|
2004 Presidential Election
Results: Spreadsheets and Charts
Scroll down or click for
Ohio | Florida | California | Nevada | Iowa | South
Dakota | New Mexico
The charts displayed below are samples from the spreadsheets.
2004 Presidential Election
Results, the Exit
Polls vs. the Vote Counts
Comparison: 2000 and 2004 Presidential Election Results
Percentages of 2004
USA Population Served by Voting Machine Types
The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election:
Cuyahoga County Analysis:
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes
Excerpts:
Seven-eights
of voters in heavily-Democratic Cuyahoga County, more
than one
of every eight
Ohio Kerry voters, could have voted at
an adjacent precinct using the wrong ballot order.
"... I focus on one Presidential election issue, cross-votinghow votes
cast one way are counted as a vote for a different candidate or option. I also focus
on Ohio and a particular area with one-tenth of the Ohio vote, Cuyahoga County. ...
This article discusses problems with the 2004 Ohio Presidential election generally
and demonstrates how the Cuyahoga County election was inherently unfair and resulted
in many Kerry votes going uncounted, counted as third-party votes, or being switched
to Bush votes...."
In a
sample of 166,953 votes, one of every 34 Ohio voters, the
Kerry-Bush margin
shifts
6.15% when the population is sorted by outcomes of wrong-precinct
voting.
Continue reading: How
Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes (updated
April 2008)
|

2004 Ohio Election Spreadsheets
Page
Ohio
rates its own page, with numerous spreadsheets and charts!
Here are just several of those links.
ARTICLE: How Ohio
Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes
Where Kerry cross-votes
count for a specific third-party candidate,
Badnarik votes increase five-fold and Peroutka votes jump over nine-fold.
Highlights of the article are now available in a PowerPoint
presentation:



Only in Florida does % Kerry
fail to correlate with % Democrats.
Why? 
In
Florida, electronic voting correlations do not match other voting methods.
 
In Florida, the 2004 Bush increase correlates with the percentage of Democrats,
moreso in
E-Touch counties than in Op-Scan counties. In Op-Scan counties,
the 2004 Bush increase
negatively correlates to the percentage of registered
Republicans. At the same time, Bush Increase
has
no correlation with Bush votes in
E-Touch counties and a strong correlation in Op-Scan counties.


In South Dakota, the percentage of non-partisan voters has a
strong correlation
with the
percentage
of Daschle votes only in the counties with paper
ballots.
The Kerry and Daschle correlations match in paper ballot counties.


In New Mexico, why does the Sequoia and Danther E-voting
equipment
fail to count so many votes? On average, 2.62% of voters did not
vote
per these machines, compared to 0.46% non-votes in the Op-Scan counties.
United Voters of New Mexico - Statistical
Analysis of Voting Results What is a Pearson correlation?

All the Spreadsheets are
Excel files.
© 2008 by James Q. Jacobs.
All Rights Reserved. jqjacobs.net | Contact
|