there are three possibilities:
* Some ballots are counted by Diebold machines.
* Some ballots are counted by ES&S machines.
* Some ballots are counted by hand.
Let me note that neither the Diebold nor the ES&S ballots lack a
paper trail in this case. These are optical-scan systems, where the
voter marks a paper ballot that is subsequently counted by computer.
There is, then, the possibility of a recount, but only if the issue
is forced, since the election was not considered close enough to
mandate an automatic recount. Given the problems demonstrated with
Diebold systems and the serious allegations made against ES&S,
perhaps such a recount should be pursued. In any case, here are the
vote totals and percentages for the big five candidates, grouped by
vote tallying method (percentages are percentages of the big five
vote, i.e., it does not include the minor candidates)).
VotingTechUsed Kerry Kperc Dean Dperc Edwards Eperc Clark
Cperc Lieberman Lperc
Diebold 59421 40.1% 37589 25.4% 18334 12.4% 19119 12.9%
13549 9.2%
ES&S 5952 37.6% 4415 27.9% 1877 11.8% 2076 13.1% 1516
9.6%
Hand 19004 34.9% 18148 33.3% 6276 11.5% 7217 13.2% 3846
7.1%
To bring the matter into sharper focus, here are the percentages by
which Kerry's vote exceeded Dean's, grouped by tallying method.
VotingTechUsed % Margin
Diebold 58.1%
ES&S 35.0%
Hand 4.7%
Given that Kerry won by all accounts, does this matter? Yes it does.
Had Dean gotten close to winning, as low as he had been the week
before, he would have gotten the momentum to remain competitive, but
instead New Hampshire seems to have doomed him. This may therefore go
down as the pivotal election of this primary. Also, the election is
not winner-take-all; delegates are assigned proportionally.
Is there any other explanation for the discrepancy? Well, the
computerized systems are mostly used in the larger towns in New
Hampshire. Can this be attributed to a rural preference for Dean? If
the sample is limited to towns with fewer than 20,000 voters, the
results are but slightly different.
VotingTechUsed Kerry Kperc Dean Dperc Edwards Eperc Clark
Cperc Lieberman Lperc
Diebold 43428 39.4% 29456 26.8% 13283 12.1% 14632 13.3% 9289
8.44%
ES&S 5952 37.6% 4415 27.9% 1877 11.9% 2076 13.1% 1516
9.57%
Hand 19004 34.9% 18148 33.3% 6276 11.5% 7217 13.2% 3846
7.05%
A dramatic rural preference for Dean would be odd, given that his
primary demographic is youth, but odd or not, such is not present in
the figures, at least not to the extent necessary to explain the data.
The Dean campaign has cause for a recount, in my opinion. Whether
they have a legal case, I don't know. I think it would be better if a
suit demanding recount were brought by a third party, however,rather
than the Dean campaign, even though they are the (possibly) offended
party.
At the very least, the possibility should be investigated. Someone
with access to lawyers should inquire whether the ballots are still
available for recount and how long they should remain available,
according to law.
79 comments
Date: 2004-02-05 11:56
Subject: Methodology and Code of New Hampshire Analysis
Security: Public
OK, here's where I outline exactly how I did the analysis of the New
Hampshire Democratic primary including code. If you don't know what
I'm talking about, see the previous entry in this blog.
The short version is that I downloaded the HTML tables of precinct
results from the Secretary of State website and loaded them into
Access using its HTML import facility (yes, yes, I know, but Access
is what I had at hand, and I was in a hurry). I then entered the
voting machine data. Finally, I derived answers using straightforward
SQL code (Access has an SQL interface, and that's pretty much what I
used). SQL has built-in functions to derive aggregates (such as
totals) over groups defined by a common value (like vote counting
technique).
I got the voting total per precinct from this URL (click on the
county name at the bottom to get the totals for precincts in that
county).
I used the following page to determine which precincts were using which
counting techniques.
Date: 2004-01-28 19:48
Subject: Tracking Touch Screen Precincts
Security: Public
To my knowledge, there is no list of which precincts nationwide are
using touch-screen machines. We need to compile one and fast. I'm
creating a list here and hope to get material from as many places as
possible. Please email to me whatever you find. Here is the table
format I will use:
Precinct County State % of vote touch-screen touch-screen company
I also will include state totals in a separate table. As the
primaries proceed, we should examine these precincts carefully for
unusual deviations from regular or exit poll predictions.
7 comments | post a
comment
There is some good material about the voting machines if you scroll down the page a bit (or
search "voting machines") at Exploded
View
At the top of the page on Exploded
View there is something else of interest, a draft for a peace agreement between Greens and
Democrats, posted "In response to Ralph's announcement that he's still running." It's a
brilliant idea and points the way to a truly constructive way for Greens and Democrats to join
forces to unseat the Neos and then fight out their differences later.
There is one problem with it. You may get the Democrats and the Greens to agree, but then you
have Nader. Nader isn't running as a Green. The Greens would mostly probably agree that Nader
is not helping things by running as a third party candidate right here right now.
But it's still a step in the right direction conceptually. It points to a more enlightened
resolution of these differences than we are accustomed to.
But lower down the page there are some important reports on the voting machine questions as
they relate to the New Hampshire primary. These are issues that must not be swept under the
rug. There is nothing fringey or radical about wanting to secure the integrity of the
vote-tabulating machinery.