The Politicus

Create | Share | Influence

Trump's 'election fraud' claims now prove themselves to be quantitatively fraudulent

4 min read

Researchers at Stanford and U. of Chicago, Eggers, Garro, and Grimmer, today demonstrated quantitatively how the election was never “stolen”, but rather framed by false media frames in order to foment insurrection and sedition.

This leaves Trump’s biggest, most illogical lie, that “because he received 74 million votes, he couldn’t possible have lost to the 81 million who voted for Biden.” Bad faith, false consciousness, and insurrectionary violence.

We focus on fraud allegations with the appearance of statistical rigor. Trump and allies used statistics to claim some election facts would be unlikely if there had been no fraud. The claims fail either because sometimes the “fact” is inaccurate or it is accurate but not surprising.

For example: Trump and his allies claimed it was suspicious that Biden lost 18 of 19 counties that had correctly picked the winner since 1980. Viral facebook memes called into question how Biden could have won 81 million votes, but only a small number of counties.
But we show that bellwether counties are bad at predicting future winners. Since these counties went for Trump in 2016, Biden’s low haul of bellwether counties isn’t suspicious at all.

Image

Further, support for Democratic candidates has concentrated in fewer, more highly populated counties over time. Biden won more counties than Clinton and the bigger counties by a larger margin than Obama. So, Biden’s performance is in line with recent trends.

Image

Similarly, in a lawsuit filed against PA the Texas Attorney General claimed that Biden had a “one-in-a-quadrillion” chance of winning. The probability comes from a report filed by Charles Cicchetti who examined election-to-election changes and the shift from early-to-late votes
We show Cicchetti’s tests are riddled with errors and vastly understate the probability of change. We apply his test historically and show that vote changes he said had a “one in almost infinite chance” of occurring actually happened in 6% of US elections.

Image

His test also fails as a diagnostic of shifts in vote totals among early- and late-counted ballots. We apply his test to Arizona and show it would flag the shift towards Trump in late-counted ballots as just as surprising as the shift towards Biden in Georgia.
Other claims are simply false. A viral anonymous report claimed Dominion machines added 5.6% to Biden’s vote share. And while Trump’s lawyers spun fantastical tales of long-dead communists subverting global democracy, this report had the appearance of statistical rigor.
But the statistical analyses supporting this claim are based on fishing and poor research design. The purported Dominion effect disappears as soon as we control for 2016 results, or make any number of other sensible design choices.

Image

Other claims rest on poor statistical analyses. 
@JohnRLottJr claimed to show that suspicious counties in GA and PA padded Biden’s vote total and suspicious counties in swing states had high turnout. These claims were tweeted by the president as solid evidence of voter fraud.
But neither claim is true. As we explain in this thread (Unroll available on Thread Reader), Lott’s analysis of Fulton and Allegheny counties depends on the arbitrary order in which “control” counties were included. Once we address this issue, there is no evidence that Biden overperformed.
Similarly, we show that Lott’s accusations about high turnout in suspicious counties are entirely due to including lower-turnout states that had no suspicious counties. Once this is addressed, there is no evidence of higher turnout in “suspicious” counties

Image

Debunking some results required only arithmetic. Others required relatively subtle data analyses. All claims fall apart under scrutiny. 
Carefully evaluating voter fraud claims is essential to addressing public concern about election security. We hope our paper provides a resource for refuting claims made about the 2020 election and a road map for evaluating fraud claims in future elections.

Federal officials have estimated that roughly 800 people stormed into the Capitol, and so far, more than 135 individuals have been charged. Prosecutors, The Post’s Devlin Barrett and Spencer S. Hsu reported, are privately debating whether they should decline to charge those who are known only to have committed unlawful entry and were not engaged in violent or destructive behavior. Maybe, but there must be thorough investigation and forceful prosecution that send the message that such vile political violence will not be tolerated.

The FBI investigation, the most extensive since the probe of the 9/11 attack, has found evidence detailing coordination of an assault by members of extremist groups, but how extensive is still unknown. Also to be determined is whether any member of Congress helped to directly facilitate the assault, other than by fomenting it with false and irresponsible statements about election fraud.

www.washingtonpost.com/…

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The Politicus is a collaborative political community that facilitates content creation directly on the site. Our goal is to make the political conversation accessible to everyone.

Any donations we receive will go into writer outreach. That could be advertising on Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit or person-to-person outreach on College campuses. Please help if you can:

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x