Berkeley Researchers Analyze Florida Voting Patterns 1237
empraptor writes "Researchers at UC Berkeley have crunched numbers and determined that 130,000-260,000 excess votes went to Bush in Florida. They have held a conference and posted their findings online. You can find articles on their research from CNet, Wired News, and many other sources. While the research used statistical analysis based on past elections and demographics, how else do you verify that a paperless voting system is working properly?"
Neat idea! (Score:5, Funny)
Totally the way to put all the electoral college debates to rest and to eliminate all issues relating to electronic voting security once and for all! Just calculate the election outcome using the ordinary-least-squares regression model (OLS) with and without robust standard errors, exactly as the paper says. Why couldn't we think of this sooner?
UC Berkeley (Score:5, Funny)
This is a great development! (Score:3, Funny)
Keyboard error? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Neat idea! (Score:5, Funny)
At least it seems likely that I do.
Re:Ohio would be better (Score:4, Funny)
These freakin' liberals, man. No freakin' priorities.
/sarcasm
Emergency Procedures (Score:1, Funny)
2) Remove political asylum papers and passport.
3) Welcome to Canada. Bring your coat.
Re:A legal question (Score:2, Funny)
The electors don't vote until December 13th. That's why they are doing a recount in Ohio.
In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
The simpsons have already given us the answer (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Bush is bad (Default Slashdot Political Comment (Score:1, Funny)
Re:UC Berkeley (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, wait. They are. [timesonline.co.uk]
Explication - it's the paper vote that's screwed! (Score:3, Funny)
NO. It's the paper voting, which is screwed! Before e-voting, only those who could read and held a pencil could vote. Now, even people that can only operate a TV can vote. This is the explication for the difference!
Re:Statistical? (Score:3, Funny)
--Jeremy
Why even hold elections? (Score:3, Funny)