収束ゾーンでのライフ: Life in the Convergence Zone

If there were systematic counting errors, any statistically valid audited sample of votes will uncover it. Kucinich's challenge is in only a couple of places but that should be enough to quash (or less likely) confirm these rumors.

My guess is that there's some unidentified factor involved here that is perfectly above-board. I don't have the statistics training to figure it out myself, nor do I have the raw data, nor can I say that I can imagine all of the possible factors that might account for the supposed discrepancy. What I can say is that statewide the results were within the margin of error of the polls, and Clinton's lead was consistent throughout the counting process. It strains credibility to think that any fraudulent Diebold counting conspiracy would be able to so smoothly manipulate the results. Thanks to the paper trail, any Diebold counting shenanigans will be easily discernible if they exist, but I would be really surprised if they do.

I don't think it's responsible to jump to the conclusion that something is odd here and claim high odds against the actual result being valid when it's impossible to know all of the confounding variables, and before there's been any comparison with the paper trail. A statistical analysis is only as good as the underlying data, and without verification speculation about voting fraud is not an honest question, it's groundless conspiracy theory. In the absence of evidence--not half-assed statistical analysis--the grander claims of voting fraud are dangerously close to libel. Until there is evidence, this looks like nothing more than a swiftboating of Clinton by her rivals. In its way, it's as sleazy as all the barely-veiled racial and gender politics that have been going on since New Hampshire.