To Prevent Election Catastrophe We Need Open Data

In 2004, many Democrats thought George W. Bush won reelection by vote fraud. How could he have done so much better than the exit polls predicted? Eventually both the nonpartisan Election Science Institute and the Democratic National Committee’s Voting Rights Institute presented good statistical arguments that Bush’s share of the vote was consistent with his exit poll numbers. These analyses didn’t stop diehards from believing the election had been stolen, but they convinced many doubters.

This November, on the morning after Election Day, Americans could awaken to find that both Trump and Biden are claiming to be the legitimate president-elect. Democrats and Republicans may allege that election results in some states have been tainted by fraud. Partisan distrust and hatred in America are much more intense than they were in 2004. If the country hasn’t already slid into civil war by November 3, charges of a stolen presidential election may help push it over the edge.

Passions are running so high that it will be hard to convince supporters of the loser to accept the result. Still, we should do everything we can to increase popular confidence in the vote. We should make every attempt to prevent even the appearance of voter suppression or voter fraud. Since accusations of fraud seem almost inevitable, we should try to establish in advance a set of standards for determining whether or not it has occurred.

Just as in 2004, statistical analysis will help us to detect tampering at the ballot box. 

Voter fraud can reveal itself in vote totals that differ markedly from the numbers that would be expected to emerge from a fair election. Statisticians can compare exit polls with recorded votes in each state and see if there are red flags. They can analyze precinct-level totals to look for “thumbprints” of voter fraud. It’s not as sure as a photograph of “mislaid” ballots dumped behind a post office, but it’s a very useful tool.

It’s not perfect, however. What if exit polling organizations don’t share their data? Even more seriously, what if partisan statisticians try out different statistical models until they come up with an analysis that “proves” or “disproves” voter fraud? If statisticians don’t say in advance what sorts of models they plan to use, they can cherry pick a method to prove whatever they like.

This sort of agenda-driven approach to statistics has plagued scientific research in recent years. It would make any post-election attempt to check on voter fraud unreliable too. America is seething with partisan rancor at the moment, and should that rancor explode, it could be catastrophic for the republic.

Statisticians and polling organizations should act before the election to outline the procedures they will use to assess whether voter fraud has taken place. Here’s what they need to do:

  • Set up born-open data collection that will allow everyone to see the raw data from exit polls.
  • Register polling organizations’ voting models in advance, so that everyone can understand why and how each exit poll differs from the final results.
  • Commit to presenting the results of all statistical models used to analyze election data, to eliminate the possibility of cherry-picking.
  • Draft and publicize a clear set of standard “best practices” criteria for post-election analysis.
  • These actions may require polling organizations to show outsiders their proprietary data and models. Perhaps access to the relevant data and models should be limited to a bipartisan group of statisticians who will sign legal agreements not to disclose the details of proprietary data and models. But Americans’ trust in “bipartisan experts” has never been lower. Given this fact, perhaps polling organizations should sacrifice their proprietary rights and make their data and methods public in the interest of the survival of the republic.

Open data and predefined statistical methods won’t be enough by themselves to save America from the toxic brew of partisan hatred. But they might make the difference that allows the country to accept the results of the November election in peace.

Let’s put a transparent system into place while we still have time.


About David Randall

David Randall is Director of Research at the National Association of Scholars.

Photo: Christoph Burgstedt/Science Photo Library/Getty Images

Support Free & Independent Journalism Your support helps protect our independence so that American Greatness can keep delivering top-quality, independent journalism that's free to everyone. Every contribution, however big or small, helps secure our future. If you can, please consider a recurring monthly donation.

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.

6 responses to “To Prevent Election Catastrophe We Need Open Data”

  1. This was a good article, but hopefully it may not be necessary as PRESIDENT TRUMP should be able to ensure a LANDSLIDE for Republicans. However, keep in mind that when Jill Stein asked for a recount of Michigan in 2016, 60% of the precincts were “disqualified for “irregularities”. Detroit almost always has a Democratic mayor.

    Keep in mind the recent mail-in voter fraud in Pittsburgh…. The SCOTUS should just say “NO” to mail-in voter fraud.

  2. To prevent voter fraud we should subject every Democratic voter to a psychiatric exam to determine if they are mentally competent to vote in the first place.

  3. While I agree with the main premise, one major issue in implementing such measures is the large increase in both mail-in voting and early voting around the country…of which most of those votes would most likely go for Biden while the majority of in person voters would probably go for Trump…thus making it very difficult to obtain the precise exit polling data needed to win acceptance from the voters for the losing candidate (if they would even be willing to accept it in the first place.)

  4. Why would any Trump voter who has been reluctant, and even afraid to publicly announce their support for the President all of the sudden reveal their vote to an exit pollster? MAJOR flaw in this proposal.

  5. Exit Polls aren’t the solution. We should invalidate the result of any location that accepts ballots after election day, and that count ballots after 24 hours of the election’s conclusion. Everything else is mail in voter fraud, and car trunks full of found democrat ballots in every major city.

  6. Breaking Now:

    CIA whistleblower has just released documented proof, Obama, Hillary, Biden and Brennan paid Iran $150 billion cash, not for any nuclear deal, but as hush money and also paid certain congressional persons some $2 billion of the total $152 billion at the same time, to keep quiet about bungled Bin Laden assassination. Seal Team six was left to die, executed at Benghazi because they knew about it.