New Mexico Statistics and Analysis. Is anyone working on this?

[L. Coyote]

I'm seeking more data on voting machine type. I have the complex data, but need a more useful, general means of sorting, not the bloody model numbers.

Here's http://www.jqjacobs.net/bush/xls/new_mexico_vote_county.xls">the spreadsheet I'm working on. I can't easily sort to machine type given the data therein.

Here is a tidbit of early analysis. The percent non-votes statewide went down, but not remarkably.

2000 Statistics	
	
# Voted	        615,607
# Cast	        598,605
% Cast Pres.	97.24
# Non-Votes	17,002
	
2004 Statistics	
	
# Voted	        775,094
# Cast	        756,363
% Cast Pres.	97.58
# Non-Votes	18,731

[noamnety]

1. There's data here

He references my site, but use his, he's get the most current numbers on his site:

http://lnvb.westside.com/NewMexico/observations.view

[TruthIsAll]

5. I downloaded the numbers. How come...

Registered Dems hardly vote?

And more Repubs vote than are registered?


New Mexico	Reg Voters	%		Votes Cast*	%
Republican	359,563	  32.53%	376,958	    49.84%
Democrats	550,519	  49.80%	370,930	    49.05%
Other...... 195,290      17.67%	8,416        1.11%
Total......	1,105,372    100%	  756,304	 100%
					

[berniew1]

8. They have done good analysis; Documented fraud; Clear Kerry won.

Here's one:
http://www.helpamericarecount.org/NewMexicoData/NewMexicoGeneralElection.pdf

It documents massive voter suppression and voter repression to insure lots of those who voted didn't get their vote counted for Kerry. The worst case of obvious stolen election I've ever seen, and one of most obvious. And the EIRS data they show clearly shows machine manipulaton and fraud on a massive level, as well as voter suppression of Indians and poor hispanics on a massive level. The EIRS report system did a good job on this.

[L. Coyote]

11. New Mexico Voter Registration. It does not match the results.

Here is a pie chart of 2004 registration.



It certainly is obvious that if voters followed party lines, with Non-Partisans splitting between parties, Kerry would have won by a landslide.

What percentage of registered voters voted is a stat I do not have. One would have to sample poll books to determine that. (More important tasks are at hand.) Here is a summary that paints the difference between registration by party and the "reported" vote.

18,731 "Non-Votes" for President

376,975 Bush votes reported
359,563 Registered Republican

370,946 Kerry votes reported
550,519 Registered Democrat

195,290 Other Voters.

[PeterPan]

25. this is unfortunately a non-issue

new mexico has a history of this dort of 'dixicrat' voting in presidential races - perhaps it indicates past republican rigging but its pretty consistent with 2000

[ISUGRADIA]

17. "And more Repubs vote than are registered?"

Not a stretch of the imagination when looking at previous years' turnout. Republicans are consistently higher turnout voters than Dems, No parties are even lower. So take 80% R, 75% D, and 55% No P of registered voters turning out and * taking 95% of the R, 10% of the D, and 60% of No Party he'd be close to the 376,000. My math may not be exactly right but some tinkering will come up with the result.

[PeterPan]

23. these are not the most current numbers

though it is an excellent site

please download the numbers drawn directly from the Access file produced by the NM SOS at

http://www.votersunite.org/info/newmexicophantomvotes.asp

[procinderella]

2. I wish I could help

Try the Green party website. I know they asked for a recount on New Mexico. Or who are the new people compiling a database from across the country? It's on another thread here.

I'm sure someone here will direct you to the right spot to post your figures and you can get more stats from them too.


Everyone's a little disorganized.

[skids]

3. helpamericarecount is.

And there are so many threads here on DU about this already, that someone just posted a "glue thread" to glue them all together.

[Rhapsody in Blue]

4. Two good sites - voting type by county

Try these:

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/

http://electionline.org/interactiveMap.jsp?page=Interactive+Map

[PeterPan]

24. these sites only give voting technology on election day

though different machines types are in use in many counties in early voting and opscans are used for all absentee and provisional ballots

[L. Coyote]

6. I found the answer on DU, on this good thread...

about non-votes in NM. Check out the correlations to Kerry strongholds and voting machine types.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=168&topic_id=328#354

And I updated the spreadsheet with sort by voting machines. It's uploaded now. Statistical summary of all variables coming soon. I'll just upload and replace the online file.

[Hamoth]

7. reduction in undervotes easily corresponds to bush margin. -nt

[berniew1]

9. Since its clear Kerry won N. Mexico, I don't see why more aren't intereste

N. Mexico is a small state where the fraud is well documented and easy to prove, and small number of counties to deal with. But the same types of fraud that occurred in New Mexico are known to have occurred also in other states such as Ohio and Florida. The big states would take a massive effort including audits of equipment and voter logs, which isn't happening in Ohio. But if they do N. Mexico and prove it, and they can- it would give the boost to do the job right in Ohio and Florida- which may not happen otherwise.

Recount New Mexico. And include audit of the obvious machine fraud.

[corbett]

18. New Mexico's Fraud Was Completely Racial

Election fraud in every state had a component of racism but in New Mexico and South Dakota, it was 100% racial. This fact makes it doubly sad that more attention isn't being paid to the New Mexico recount. I think the reason is that it has so few electoral votes that even if it is corrected, people think that it's moot.

[berniew1]

10. Here's documentation of similar vote machine fraud in Ohio

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=176637&mesg_id=176637

[L. Coyote]

12. Non-Vote Comparison with Other States

This repeats some of what I've posted in another thread. But this thread focuses on New Mexico, so here it is again in parts with added charts.

Comparison of non-votes in the 2000 and 2004 presidential races.
33 counties sorted as:

  Vendors: Three of 11 counties each (staticatically convenient)
  Both E-voting vendors in one category
  Statewide: All 33 counties. 

All numbers represent percentages of non-votes.

2000		2004			
					
Mean (average)					
0.745		1.172		OpScan	
3.171		3.721		E-Voting Danather	
4.776		2.991		E-Voting Sequoia	
3.973		3.356		E-Voting All	
2.897		2.628		Statewide	
					
Skew					
0.983		3.279		OpScan	
0.457		0.008		E-Voting Danather	
1.654		1.595		E-Voting Sequoia	
1.936		0.660		E-Voting All	
1.291		0.922		Statewide	
					
Standard Deviation:					
0.270		2.291		OpScan	
0.990		1.715		E-Voting Danather	
2.125		1.580		E-Voting Sequoia	
1.841		1.689		E-Voting All	
2.145		2.171		Statewide	
				
Average Deviation:					
0.226		1.313		OpScan	
0.789		1.478		E-Voting Danather	
1.441		1.084		E-Voting Sequoia	
1.242		1.371		E-Voting All	
1.672		1.709		Statewide

For 2004, the mean of 3.721% E-Voting Danather really stands out.

A comparison with other state Presidential results poses far more questions about what happened in New Mexico. Note also the differences with Senate races.


In New Mexico, the statewide non-vote percentage is 2.42.


In Florida, the statewide non-vote is 0.399 percent!


In Nevada, an all E-vote state, the statewide non-vote is 0.681 precent.

Check out the standard deviation for E-voting in Ohio, where the county average is 2.0 percent and the statewide percent is 1.66!



We do not all have an equal vote "even when" our vote is counted!!

PS. The spreadsheet is updated online with the stat summary.

[L. Coyote]

13. More on the New Mexico Statistics... Machines Lost 14,051 Votes

The skew in the 2004 Op-Scan counties is due to just one county.
De Baca county with only 993 votes and 91 non-votes has an 8.40 non-vote percentage.
Their counted votes are 25.92 percent Kerry.



Without De Baca, the picture changes as follows:

2000		2004
0.745		0.450		OpScan	
3.171		3.721		E-Voting Danather	
4.776		2.991		E-Voting Sequoia

So Op-Scan in 10 of 11 counties in New Mexico outperformed the state percentages in Nevada, but not Florida.

Permit me two assumptions. First, little De Baca county, with 0.13 percent of the vote, is anomolous. Second, I'll assume all the non-vote difference is due to the diffference in voting machines. Given these assumptions:

Using voter numbers by county and percent for candidates, if all of New Mexico had the same non-vote rate as the 10 Op-Scan counties, the Bush margin would drop by 1040 votes (including 20 Kerry votes and 51 Bush votes in De Baca county).

Given this standard of non-votes (0.45% in the 10 Op-Scan counties), the number of New Mexicans whose votes were not counted is 14,051. With Florida's rate of non-votes, this number would be 15,744.

[L. Coyote]

21. The source file for this graph is online

The spreadsheet is updated with the calculations in a new worksheet. I altered the method by using actual vote count instead of the 10 county average. So there's a very slight change in the numbers.

[berniew1]

14. Same type of Default to Bush Fraud in New Mex. also happened in Florida

Fraud Documented in big Florida Touchscreen Counties

The biggest Democratic counties in Florida of Palm Beach, Broward, and Dade each had dozens of incidents of vote switching reported from Kerry to Bush, mostly and a few from Kerry to a minor candidate. As well as a much lesser number of switching in the U.S. Senate race. Poll workers told frustrated voters who were having trouble that "this has been going on all day". I have the EIRS cases for each county. This was even reported to be happening on the radio during election day.
(but no one has done anything about it?)

There were also a lesser number of cases of switching reported in Hillsboro, Sarasota, and Pinellas.
Some of these were in the U.S. Senate race.
This is clear documentation that the "Default to Bush" pattern was programed into the touch screen vote equipment in large numbers of the precincts of the big touchscreen counties. The only question is who was responsible and what to do about it.


The Florida EIRS case data that supports the vote machine fraud in the big Florida touchscreen counties, just as my previous study pointed out(www.flcv.com/fla04EAS.html) is at:

www.flcv.com/EIRSFla.html

[Lil]

15. Great work. Thanks.

[L. Coyote]

16. Here is the correct link to the updated spreadsheet.

new_mexico_county.xls - 311 Kb

I pointed to the Spreadsheets Page before the link therein was updated to this specific spreadsheet.

[libertypirate]

19. Presidential race data

If anyone wants to run the numbers themselves. I can get the any other race by request...

http://home.comcast.net/~libertypirate/NM_Presidential.csv

[berniew1]

20. The 3 minority counties are where its important

I understand the analysts there are working on this.
I think they may have to have their filing complete by lunch today.

[L. Coyote]

22. Bernie: Which are the minority counties in NM?

[phillipw]

26. Whats the latest on the recount??; New Mexico fraud proof could be domino

The proof of fraud and other manipultion is clear and easy to document; the analysts there have done a good job and have a strong case.
Whats new on the recount? Will it still happen? Why haven't the Dems shown more interest.

I think this is the domino that could jumpstart the fraud investigation in Ohio and Florida and etc.

Are people still pursuing the N.M. recount?

and why haven't they filed a suit in N. Mex. like the Arnebeck suit to overturn the election results??