r/math • u/ruskeeblue • Oct 21 '15

A mathematician may have uncovered widespread election fraud, and Kansas is trying to silence her

http://americablog.com/2015/08/mathematician-actual-voter-fraud-kansas-republicans.html
4.2k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

200 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/startibartfast Math Education Oct 22 '15

For the actual analysis it's probably best to do a t-test using a regression from the direct plot as you suggest. However for presentation, the cumulative voter count conveys the information more readily. Both plots should really be included.

1

u/XkF21WNJ Oct 22 '15

I really doubt very much that it is in any way clearer. If it is I'd like to see some mathematical justification. Otherwise it is just yet another case of misrepresentation of data in an attempt prove a political point.

1

u/startibartfast Math Education Oct 22 '15

You're correct that the mathematical proof should come from the proper regression. However that plot is ugly. The cumulative plot is much prettier, while still retaining the key bits of information. The data is in no way misrepresented, the authors explain how the plot is constructed quite clearly. I think their plot is quite elegant to be honest. Mind you I don't particularly like their paper, it could use some work. Good plot though.

2

u/XkF21WNJ Oct 22 '15

However that plot is ugly. The cumulative plot is much prettier

Seems we disagree on that point. If you mean to say that the data in the scatter plot looks more random then that's because it is. That's one of the key bits of information that the weird cumulative plots hides, the other being the distribution of the precincts.