IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Are Chads Democrats? An Analysis of the Florida Presidential Recount

  • Matthew Spiegel
Registered author(s):

    This paper presents the results from a statistical analysis of the first Florida recount. The findings indicate that it is highly unlikely that the relative increase in Gore's vote total can be explained by mechanical reading errors. Rather it appears partisan biases influenced the outcome. Estimates indicate that on average if a ballot's status changed from no vote to a vote, the chance that it went to Gore was about 15% higher than one would expect given his fraction of that county's vote. Overall then, controlling for each candidate's vote in a county and the type of ballot used, this paper estimates that Gore picked up 903 "too many" votes in the recount relative to what would have been expected by chance machine read errors. If humans influenced the results how did they do it? During the recount the ballots were put through the tabulating machines several times. However, machine readings tend to vary from run to run and this means

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://icfpub.som.yale.edu/publications/2368
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Yale School of Management in its series Yale School of Management Working Papers with number amz2368.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 01 Dec 2000
    Date of revision: 01 Nov 2001
    Handle: RePEc:ysm:somwrk:amz2368
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://icf.som.yale.edu/
    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ysm:somwrk:amz2368. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.