#### Comment Preferences

• ##### Here's my math(8+ / 0-)

There are 8900 undervotes on the presidential race. I'd argue that any extra undervotes in the senate race are deliberate, so let's start with that number.

A 2006 audit in the Minnesota senate race showed a .05% rate of machine error. That would explain 1500 of the undervotes, leaving 7400. A 2004 study in FL counties which looked at optical scan machines, like MN's showed, of the undervotes which were not machine error (different machines, so that part is meaningless), 24% were correctible voter error (marking an X in the wrong place, etc.). So that would be about 1800.

If the 461 disqualified absentee ballots, and others like them across the state, are eventually validated, that could be as much as about 1400 more votes.

There are two ways Franken could win: through random fluctuations (luck) in those ballots, or if they were systematically more Democratic. Random fluctuations would lead to a standard deviation of not more than 35 votes; that means there's a 98% chance that the deviation is under 70 votes.

So he needs a systematic advantage. To add 206 votes out of a pool of 1800 (the machine errors can have no bias), those votes must break for Franken by about 11%. With Barkley in the picture, that means that they must be about 47/35 F/C. On exit polls, the best Franken demographics - low income, minority, and first-time voters - only make about 52/33. So these good demographics must be about 80% of the undervotes. Since they are under 1/3 of the voters, that would mean they would be 8 times as likely to make a correctible voter error than other voters. That is a massive difference. On the other hand, in FL-2000, correctible voter error on optical scan ballots tilted about 20% more democratic than the counties in question, so it is not out of the question.

Still, those absentee ballots are key. I can't really see that Franken can have more than a 50/50 chance, even under the best possible assumptions, without them.

Opinions are like assholes. I spend way too much time looking at them on the internet.

• ##### But you are assuming that none of the counted (3+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
rincewind, mcartri, Don Enrique

• ##### Didn't talk about that(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
mcartri

but those votes should change in a pretty unbiased way overall. That would increase the standard deviation (double, because each changed vote is a 2-vote shift). But there's no reason to believe that there would not be fewer changed votes than machine-caused undercounts, so the stdev is still somewhere (significantly) south of 70, which means a 98% chance that he'll get fewer than 140 votes on that basis alone.

The Absentees are The Keys.

Opinions are like assholes. I spend way too much time looking at them on the internet.

[ Parent ]

• ##### My god are you wrong(0+ / 0-)

I've lived through several recount'sin Minnesota's downticket races.  And I've seen dozens of votes change in state house races.  If you extrapolate that to the entire state for a US senate race, I think it is highly likely that several hundred up to two thousand votes may be added or subtracted.

• ##### I said <1500(0+ / 0-)

which is not far off your estimate. The 70 number is the standard deviation based on random fluctuations, which is the square root of the total of vote changes from all sources. It's only what's left over after most of the vote changes cancel out.

Opinions are like assholes. I spend way too much time looking at them on the internet.

[ Parent ]

• ##### Not just undervotes(4+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
buddabelly, mcartri, brein, Don Enrique

Some portion of the ballots may not have been counted at all. At the precinct I was doing Voter Protection (VA), one voter noticed that scan machine's counter didn't change. Her ballot might not have been counted. And, she's the one who actually noticed this. How many others didn't even notice?

Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

[ Parent ]

• ##### same thing happened to me in '06 here in Az.(0+ / 0-)

supposedly, the machine was to be hand recounted at election HQ after I pointed it out.

A view from the border you need to see.

[ Parent ]

• ##### Many "undervotes" are disputable(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
mcartri, brein

as are the validity of disqualified absentee ballots.  Therein lies the importance of Franken lawyers at every count site.  This is by no means a given.  Franken is pleading online for donations.

Coleman, it seems, has them already due to the generosity of Mitt Romney.

Link to Franken recount contribution page:
https://secure.alfranken.com/...

Money is more important than math.

• ##### 9,848 Pres Undervotes(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
homunq

The hand inspection audits this week resulted in lost votes in some cases.

I also don't think that .05% is the correct machine error rate, won't random machine errors generally cancel each other out?

Although it IS a small sample, the recently counted 32 absentee ballots heavily favored Franken (he gained 11 votes), more so than the county at large.

• ##### Good catch(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
brein

9,848 not 8900. That lowers the margin Franken needs without the absentees to 9-10%, still pretty high - it would mean the "good" populations would need to have been over 5 times as likely to make voting errors.

As you say, the absentees should be strongly Franken, and if he (has the money to) get these counted his chances are good. But without them, it is feasible, but a bit of a stretch.

0.053% is correct, it was something like 48 votes out of 97,000 in the 2006 audit. And you are right, these mostly cancel each other out; random fluctuations lead to a margin of something less than twice the square root of the number of random errors. That is what I was talking about with the standard deviation above.

Opinions are like assholes. I spend way too much time looking at them on the internet.

[ Parent ]

• ##### jmho(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
homunq, brein

I don't think the 2006 audit numbers will necessarily hold for this election. All mid-term elections drop off from Pres elections, and this year MN increased its traditionally-high turn-out rate. Mid-term voters tend to be the hard-core committed voters, and the increased turn-out in Pres-election years are the newbies/intermittent voters (more susceptible to making mistakes?).

IMPEACH "...so that no future president may infer that we have implicitly sanctioned what we have not explicitly condemned." John Conyers, 1974

[ Parent ]

• ##### systematic advantage(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
brein

since new voters are more likely to make errors than experienced voters I would expect that votes counted in the recount will come disproportionately from:
-young voters
-people who registered for the first time this year

both of which are friendly demographics... so the presence of a systemic advantage seems likely to me.

• ##### Also absentee(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
homunq

Folded ballots are less likely to be read correctly.

I believe Franken won with absentees but I don't have numbers.

• ##### This is a good point, and one I didn't include(0+ / 0-)

If you can find data, I could put it in my numbers.

Opinions are like assholes. I spend way too much time looking at them on the internet.

[ Parent ]

• ##### yes(0+ / 0-)

friendly demographics are overrepresented in the pool. But as I said, for franken to win without the absentees, they would have to be overrepresented by a factor of 5 to 10, which is a lot.

With the absentees, it becomes much more plausible.

Opinions are like assholes. I spend way too much time looking at them on the internet.

[ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

• Recommended (154)
• Community (61)
• Environment (36)
• Culture (34)
• Memorial Day (31)
• Republicans (31)
• 2016 (28)
• Elections (26)
• Civil Rights (25)
• Bernie Sanders (25)
• Science (23)
• Media (22)
• Climate Change (22)
• Education (22)
• Labor (21)
• Spam (21)
• GOP (20)
• Law (20)
• Rescued (19)
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (16)