Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

More Minnesota Madness

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ccharles000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:11 PM
Original message
More Minnesota Madness
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/more-minnesota-madness.html

A Minneapolis-based Daily Kos diarist named 'bitwise' has done some further sleuthing on the impending Minnesota senate recount, which we had discussed at length this morning. Here's what he's found:


The freshest data, pulled from the state website minutes ago, shows Franken down by 206 votes. The total presidential undervote is 10086. The total senate undervote is 34916. If the senate undervote is allocated to Coleman and Franken along their fraction of the Coleman+Franken vote in that precinct, Coleman would receive 16573 new votes, Franken 18342, for a Franken gain of +1769.

There are a couple of things to pick through here. Firstly, it appears that slightly more than 10,000 people undervoted the presidential race. Although there are undoubtedly cases in which the voter undervoted the presidency but not the senate race, it would appear that for the most part the presidential undervote is a subset of the senate undervote.

The research I've come across suggests that about two-thirds of presidential undervotes are unintentional. So let's take two-thirds of that 10,086 vote total and assign them to the recount pile -- that equals 6,724 votes.

There were also about 25,000 cases in which the voter voted for the presidency but undervoted the senate race (consistent with the AP's reportined finding last week). Let's assume that in most of these cases, the voter intentionally skipped the senate race, but that in one-third of cases he did not. This equals another 8,277 votes, or a total of 15,001 cases in which the voter intended to vote for the senate race, but his vote was not recorded.

In not all of these 15,001 cases, however, will the voter's intention be clear. Let's assume that one-quarter of these ballots will be unresolvable, even upon a hand recount. This means that 11,251 ballots will actually be reclassified during the recount, or about 0.4% of the total cast.

Bitwise notes, however, that Franken did in fact perform better -- really, quite a bit better -- in precincts with more undervotes. If undervotes follow the pattern of the recorded votes, then Franken would win 52.5% of recounted ballots (excluding any ballots cast for third parties). This is a significant finding, as these are the first numbers I have seen to break the undervote down to the precinct level.

Let's approach this in a couple of different directions. Firstly, let's assume that my estimate of 11,251 recounted ballots is correct and hold this number constant, but vary the share of such ballots that go to Franken. Here are his win percentages under various such scenarios:

11,251 recounted ballots (0.4% correctable error rate)======================================================Recounted BallotsResolved for Franken Franken Win %50.0% 1.85%50.1% 2.93%50.5% 13.39%51.0% 44.82%51.5% 80.18%52.0% 96.61%52.5% 99.75%53.0% 99.99%Alternatively, let's assume that Bitwise's estimate of 52.5% of recounted ballots being resolved for Franken is correct, but vary the number of qualified ballots:

Franken Wins 52.5% of Recounted Ballots======================================================Number of Recounted Ballots Franken Win %2,500 1.68%5,000 54.60%5,623 68.93%7,500 92.49%10,000 99.15%11,251 99.75%15,000 99.99%20,000 100.00%The long story short is as follows: if Al Franken in fact wins anywhere near 52.5% of the undercounted ballots, it is quite likely that he will prevail, even given what I would consider to be fairly pessimistic assumptions about the number of correctable errors. You could halve my estimate of the number of recounted ballots, for instance (to 5,623) and Franken still projects to prevail around 69% of the time. If, on the other hand, Franken only wins say 51% of the undercount, then the precise number of correctable errors is more important.

I hesitate to say this, but I think the evidence points on balance toward Franken being a slight favorite to win the recount.

-- Nate Silver at 3:13 PM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Holy crapoli. This is starting to smell like Florida 2000 all over again.
I guess it keeps some people off the streets at night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. I really hope Franken wins
he's by far the most liberal of all the senators who ran this year who had a shot of beating an incumbent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
20. I don't know
Jeff Merkeley here in OR is a great progressive. We'll be lucky to have him in the senate. I'm glad he won.

That said, I REALLY want Franken to be there. He's incredibly intelligent and of course has a great sense of humor. Coleman is such a smarmy bastard. What the hell is up with MN anyways? Many down ballot candidates didn't do that great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. Watch out for fake rioters composed of Texas yuppie
Republicans who fly into Minnesota on Lear Jets...

Just a bit of advice from a Florida in 2000 Democrat..

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thevoiceofreason Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. I think a few of us Texas deer-huntin' liberals who used to play defensive tackle
Will go up there and stage our own protest!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
4. K&R for the report. Really interesting and glad it looks like Franken will win. //nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
byronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. Rooting hard for Al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why do I want to see Norm's Face if/when he learns of Al's overwherlming gain? Am I Sick?
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desktop Donating Member (263 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. This could turn into a national scandal if optical scanning machines not working right
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Minnesota has a paper trail....something some states DON'T HAVE....
That is why they can hand count the paper ballots.

No scandal here. I wish every state had elections with a paper trail to verify votes.....

The real scandal is a state that does NOT have a paper trail
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desktop Donating Member (263 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Still a scandal if the paper trail differs significantly from scanned outcome
This would mean perhaps thousands of votes not counted or miscounted and only someplace that did a recount would find out. Yes Minnesota would get it right with the recount, but all the other places that used those types of machines and did not do a recount had bogus outcomes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. Good Job Nate!
K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
10. I have a lot of confidence in Nate Silver...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Yes! This is the year of the nerd! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
14. Does anyone know if this has any bearing on Bachmann's "election?" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShadowLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
15. Politico says if it takes too long to decide the Senate could vote on who to seat
The reason the senate could do this is that they have the power to look into senate elections where 'questionable' things happened, and to invalidate the results of an election and choose a winner themselves if the results were tampered with. Politico talks like it's only likely to happen if legal battles make it take so long to declare a winner here that the 111th congress is in session. Obviously though this would produce lots of bruised feelings no matter who's side they choose, and cause controversy either way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
16. Wouldn't it be ironic if Franken takes the lead and Coleman is behind before the recount?
You could go to the videotape where Coleman said "If it was me I would concede rather than put everyone to the trouble of a recount"(paraphrased)

In that case, he could do just that --call off the state mandated recount.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
codjh9 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
17. WTF is an 'undervote'?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xochi Donating Member (191 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 06:56 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Here's an explanation by Nate Silver...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
18. We're pulling for you, Minnesota.
We feel your pain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
21. I am completely mystifed by the needlessly complex approach Silver and Bitwise took
to a fairly simple problem. For an alternate, much simpler approach, which simply multiplies two quantities together for an estimate of the number of net votes Franken would gain in a precinct or county, see my thread at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7842561 .

Can someone explain to me why a much more complex approach than I took there (albeit with county-level data rather than precinct data) might be appropriate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
22. There is a simpler explanation...
...which is that some share of the electorate was inspired to vote for Obama, and didn't care about any of the downballot races, in which case a handcount (Minnesota uses optical scan paper ballots) may change the results, but not by a large amount.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC