bowl of blood
Contributor
some quick math, rounding up as high as i can
- the heritage database contains about 1000 incidents of vote fraud
- estimate each case accounts for 37 votes (the max of the sample i pulled, not the mean)
- assume every single one of those votes is in a presidential elections (0 of the sample was)
- assume the recorded sample accounts for only 1% of actual vote fraud
- reduce the spread to 20 years (most cases in the db are post-2000 for obv reasons)
- potus election is only 1 in 4 years, assume votes stack
that gives us:
1000 incidents * 37 votes = 37,000 recorded fraudulent votes
37,000 votes * (100/1) = 3,700,000 actual fraudulent votes
3,700,000 votes / 20 = 185,000 expected fraudulent votes per year
185,000 per year * 4 years worth = 740,000 fraudulent votes per potus election
and just for fun let's say it doubles this year, cuz the illegals hate trump
740,000 * 2 =
1,480,000 ceiling for expected fraudulent votes in 2020
the electorate of the u.s. is around 220,000,000, however, only swing states really matter in presidential elections. so let's assume all the fraudulent votes occur in swing states. this is getting boring so i'm going by the first google result (npr) for what is a swing state: ia, oh, nc, ga, fl
ia = 1%
oh = 3.6%
nc = 3.2%
ga = 3.2%
fl = 6.5%
sum = 17.5%
220,000,000 voters * 17.5% swing = 38,500,000 eligible swing voters
38,500,000 voters * 55.5% (2016 turnout) = 21,175,000 2020 swing voters
so if we take all the max estimated numbers of vote fraud, assume they all occur in presidential elections in swing states, add in some spice factors, and compare to the likely voter turnout, we get
1,480,000 bad votes / 21,175,000 total votes =
6.98% ceiling for fraudulent vote
a minimum of 70% voter turnout (56% + 7% + 7%) in swing states should be the goal to safeguard against the effect of documented fraud
- the heritage database contains about 1000 incidents of vote fraud
- estimate each case accounts for 37 votes (the max of the sample i pulled, not the mean)
- assume every single one of those votes is in a presidential elections (0 of the sample was)
- assume the recorded sample accounts for only 1% of actual vote fraud
- reduce the spread to 20 years (most cases in the db are post-2000 for obv reasons)
- potus election is only 1 in 4 years, assume votes stack
that gives us:
1000 incidents * 37 votes = 37,000 recorded fraudulent votes
37,000 votes * (100/1) = 3,700,000 actual fraudulent votes
3,700,000 votes / 20 = 185,000 expected fraudulent votes per year
185,000 per year * 4 years worth = 740,000 fraudulent votes per potus election
and just for fun let's say it doubles this year, cuz the illegals hate trump
740,000 * 2 =
1,480,000 ceiling for expected fraudulent votes in 2020
the electorate of the u.s. is around 220,000,000, however, only swing states really matter in presidential elections. so let's assume all the fraudulent votes occur in swing states. this is getting boring so i'm going by the first google result (npr) for what is a swing state: ia, oh, nc, ga, fl
ia = 1%
oh = 3.6%
nc = 3.2%
ga = 3.2%
fl = 6.5%
sum = 17.5%
220,000,000 voters * 17.5% swing = 38,500,000 eligible swing voters
38,500,000 voters * 55.5% (2016 turnout) = 21,175,000 2020 swing voters
so if we take all the max estimated numbers of vote fraud, assume they all occur in presidential elections in swing states, add in some spice factors, and compare to the likely voter turnout, we get
1,480,000 bad votes / 21,175,000 total votes =
6.98% ceiling for fraudulent vote
a minimum of 70% voter turnout (56% + 7% + 7%) in swing states should be the goal to safeguard against the effect of documented fraud
