"The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots"
Can someone explain to me what exactly this means? For the life of me I can not figure out what they mean by this.
Did Clinton do 7% worse than Obama 2012 in a county that uses voting machine or something?
For instance, she got 45% in the former, and 52% in the latter.
Regardless of any ethical/moral consideration, those claims are pathetic even when looking purely at the statistical aspect.
Counties using electronic-voting machines might simply have more low-education and less minority voters (and that seems to be the case, as I've briefly read). It's not like the electronic voting machines are randomly distributed across the state.
