You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #81: Yes, I'm sure you're right (about micronumerosity). [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
eomer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-17-06 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #80
81. Yes, I'm sure you're right (about micronumerosity).
I've been keeping in mind the issue of how to distinguish redshift that is due to repeated fraud and would therefore not correlate with swing for a given 2-election comparison. Some of the posts in this thread gave me those ideas, but I guess you're right that the data is insufficient to support the tests I came up with. I'll keep pondering it. Or maybe I'll try pondering the cosmos and see if it will just come to me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC