WA governor's race

[MoreSpaceEcho]

.
BTW. Kerry won. The recount in Ohio will show that Bush is monkey-man.

i'm with ya. i doubt the recount is gonna show anything though....

swingdoc's last post made my brain implode. damn i am dumb.

[jamoo]

I like the necklace-of-scorpions northern-European style parliments where the leading party and the 2nd runner-up party have to form a coalition, without which they'll both be immobilized. That's pretty awesome. Combine that with executive veto power, and you've got a pretty decent system of checks-and.

I like the necklace-of-scorpions description. Those European coalitions definitely spice up the political world, but they do have the drawback of giving those 2nd runner ups more political representation/power than is warranted by their popular support.

[andrew embassy]

Oh boy, heres what I did tonight....

Here's a brief statistical look at the numbers of the 2 recounts (machine/ hand); (Applied just for Rossi/Gregoire)

Machine:
All other counties excluding King:
total votes 1,887,963 Change: +26 Rossi (0.001377%);
King: 856,963 Change : +245 gregoire (0.02859%)

Hand:
All other counties excluding King:
total votes: 1,889,094 Change +7 Rossi (0.0003705%);
King 857,500 change +179 gregoire (0.020875%)

Combined:
All other counties excluding King: total votes recounted: 3,777,058 +33 Rossi (0.00087369%)
King: 1,694,463 + 424 gregoire (0.0250227%)

So my quick math shows that the change rate in all other counties is just 35/1000ths of the change rate in King Co.
Or this is to say, King county changed their votes by a factor of 286 times (or 2,864%) the rate that all other counties combined changed their votes.
I did the probablity determination using chi-squared analysis.
Sounds like this:
I used all the counties except King County as the control, or that which demonstrates the expected vote change rate of the recount.
The rate of vote change (unilateral) was +33 out of 3,777,058 or 0.000873%
So, the same expected rate of change for King Co (1,694,463) would be +14 , but the actual observed number was 424.
We want to know whether this reflects a statistically significant variation, or whether it's just coincidence. Statistical calculations cannot of course answer this definitively, but we can answer a related one: If the rate of change is determined at 0.00873%, what is the probability of 424 votes changing out of 1,694,463 votes?

Here's the answer:
P value and statistical significance:
Chi squared equals 12007.242 with 1 degrees of freedom.
The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001
By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant.

So there it is. Based purely on the numbers of the rate of vote change, (King County compared to all others) I do not believe that one can reasonably assume random variation in the way the votes changed.
If it was not random, then by definition it must be considered a guided or biased change.
Notice too, that this is simply a numerical analysis of the variation of the recounting, or a review of the proposed system "error" rate.

I must conclude therefore that there is absolutely no scientific confidence in the recount changes (King Co vs all others) as being a random statistical event.

Take care ya'll,
and Merry Christmas,
Mark

Hey Mark-

(merry Christmas!)

Are you counting the 566 votes that were counted during the hand election in your numbers?

I ask because (one) I don't know dick about statistics and I can't quite tell) and (two) this obviously would skew things pretty substantially, and I think this error is documented well enough to not include it in potential fraudulent activities. There still is the problem with the +300 something votes with the machine recount and hand recount, but yeah.

On another note I have to add- Mary Lane and some members of the Rossi camp are annoying the hell out of me. The way they're spining this just leaves an awful taste in my mouth. It'd be one thing if they were like "We want to make sure that if people's votes should be counted that they are, and if they shouldn't be counted then they're not- we don't believe that it's been fairly handled and we want to make sure that everybody from each county has the same opportunity to make their vote count" But instead they're like "Gregoire seems to think they can just change the rules on us, so fine, we're going to play by those rules! Gregoire only cares that Democrats in King County get their votes heard, she doesn't care about our servicemen in Iraq getting their voice heard..." When Gregoire didn't have anything to do with the state supreme court's decision, nor did she have anything to do with the clerical error that left the 566 (I think that was the final tally) votes uncounted till this final recount. This equation of all things King County as Democratic and Pro Gregoire just seems to be an attempt to galvanize and enrage their base instead of actually argue their point.

[swingdoc]

Hi,
yah everything is included. And I see you're point. But like you suspect, even the 300+ gained prior to the addition of the recently found ballots will still be significant.
I agree with your frustration with the current spinning. Its all crap. Funny, if the Supreme court said "no, cant include them", the election would still be over in favour of Gregoire. So the courts' ruling is actually quite favorable to the repubs because it gives them the only legal basis of contesting the elections validity. (except ballot fraud etc).
Finally, my problem with the whole thing is the way we somehow came to the conclusion that the machine recount is more likely to produce an unnacceptable error rate, but a hand recount done by partisan participants is more likely to produce most accurate results. I mean, geesh, a 1st grader would have a problem with that concept. That quote by Gregoire "I dont trust machines" is just ringing in my brain...uuggh.
Some of the stories from the observers, photos etc are pretty uncomfortable.
My take on all this would include the following revisions:
Hand recounts need to have equal number of partisan participants per ballot. Ties go to a board (larger than the current canvas of 3 people) for a ruling in which a super majority is needed to confirm "intent" of the voter.
Finally all disputed ballots in which voter intent was needed to be interpreted should be public property (anonomously of course) for everyone to be able to see for themselves. This is the only way to keep public confidence.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.

[Piotr]

Remarkable that Rossi would complain so loudly about Gregoire contesting the recounts only to demand an entirely new election.

Hypocrite. What is he, drunk? Martini & Rossi anybody?

[MASSIVE Mastering]

Here's what I have a problem with - Either winner, doesn't matter...

Original vote - R

First recount - R

Second recount - R

Then suddenly, 700-ish votes are "found" - That's one thing. However, the fact that 550 of them are from the same address bugs me.

But I'm sure none of you find that the least bit suspicious, as long as the "D" wins, right?

[marqueemoon]

I'm not going to lie. I took great pleasure in watching Dino Rossi demand a re-vote on the news last night (looking every bit the whiny little bitch), but I want our governor to be the person the people of this state voted for. If we need a re-vote to decide the outcome, then I'll be among the first in line.

[ottokbre]

I'm not going to lie. I took great pleasure in watching Dino Rossi demand a re-vote on the news last night (looking every bit the whiny little bitch), but I want our governor to be the person the people of this state voted for. If we need a re-vote to decide the outcome, then I'll be among the first in line.

did you happen to catch his "copy guy" shoes that he was wearing?

and is it just me or is does his son follow him around like he's mini-me?

[andrew embassy]

Here's what I have a problem with - Either winner, doesn't matter...

Original vote - R

First recount - R

Second recount - R

Then suddenly, 700-ish votes are "found" - That's one thing. However, the fact that 550 of them are from the same address bugs me.

But I'm sure none of you find that the least bit suspicious, as long as the "D" wins, right?

Same address? Are you talking about the same county or actual same address? And does it bug you like it would bug me if the reverse were true but the votes came from Spokane like as in "ah dang, those votes are totally going to help the other person" or does it bug you like "Those votes can't be legit."?

Because I totally would understand if the former were true, but if you're going to argue for fraud then let's have it out with facts instead of insinuations; I think we're all tired of those from both sides.

To my knowledge, nobody has brought out any evidence that the votes were anything but an administrative mistake that was corrected before the results from that county were certified, something that was done in Kitsap county (to the tune of 244 votes) Peirce County, uh, and I think three other counties; I'm not sure exactly which ones.

It seems to me that those votes are going to be gone over with fine tooth combs to make absolutely sure they're legit, both by the Democrats and the Republicans. The hand recount was done by bipartisan pannels, with observers present to make sure things were smooth.

Earlier Swingdoc stated that he was more suspicous of people than machines, which I think in some cases is certainly true, but machines do misread votes, and if you have enough people (especially enough bipartisan and independent people) you can get a more accurate hand recount than machines.

It certainly doesn't seem very probable that the first and second recount would go to Rossi and then the final would go to Gregoire, but when you're talking 240 votes to start out with, it becomes a lot more possible. I think if the recounts showed Rossi's lead steadily increasing or remaining the same then I think Gregoire would have (or at least should have) conceeded. But with such a small margin, I think it made sense to go for the most accurate count, and I think, with the bipartisan panels and observers, we've gotten as close as we can get within state laws.

People are really quick to call fraud, and the term "stolen election" has been bandied about WAY more than it should in the past four years, and while I won't begrudge Republicans feeling entitled to (ab)use it when appropriate, I'll need to see some hard evidence of wrongdoing before I start my chanting...

[swingdoc]

The case that may still hold water is that King Co. had different rules to play with after the other counties certified.
The 550 "same address" voters mentioned above I believe refers to the 550 voters registered at a King Co. election administration office. It is believed these were "homeless" people recruited by the dems and they used the admin office as their address. The problem with this is that these people have no way of being tracked down, and if they were registered early on a voter drive, but failed to come in to vote, then basically its an open ballot to those at the admin office with no way of confirming.

My biggest problems with this thing are the statistical anomolies with the recounts.
If one believes that a recount is basically going to have a variability average based on the intrinsic lack of reproducability (ie error rate), then one can determine an expected outcome, and compare to the observed outcome. This is where there real stink is. All of the recount variation that falls outside of statistical probability occurs in favour of Gregoire, and occur most notably in the heavily Dem or split counties. It is then fair to ask why, and its reasonable to assume fraud and foul play. Public opinion follows this same line of reasoning. The polls are still 2 to 1 in favour of a new election, and about that same percentage still believes Rossi won the "real" election.

Now heres a few more numbers used to back up the above statement:

We can look at the %change in votes for the 1st and 2nd recounts in each county. Then you can calculate a bias. The bias is the difference between the expected number of changed votes, and the actual observed. For example if the previous (1st count) was 60% Gregoire and 40% Rossi, and 10 new votes were counted, one would expect 6 new Greg, and 4 new Rossi. So if the actual observed number was say 7 and 3, the bias would be listed as +1. Then one can calculate a probability of seeing such a bias. Remember a 5% bias falls outside 2 standard deviations, and is usually considered significant. However, for scientific purposes, a probabilty doesnt start becoming too important until its <1%, and becomes "almost proof" when it falls below <0.1%. (one in a thousand chance)

So....
In King County, for the machine recount, there was a 0.11% change, with 593 new greg votes, and 348 new Rossi votes, equating to a Gregoire bias of +38, which falls below 1% probability. (0.67%). Then for the hand recount, they had another 0.06% change with 358 new Greg, and 179 new Rossi, for a bias of +41, and a probability of seeing such a bias at just 0.02%!. ( So this means, if one recounts votes with an unbiased method, one would see such a unilateral move in just one in five thousand counts.)
Pierce co: Manual recount, bias +24 for gregoire , probability of just 1.07%.
Snohomish county: Bias +21 for Gregoire, with a probabilty of 0.15%.
Walla Walla county: Bias +21 Gregoire, prob 0.04%.
Kitsap Co: +17 for greg, probability, <0.01%.

None of the other counties had a bias greater than +6 in either direction. And only one county had a + Rossi bias with a prob of <5%. That was Skagit county manual recount with a total bias of +6 Rossi, with a probablity of 3.13%, which is close to the magic 5% declaring it a likely random event.

So these are just the numerical facts, scientific, analysis of the supposed..."lets just recount the votes". I understand that no system can be 100% accurate. I've heard that some people are saying the recounts were like 99.9% reproducible (accurate). The problem is, is that last 0.1% a biased inaccuracy, or a random inaccuracy? The Gregoire campaign claims its random number variation, the Rossi camp claims its biased. I believe the numbers support the Rossi's claim of a biased tilt to the recount. Hey, if the numbers didnt show this, I wouldnt say it.
Finally, a lot of people are sayin, "well, show us the fraud, or stop bitching." Whatever. I can appreciate that. Its still early. There are some soft leads that are coming out. I'll ask this, would it surprise anyone if fraud was clearly determined?
It may not happen, but I think there is still a possibilty that this election is going to be re-done. If it does Rossi will win by 10%.

Democracy in the US. Its still better than sticks and stones.

[Piotr]

My only other comment would be:

Get a vote-by-mail system like we have in Oregon...

[Ivon]

Oh boy, heres what I did tonight....
Here's the answer:
P value and statistical significance:
Chi squared equals 12007.242 with 1 degrees of freedom.
The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001
By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be extremely statistically significant.

Uhhh, Dude...you're like, tripping me out. Actually, I'm impressed that you actually took the time to gather those numbers and do the math. But wouldn't you rather be working on your music?

Anyway, regardless of which candidate becomes our governor in Washington (at this point it's Gregoire, unless a revote occurs), will it really make a difference in the quasi grand scheme of our lives - and grand span of time prior to and beyond our lives? I truly doubt it. Every great kingdom in the world's history has risen to power...and fallen. Babylonia, Medo-Persia, Alexandria, Rome, et cetera (not that these are in order). The USA is just another great power in a line of several.

We're but a brief moment existing - or living - between history and the future that stretches before us. But, we can make some speculations as to what the future holds, based upon humankind's history. I think it's safe to say that whomever the Governor of Washington State is won't really make any difference in the overall spectrum of human existence. Our kingdom has risen...and sadly, will eventually fall no matter who Washington's governor is. Granted, I don't want the USA to fall, but that's just been the pattern of world powers throughout history.

Regards,
Ivon

[Piotr]

Fuck that. Rule Cascadia!!!

[Ivon]

Fuck that. Rule Cascadia!!!

Ha! If that's a reply to my tirade, I'm LMAO. Long live Rhodes AND his totally rad hair! Honestly.