Reply #68: Your results (and your math)

[rdmccur]

assume that there is nothing systemic in the e-vote results with the smell of fraud on it (of which I have no doubt you're aware).
I believe that the biggest implication of this analysis is that the hypothesis of election fraud has been made more plausible (especially in light of the early exit poll data).

Ignatzmouse, have you looked at the NC data from the perspective of e-vote counties and the distribution of undervotes? Suddenly it strikes me that someone should send this to Arnebeck with the query whether anything similar was observed in Ohio.