Joseph Petviashvili (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} krotty) wrote,@ 2007-12-07 11:38:00 |
|
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
A lot of you have asked me if there's an explanation for this graph and if it proves or disproves something.
As usual with statistics a single argument will not prove or disprove anything by itself, this is not logic where if you find a contradiction - you're done, or if you've proved something, you've proved it no matter what other arguments you can find.
This graph is the single most convincing graphical argument that I can find that "proves" that the elections were not free and that that they were rigged. Of course there are other arguments for and against that. If you follow the news will will find plenty of them, and you have to find them all, combine them with your prior assumptions to come up with your own conclusions.
As for the actual method of how this was done, I'm not so convinced that it was just ballot stuffing and nothing else. It seems to me that different portions of the graph show different methods of fraud, and it is just a coincidence that they all lined up like that.
The top 80-100% turnover portion is the most clear example when people have no voice at all, like in the soviet union. No matter if they showed up because they were forced to, or they didn't show up and their voices were counted anyway. Chechnya and Ingushetia had almost 0% real turnout and they've reported ~90% - ballot stuffing at its worst.
The dark left cluster shows a different story to me - a story of coercion and massive propaganda. People were forced to attend, people were forced to show their vote, people were given the idea that there is no other choice. And everybody not voting for the main line was discouraged to attend - there's no reason to go if your vote will end up counted against your will because of the 7% barrier (if you voted for a party that didn't pass it, your vote will go to the top contenders proportionally). Ballot stuffing is still there, but it probably plays a minor role here.
A lot of you have asked me if there's an explanation for this graph and if it proves or disproves something.
As usual with statistics a single argument will not prove or disprove anything by itself, this is not logic where if you find a contradiction - you're done, or if you've proved something, you've proved it no matter what other arguments you can find.
This graph is the single most convincing graphical argument that I can find that "proves" that the elections were not free and that that they were rigged. Of course there are other arguments for and against that. If you follow the news will will find plenty of them, and you have to find them all, combine them with your prior assumptions to come up with your own conclusions.
As for the actual method of how this was done, I'm not so convinced that it was just ballot stuffing and nothing else. It seems to me that different portions of the graph show different methods of fraud, and it is just a coincidence that they all lined up like that.
The top 80-100% turnover portion is the most clear example when people have no voice at all, like in the soviet union. No matter if they showed up because they were forced to, or they didn't show up and their voices were counted anyway. Chechnya and Ingushetia had almost 0% real turnout and they've reported ~90% - ballot stuffing at its worst.
The dark left cluster shows a different story to me - a story of coercion and massive propaganda. People were forced to attend, people were forced to show their vote, people were given the idea that there is no other choice. And everybody not voting for the main line was discouraged to attend - there's no reason to go if your vote will end up counted against your will because of the 7% barrier (if you voted for a party that didn't pass it, your vote will go to the top contenders proportionally). Ballot stuffing is still there, but it probably plays a minor role here.
