Precinct anomaly
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 20, 2024, 03:05:35 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Precinct anomaly
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Precinct anomaly  (Read 669 times)
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,069
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 26, 2015, 03:42:00 PM »
« edited: December 26, 2015, 06:39:52 PM by Torie »

Look at this precinct in beautiful downtown Glendale, AZ on its southern end where most of its Hispanics hang out. It's surrounded by precincts that look about the same (small tightly packed well kept little single family houses, with a few apartments here and there). Yet all the surrounding precincts with similar demographics, voted 3 to 2 for Obama over McCain. This precinct also had unusually high turnout, maybe close to twice as high as some precincts nearby, so scratch the theory that the Hispanics are packed into the apartments on the west side of the precinct, and don't vote. Heck the McCain vote is not that much below the white population over 18. I wonder what is going on here?

]
Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,106
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2015, 03:58:39 PM »

Notice how the average is closer to 60% Obama. Even precincts that are Democratic have averages that are less Democratic than that. Might be a mistake of entering the wrong numbers.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,069
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2015, 04:16:12 PM »
« Edited: December 26, 2015, 06:42:34 PM by Torie »

Notice how the average is closer to 60% Obama. Even precincts that are Democratic have averages that are less Democratic than that. Might be a mistake of entering the wrong numbers.

Ah ha, that is probably the best answer. The neighboring precincts do have about the same Democratic averages. Unless there was some bizarre McCain love there, maybe because he spent weekends there handing out free beer, it's probably just a data entry error. Damn! How boring.

But what about the high turnout? Maybe a digit transposition?  Except even moving the order of the digits around to get the Pub and total vote down would not really do more than eliminate part of the anomaly.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,800


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2015, 08:59:22 PM »

According to the archived data at the Maricopa recorder the data for Bethany precinct is correct. The problem is that Bethany precinct is in Phoenix just south of Phoenix Mountains park. If you look there you will also see a Bethany precinct won by Obama with 55% of the vote even though the precinct avg is 55% Pub. The data in that Phoenix precinct belongs to Bethany Park precinct, which is located, wait for it ... in Glendale. The 2008 presidential numbers for the two precincts were switched by the data entry person for DRA.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,069
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2016, 02:27:06 PM »

Nothing to add here as it seems like muon2's response is the best, but could Torie or someone else please tell me what program you took a picture of in the original post is from, please? Thanks.

Here you go. We call it Dave's Redistricting Application, or DRA for short.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 12 queries.