- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 1223 Hour
- Reading permission
This post was edited by abramicus at 2016-5-11 21:04|
The numbers speak for themselves. Marcos, Jr., does not have to prove fraud in order to demand a manual recount. He only needs to show probable cause for the existence of an anomaly by objective statistics. Two anomalies stand out in the results of the unofficial count of the vice-presidential candidates Marcos and Robredo. First is that the 3rd and 4th tranches of votes reported had EXACTLY the same percentages of votes for Marcos (41.8%) and Robredo (58.1%), with the 3rd tranche containing 2,061,292 votes, and the 4th tranche containing 4,090,140 votes. This degree of similarity of two proportions is unheard of in the history of vote counting, and constitutes a statistical evidence of a counting anomaly (not necessarily due to fraud) that merits a recount. Second is that the percentages of votes for Marcos (52.77%) and Robredo (47.23%) in the first tranche counted and the percentages of votes for Marcos (41.88%) and Robredo (58.12%) in the 3rd and 4th counts can be shown to belong to two different populations with a p-value less than 0.001, and an anomaly of counting, or sampling bias, or even use of spreadsheets that round off decimals for one candidate downwards, and the other upwards or none at all, can produce a systematic bias in favor of one or against the other, or both. The machine language and hardware level of rounding errors may need to be checked across a representative sample of voting machines to rule out a ROUNDING BIAS, for instance.
SO MUCH FOR THE SHOWCASE OF DEMOCRACY IN ASIA. THAT DUTERTE WON IS WITHOUT DOUBT. BUT THAT MARCOS LOST IS VERY, VERY MUCH IN DOUBT. AND THE KEY TO THE SURVIVAL OF DUTERTE PRESIDENCY IS IN WHO IS HIS VICE-PRESIDENT AS THIS FACTOR WILL SPELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF IMPEACHING HIM OR OF WORKING WITH HIM DURING HIS TENURE.