Morendil comments on Open Thread June 2010, Part 4 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Will_Newsome 19 June 2010 04:34AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (325)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kevin 19 June 2010 06:06:09AM *  5 points [-]

Strange occurrence in US South Carolina Democratic primary.

The only explanation, Mr. Rawl’s representatives told the committee, was faulty voting machines — not chance, name order on the ballot, or Republicans crossing over to vote for the weaker Democrat. With testimony dominated by talk of standard variances, preference theories and voting machine software, the hearing took on the spirit of a political science seminar.

The Washington Post profiled Alvin Greene last week

10 minute video interview with Greene

What happened here?

Wikipedia has a list of possible explanations.

Fivethirtyeight lists possible explanations and analysis.

Rawl and co presented five hours of testimony that the results could only be attributed to a problem with the voting machines.

What is your probability estimate for Alvin Greene's win in this election being legitimate (Greene getting lucky as a result of aggregate voter intent+indifference+confusion, as opposed to voting machine malfunction or some sort of active conspiracy)? What evidence do you need in order to update your estimate?

Comment author: Morendil 19 June 2010 01:30:00PM 5 points [-]

My most likely explanations would be 1) software bug(s) 2) voter whim or confusion 3) odd hypothesis no one has thought of yet. Active intent to steal the nomination a distant fourth. Make it 60/30 among the first two.

Evidence? Well, anything credible, but how likely is that. :)