[ExI] elections again

[spike]

> Subject: Re: [ExI] elections again
> 
> a comment from a pal on Spike's post, and my reply:
> 
> =========
> 
> >the stealth code hypothesis also looks like a loony 
> conspiracy theory - 
...

This will be the first time I have ever given credence to a loony conspiracy
theory.  All the other times I have been on the other end, ridiculing such
things.  This one doesn't look so loony to me.  This in itself is a bad
sign, for it suggests my own mental state is drifting toward loony.


> 
> Indeed. I assume it's what some commentator explains--rural 
> voters are different from city voters, and as it chanced each 
> predominantly used different voting systems. It's just 
> surprising that the skews should be so symmetrical... Damien Broderick

Damien, my numbers were specifically filtered to remove that rural/urban
explanation.  Those results I supplied yesterday were from all NH districts
with between 300 and 900 residents, some with machines and some with hand
counts. 

Turns out the results between the hand-counted ballots and the
machine-counted ballots (all from small districts) agree much more closely
if one swaps the numbers for machine-counted ballots between the two
candidates.  Clinton's machine-counted ballots were 18% higher than her hand
counted, and Obama's machine counted ballots were 15% lower than his
hand-counted.  If one swaps the machine-count numbers between the two
candidates, then both are within 5% agreement between hand-count and
machine-count.

Am I the only loony that thinks it remarkable?

spike