MAINE: Fully analyzed before-and-after data in Excel format!

[economics102]

This took me about two hours to do so hope some here find it useful.

The document most here will find interesting is the summary analysis page, which you can view below. Note that the per-candidate totals are at the bottom of the spreadsheet.

Before-and-after change analysis (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApVfzgTbmSJldEQ0eHgyWWFTc08wT2dCOERYTENpN lE#gid=3)

The second file will be very useful to any of you who are analyzing and crunching numbers. It's a spreadsheet with five worksheets. All data includes auto-calculated formulas and the whole works:

WORKSHEETS

Original tallies, with auto-calculated flags identifying discrepencies in total column
"Revised" tallies (the ones just released), with auto-calculated flags identifying discrepencies in total column
Combined before-and-after tallies and with +/- change columns
Just the +/- change columns


GOOGLE DOCS: View online here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApVfzgTbmSJldEQ0eHgyWWFTc08wT2dCOERYTENpN lE#gid=0)

OR

EXCEL: Download link (http://www.filedropper.com/mainegopanalyzeddata)

Happy hunting!

EDIT: In the change analysis, if you're wondering what "Undecided V2" means, it's just the number of undecided votes in the revised results. The original tally did not list undecided votes, so it's always an "add."

[sailingaway]

+ rep!!

[parocks]

Nice.

Here's my conclusion here.

Maine GOP made 2 errors before that benefitted Ron Paul.

1) They switched Romney and Paul in Portland.
2) They gave Ron Paul 20 instead of 0 in Limington.

If they didn't make those 2 corrections, Ron Paul would've been +69 and Romney would've been +64. And we would've been 5 votes closer.

But apparently they made those 2 mistakes earlier, and now they're correcting them. Or are they? I heard about the Portland mistake a while ago.
This is the first I heard of the Limington mistake. The campaigns should have their own data by now, from their sources and they should be checking these things.
If any numbers are wrong now, that would be even worse. It was an incredibly sloppy incompetent job on the part of the Maine GOP. Definitely the kind of job you lose your job for. But they added the 2 things we wanted them to add the most. Waterville and Waldo County.

There isn't much to complain about now. (If the new numbers are right)

Here's what I have.

1) Where are the numbers for New Portland in Somerset county. Reports from Ron Paul supporters indicate that they live in New Portland and they voted for Ron Paul, yet there's 0000's there. Apparently other towns in Somerset voted and their votes didn't count either. What is going on there?

2) The rules were not followed in Portland, and not followed in some of the mouths. Not following the bylaws, etc etc.
The situation involving the delegates and the delegate chair is probably the worst problem left.

3) Why aren't the Aroostook results broken out?

4) Will the Hancock and Kennebec results be counted, the ones that took place, or will take place, after the first announcement. The GOP is currently saying no. When did the GOP announce to the towns that the preference poll window would be over on Feb 11? Was it before or after the town scheduled their caucus? Does the GOP
have a tradition of a deadline to announce results before all the caucuses are over? If there is no tradition, there is no reason for towns to expect there to be a cutoff time. The Maine GOP might've been negligent in failing to clearly communicate to the towns the existence of this Feb 11 deadline as they should've known that towns would not be looking for something that never happened before. The Maine GOP also must've been aware of traditions in parts of the state to hold caucuses in March. It is not always easy to find a place to hold a caucus. Because of all of those reasons, ALL the votes from ALL the caucuses - previously scheduled caucuses and caucuses that have not yet been scheduled - must be counted.

[Sematary]

So where did you find the updated numbers?

[FSP-Rebel]

re up

[economics102]

Why aren't the Aroostook results broken out?

This is something I think is most shady. Arostook, the REAL one county Paul won in 2008 (not Washington County), is the only county that neither the before nor after results bother to break down by town.

Maybe there's a legitimate reason for this, but I'd love to know the answer to that.

[Justinfrom1776]

This is something I think is most shady. Arostook, the REAL one county Paul won in 2008 (not Washington County), is the only county that neither the before nor after results bother to break down by town.

Maybe there's a legitimate reason for this, but I'd love to know the answer to that.

My only guess is that Arostook is so rural the entire county votes in one caucus.. The numbers appear legit to me based on how they voted in 08'.

[Maestro232]

+Rep.

I worked up a couple of very simple metrics off of your data, but they are very media-friendly/short-attention-span-friends-friendly stats to have in your back pocket.

I took the Paul, Gingrich, Santorum, Romney, Undecideds, and Others columns on the COMBINED CHANGE ANALYSIS worksheet and come up with the following metrics:

154 of 2622 values changed. That's a 6% error rate.

This one's better:
79 of 437 precincts had their values changed for one or more columns. That's an 18% error rate.

AT LEAST 18% OF PRECINCTS IN MAINE WERE MISREPORTED!

[economics102]

+Rep.

I worked up a couple of very simple metrics off of your data, but they are very media-friendly/short-attention-span-friends-friendly stats to have in your back pocket.

I took the Paul, Gingrich, Santorum, Romney, Undecideds, and Others columns on the COMBINED CHANGE ANALYSIS worksheet and come up with the following metrics:

154 of 2622 values changed. That's a 6% error rate.

This one's better:
79 of 437 precincts had their values changed for one or more columns. That's an 18% error rate.

AT LEAST 18% OF PRECINCTS IN MAINE WERE MISREPORTED!

Nice, interesting data. The thing that I find so hard to believe, is that EVERYBODY, even Gingrich, who came in a distant 4th overall, "gained" more votes than Paul in the revised tallies. All of these discrepancies look very suspicious when you start adding them all up.

Someone in another thread said we need to reach out ourselves to the town/county chairs and try to confirm numbers with them. I think that's a good idea.

[sailingaway]

Just saw this tweet, was Paris counted twice under a different name? And if so, how many votes are we talking about? BDN Maine Politics @BDNPolitics
Will attempt to confirm MT @rarohla: The latest official MEGOP town results double count Paris as South Paris. #mepolitics

[SCOTUSman]

Just saw this tweet, was Paris counted twice under a different name? And if so, how many votes are we talking about? BDN Maine Politics @BDNPolitics
Will attempt to confirm MT @rarohla: The latest official MEGOP town results double count Paris as South Paris. #mepolitics

They do indeed have the exact same results. 10 Romney 6 Paul 1 Santorum. So if that is the case...we gained four votes.

[bcreps85]

Just saw this tweet, was Paris counted twice under a different name? And if so, how many votes are we talking about? BDN Maine Politics @BDNPolitics
Will attempt to confirm MT @rarohla: The latest official MEGOP town results double count Paris as South Paris. #mepolitics

Just looked at the "new" GOP tallies.

Paris 10 Mitt, 6 Ron, 1 Santorum
New Paris, 10 Mitt, 6 Ron, 1 Santorum

Conclusion: Very unlikely...they gamed the new numbers. If anyone has these numbers in Excel format, they should sort by vote totals for Romney and see how many "dupes" there are perhaps?

[economics102]

Not sure if this is what you mean but I noticed that South Paris is the one town listed in the new results but not in the originals.

To be honest I haven't spent any time analyzing anything beyond putting together the spreadsheets I provided. I thought I would just get other people off the ground floor by making the data available in a useful format and let others run with it. When/if new results are released, or when Washington/Hancock County results are released, I will add them into my spreadsheet though.

[economics102]

Just looked at the "new" GOP tallies.

Is there a new third set of results?? Let me know, I'll add them into my spreadsheet.

[bcreps85]

Is there a new third set of results?? Let me know, I'll add them into my spreadsheet.

No, just compared the original Maine GOP spreadsheet to the one they posted after the "recount". Interestingly, South Paris didn't previously exist. It wasn't on the old sheet at all, denoted with 0's like everyone else who hadn't voted...it just wasn't there and got added out of thin air!

[GraniteHills]

+rep