[polemic]

The take home message:

> "...highly anomalous election results indicate a widespread, systematic exchange of votes favoring one candidate"

> "Mitt Romney, based on our analysis, should have (statistically) gotten third rank in Iowa’s election (as opposed to second); second rank in New Hampshire (as opposed to the first rank), and so on, resulting most likely to a brokered convention at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, FL."

Statistics is awesome, although I suspect that public/media knowledge will mean this is brushed aside.