Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Official Vote Tally on Ohio's Pot Issue Deemed "Statistically Impossible" [View all]
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/33656-official-vote-tally-on-ohios-pot-issue-deemed-qstatistically-impossibleqThe "stolen election controversy over this months officially defeated Ohio pot legalization referendum has gone to a new level.
The results are not only impossible but unfathomable, stated Ron Baiman, Assistant Professor of Graduate Business Administration at Benedictine University, where he teaches economics and statistics.
The Columbus Free Press asked Baiman to calculate the odds of the official vote count of Ohios Issue 3, to legalize marijuana, being correct compared to the tracking polls charting voter preference leading up to this years November election. The Free Press supplied Baiman with poll results taken prior to the election by noted pollster Jon Zogby.
The polls leading into the November 3 vote showed the referendum passing. But the official results claim it lost by 2:1.
The standard assumption with such polling is that the undecided voters in the poll would have potentially gone 50-50. Thus half of them would be voting no and the other half would be voting yes on Issue 3. Baiman pointed out that with such an assumption being probable, the odds against the referendum losing 2:1 go through the roof. They are, he said, one in a trillion.
The analysis showed that even if the most illogical outcome is assumed that every single undecided voter in the polls voted against Issue 3 it is still statistically impossible to accept Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husteds official tally as being credible.
If the Zogby poll was accurate, says Baiman, one would expect the official outcome as reported by the state once in every 105,000 elections.
As general rule, undecided voters do not tend to split more than 60-40 percent in favor of one side or the other.
Pre-election tracking polls are performed using a random and representative sample. They accurately reflect how voters of various demographics are likely to vote. All such polls do contain a margin of error. The Zogby poll has a 4.9 percent margin of error, which leaves the official outcome of the Issue 3 vote still very far out of the realm of reasonable statistical probability.
Another Issue 3 poll done by the Kitchen Group showed a closer split between the yes and no vote. It was conducted one week before Election Day, with a random survey of more than over 1000 Ohioans. The odds that Husteds official tally is correct based on the Kitchen poll are even heavier than with the Zogby poll in this case yielding a result that would be expected only once in once in every 799,000,000 elections. [see attachments]
There can be only two explanations for this.
Ohioans can assume that the well-funded corporate multimillionaire growers backing Issue 3 who hired highly-regarded pollsters were given made-up drivel as the poll results. Or, Ohios notoriously corrupt, antiquated and highly-vulnerable voting system was hacked or manipulated by partisans like Ohios Secretary of State Husted.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
The results are not only impossible but unfathomable, stated Ron Baiman, Assistant Professor of Graduate Business Administration at Benedictine University, where he teaches economics and statistics.
The Columbus Free Press asked Baiman to calculate the odds of the official vote count of Ohios Issue 3, to legalize marijuana, being correct compared to the tracking polls charting voter preference leading up to this years November election. The Free Press supplied Baiman with poll results taken prior to the election by noted pollster Jon Zogby.
The polls leading into the November 3 vote showed the referendum passing. But the official results claim it lost by 2:1.
The standard assumption with such polling is that the undecided voters in the poll would have potentially gone 50-50. Thus half of them would be voting no and the other half would be voting yes on Issue 3. Baiman pointed out that with such an assumption being probable, the odds against the referendum losing 2:1 go through the roof. They are, he said, one in a trillion.
The analysis showed that even if the most illogical outcome is assumed that every single undecided voter in the polls voted against Issue 3 it is still statistically impossible to accept Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husteds official tally as being credible.
If the Zogby poll was accurate, says Baiman, one would expect the official outcome as reported by the state once in every 105,000 elections.
As general rule, undecided voters do not tend to split more than 60-40 percent in favor of one side or the other.
Pre-election tracking polls are performed using a random and representative sample. They accurately reflect how voters of various demographics are likely to vote. All such polls do contain a margin of error. The Zogby poll has a 4.9 percent margin of error, which leaves the official outcome of the Issue 3 vote still very far out of the realm of reasonable statistical probability.
Another Issue 3 poll done by the Kitchen Group showed a closer split between the yes and no vote. It was conducted one week before Election Day, with a random survey of more than over 1000 Ohioans. The odds that Husteds official tally is correct based on the Kitchen poll are even heavier than with the Zogby poll in this case yielding a result that would be expected only once in once in every 799,000,000 elections. [see attachments]
There can be only two explanations for this.
Ohioans can assume that the well-funded corporate multimillionaire growers backing Issue 3 who hired highly-regarded pollsters were given made-up drivel as the poll results. Or, Ohios notoriously corrupt, antiquated and highly-vulnerable voting system was hacked or manipulated by partisans like Ohios Secretary of State Husted.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
61 replies, 5147 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (71)
ReplyReply to this post
61 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Official Vote Tally on Ohio's Pot Issue Deemed "Statistically Impossible" [View all]
HomerRamone
Nov 2015
OP
That is a typical sample size and it had a margin of error of less than 5%. So it makes no sense
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#60
While I'm fine with the way it turned out, I welcome any investigation into Ohio voting.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Nov 2015
#5
Sounds great! Better, come up with a system not relying on the cheaters' cooperation, like a site
GoneFishin
Nov 2015
#25
People, including those here, are SO eager to discredit poll after poll year after year
HomerRamone
Nov 2015
#9
that second to last paragraph explains it all. They should really save those tricks for bigger
yurbud
Nov 2015
#26
So it's true in Ohio, but not in Kentucky? Polls do, errrr, do not, em, ...lie, except????
Ford_Prefect
Nov 2015
#31