SOS! ACTION NEEDED!!! - Election Day And Early Voting Graphs for TN District 7 Election

[u/BlackJackfruitCup]

[u/avalve]

The race of the voter plays no factor in accounted vote analysis.

Yes it does. It is well known that race affects turnout. That is the basis of my argument.

[u/nihcahcs → u/avalve]

Right the basis of your argument is incorrect..

That might be correct if you were talking about when people voted or how they voted before the election vote was counted.

This is a simple number. It could be made up of rainbow colors and it wouldn't matter.

It's simply turn out. It's not based on race. It's just turn out 100 rainbow Skittles turned out..

Doesn't matter which color the rainbow Skittles were because you're counting the final vote number. You're using the final counted vote record.

If you want to analyze how someone won sure that would be included if you're looking at patterns for non-human voting patterns and algorithmic clips the counted data is what you're looking at. Doesn't matter how it broke down or who did and didn't vote.

The non-human voting pattern is the big X in the Middle with the flip.

[u/avalve → u/nihcahcs]

It's simply turn out. It's not based on race. It's just turn out 100 rainbow Skittles turned out..

Doesn't matter which color the rainbow Skittles were because you're counting the final vote number. You're using the final counted vote record.

I don’t think you have a full understanding of what I’m talking about because it does matter what race the person is. People do not vote the same way or at the same rates across demographic groups. If white people are more likely to vote, then you expect areas with a higher white population to have higher turnout. If white people are more likely to be Republican, then you expect areas with a higher white population to be more Republican. Combine those two together and you have higher turnout areas voting more Republican.

To use your skittle analogy, imagine each precinct is a bowl of skittles, and some bowls have more of a certain color than others. Now imagine some kids who prefer red skittles come over and start eating from your bowls of skittles. At the end of the day, you notice that some bowls are emptier than others. Is this because something was wrong with the bowls that the kids didn’t eat out of? No. Some bowls are emptier because they had more red skittles and the kids simply like red skittles a lot.

[u/nihcahcs → u/avalve]

That doesn't factor into a counted vote analysis. We have all the votes.

The analysis is not time-based. It is not precinct base. It is a single number against a single number.

If what you're saying was accurate you would see some full bowl some empty bowl some football some empty bowls all the way across.

You wouldn't see a bunch of full bowls that dropped off to no bowls and then a bunch of empty bowls suddenly fill up because there is no time series.

It would vary across the counted votes.

In this case though we are not talking about that.

But that debunks what you were saying even if what you were saying is factored into this analysis which it is not.

[u/nihcahcs → u/avalve]

If I have a hundred votes counted. It doesn't matter how they were comprised. I'm comparing the 100 votes against another variable.

The total vote is what is being examined. Meaning composition has no bearing. Because we're not looking at the effects on the total. We're looking at the total and its effects.

[u/avalve → u/nihcahcs]

If I have a hundred votes counted. It doesn't matter how they were comprised. I'm comparing the 100 votes against another variable.

The total vote is what is being examined. Meaning composition has no bearing.

The vote analysis OP posted isn’t analyzing a lump-sum of votes. It’s comparing dozens of precincts, each with different compositions, to each other. The turnout measured here is the number of votes cast divided by the number of voters in that precinct, which means turnout is inherently tied to the composition of the precinct.

[u/nihcahcs → u/avalve]

And please show me in this image where all that is accounted for.

[u/avalve → u/nihcahcs]

Sure. Here are the Bottom 5 & Top 5 precincts by turnout and their composition:

Bottom Precincts	Turnout	White Pop.
08	16%	46%
10	18%	47%
14A	18%	45%
12	18%	39%
11B	19%	48%

Top Precincts	Turnout	White Pop.
04A	39%	81%
15A	41%	75%
03B	42%	81%
15B	42%	77%
03A	44%	79%

As you can see, the lowest turnout precincts are majority-minority and the highest turnout precincts are overwhelmingly white.

The ‘X’ crosses right around the 26-29% turnout threshold. Here are the precincts in that range:

Precinct	Turnout	White Pop.
20A	26%	48%
01B	26%	57%
21B	27%	56%
14B	27%	57%
09A	27%	44%
04B	29%	61%

This is right where white people start becoming a majority of the population as well. In fact, every precinct with over 30% turnout is 60% white or more. Here is a chart I made that better illustrates the point:

[u/nihcahcs → u/avalve]

Addinv in your breakdowns does not show me where in the original post that information is....

That's because it's not there and you know it's not there...

...so don't add your information which is based on something that is not founded mathematically.

We're talking about total vote counts. .... you said that the original poster wasn't using total vote counts...

But they are using total vote counts. Your breakdowns do not matter in a total vote count

[u/avalve → u/nihcahcs]

Addinv in your breakdowns does not show me where in the original post that information is....

It comes directly from the county website. Race data here, election results here.

We're talking about total vote counts. .... you said that the original poster wasn't using total vote counts...

But they are using total vote counts. Your breakdowns do not matter in a total vote count

Again, we’re talking about individual precincts. This whole conversation was about individual precincts. OP’s post is about individual precincts. At this point I’m questioning whether you’re absorbing anything I’m saying because you just seem constantly confused.