have no doubt Shumlin would have asked for a recount too if he was 180 votes behind. That's the problem. The primary is supposed to be the preliminaries, not the main event.


[ Parent ]
It's going to happen; that's the reality. (0.00 / 0)
My own personal perspective is to simply concentrate on Dubie.

[ Parent ]
Oh.... (1.00 / 1)
...I aint done complainin' yet ;)

Nullius perfectus est

[ Parent ]
But the nature of "random".. (4.00 / 1)
There is the "probability" that there will be a random distribution, but the mere fact that there is a random distribution, presupposes the "possibility" that all the error corrections could end up for one candidate.

The theory of Chaos demonstrates this point.

Short version - keep all "chances" on the horses; which is not a "random" game.


and what does this have to do with.... (0.00 / 0)
...not electing Dubie?

[ Parent ]
Chaos Theory (4.00 / 2)
Since my name is being bandied about so freely I would just like to observe that the perceived closeness of the vote by members of the electorate who are neither statisticians nor students of quantum mechanics will, in the absence of a recount, leave a niggling doubt in the minds of the approximately 74% of the electorate whose candidate didn't come out on top in the certified count. I include ALL non- winning candidate's supporters because in a 5 way race we all run a little IRV machine in our heads.

A court supervised recount will eliminate doubts, not of fraud, but of possible human error and get all the team pulling in a straight line to victory in November. Generally, all publicity is good publicity. The press will be focused on the recount and provide all candidates the opportunity to exhibit statesmanlike behavior while Dubie remains sealed in his bunker.

And finally, even Schrödinger didn't know if his cat was alive or dead, at least for the first few days.

Random Arrow

Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?


Recounting for Democracy (3.00 / 2)
Last year we were all inspired by the democratic recount process in Minnesota where Al Frankin eventually won by 300+/- votes after Colman had declared himself the winner in the November 2008 election.
I say respect the process but verify that every vote is counted correctly.
Minnesota proved that there are many ways for votes to be wrongly counted, and not all of them sinister.

There is also plenty of precedent to question the validity of the optical scanner counts.
As discussed here http://hackingdemocracy.com/ and here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
I hope all actual paper ballots are hand counted to assuage that worry.

What I really miss is Instant Runoff Voting.  
Despite the complexity it was a real breath of democracy in action....
And applied here we would really know which candidate most democratic voters in VT preferred... and know who that was only as late as a day after the election too !

(Cross posted)


Final results follow up (4.00 / 1)

Now that the results are in, we know that:

* The towns did an exceptional job of counting originally. The error rate was .19%, or 19 votes in 10,000. That is about 20% of the expected 1% error rate. As I predicted, because it was a top-of-the-ticket race, the towns were super-careful in their initial reporting.

* The errors were random. Both candidates added and lost handfuls or no votes. It was like coin-flipping.

There was no evidence to support the recount request. Making it wasted a lot of time and effort. Future recount requests should not be supported absent a compelling case that the results will be changed.



GMD Links

Vermont Daily Briefing
Rational Resistance
VT News Guy
VT Digger
Minor Heresies
What's the Point?
Vermont Yankee, evacuation plans, & more
Mulish Behavior
Political Animal (with Steve Benen)
Reason and Brimstone
Blazing Indiscretions
sneigwh
Dohiyi Mir
Blier Watch
five before chaos
Blue Hampshire
Blue News Tribune
Burlington Pol
Norsehorse
Rip & Read
Integral Psychosis
VT Secession
Tenselblog
VT Bloggernaut
Morgan's Gov. race blog
Bureaucracy Blog
Austanspace

Non-political

Candleblog
iBrattleboro
WKVT 1490 AM
Vermont Mornings
False 45th
Bosox Wally

National

Congress Matters
Daily Kos
Open Left
BlogPac
Talking Points Memo
My Left Wing
MyDD
Docudharma
Glenn Greenwald
Firedoglake
Atrios (Eschaton)
Think Progress
Driftglass
Pam's House Blend
Hullabaloo (Digby)
The Plum Line (Sargent)

Legacy Media Blogs

Vermont View
vt buzz
Blurt (7 Days)

International

The Irish Independent
Comment is free...(Guardian UK)
Al Jazeera
Pulse Media
Global Voices
All Voices
Vermonters for a Just Peace in Israel/Palestine




Specialized Feeds:

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Subscribe with Bloglines
Subscribe in NewsGator Online

Add to My AOL
Subscribe in Rojo
R|Mail
Add to Technorati Favorites!


RSS FEED

250-1

75-1


blog advertising is good for you
Event Calendar
February 2012
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 * * *
<< (add event) >>



Featured Stories
State and Local
National and International




Powered by: SoapBlox