|
|
|
|
|
|
by anonymouse008
2015 days ago
|
|
|
> The higher percentage he mentions for past years is likely based off the total rejected ballots (here) which can not be compared with 2020, as this information is not available. This is also the same style of reasoning that helps people explain away the abnormally high voter turnout in WI. Please understand I mean no disrespect in this - I just think changing definitions to cure the abnormalities isn’t necessarily correct (and is frighteningly Orwellian in the bad way). If I had ever turned out 90% of voters measured as (votes/total registered voters) I would have more money than Elon. The way these shocking statistics get diluted is by placating to people with no experience in the process. The goal is to make them feel better by offering an alternative (however misguided) representation, that will stop the line of questioning. So when confronted with an extremely implausible voter turnout, people say the real turnout is votes/total eligible voters... which is very different than every other time
I’ve experienced voter turn out |
|
|
Not sure how whatever conjured view of voter turnout YOU have is relevant. You can go to https://elections.wi.gov/elections-voting/statistics/turnout grab `Voter Turnout Partisan-NonPartisan Through August 2020.xlsx` and see that turnout percentage is computed as `number of votes cast` / `voting age population`.
Which puts Wisconsin turnout at 72.3% [1]
We were talking about ballot rejection, and you start going off about "shocking" voter turnout statistics because you had no retort to the rejection stuff. Either you have an axe to grind or you are a troll. Or maybe you're a masked free speech crusader. The hero we deserve. But I kind of doubt that.
1: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/05/fac...