I think I have a counterexample, if such things exist when discussing
probability.
The US presidential election with the highest turnout (81.8%, as a
percentage of the voting age population) was the Tiden-Hayes election of
1876. It is also the smallest electoral vote victory (185-184). The
winner of the popular vote (by 3%) did not win the election. The result
ultimately came from a back, presumably smoky, room.
—Barry
On 28 Oct 2020, at 19:19, uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ wrote:
From:
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2020/Pres/Maps/Oct28.html#item-7
"6. High turnout makes razor-thin victories, like the ones Trump
notched in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in 2016, much less
likely."
Is that true? I've always heard that tight races lead to higher
turnout, which would imply that high turnout would correlate WITH thin
victories, not against them.
--
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
