Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 15 subscribers
  • Views 453 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Ethics of Big Data Analysis : US Election Result Expectations

Former Community Member
Former Community Member

The Trump Camp is understandably disappointed with this unexpected election result.



However, it can be fairly expected that a lot of their elderly supporters in some of their established constituencies, may not have had access to voting at the time of Pandemic, mainly due to the elderly being more susceptible to the virus and choosing the conservative decision to not take the added risk of life. Here, it is not by choice, but by loss of freedom due to Pandemic, such citizens may have been deprived of their fundamental rights. Was the loss of this conservative sentiment amongst the elderly - and its representation in the cast ballots, the cause of such unexpected defeat?



Big Data set comparisons would suggest that some of the states with high elderly population, obtained an unexpected result from the US Election. Hence, as per the value of Big Data Analysis, should such identified discrepancies be worth further appeals - or should such data be ignored as a human observation fallacy? Indeed, the future of such Big Data technologies are in these important ethical considerations.



uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm



www.nbcnews.com/.../president-results



www.prb.org/.../



 


  • 0
    Syamantak Saha:

    The Trump Camp is understandably disappointed with this unexpected election result.



    However, it can be fairly expected that a lot of their elderly supporters in some of their established constituencies, may not have had access to voting at the time of Pandemic, mainly due to the elderly being more susceptible to the virus and choosing the conservative decision to not take the added risk of life. Here, it is not by choice, but by loss of freedom due to Pandemic, such citizens may have been deprived of their fundamental rights. Was the loss of this conservative sentiment amongst the elderly - and its representation in the cast ballots, the cause of such unexpected defeat?



    Big Data set comparisons would suggest that some of the states with high elderly population, obtained an unexpected result from the US Election. Hence, as per the value of Big Data Analysis, should such identified discrepancies be worth further appeals - or should such data be ignored as a human observation fallacy? Indeed, the future of such Big Data technologies are in these important ethical considerations.



    uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm



    www.nbcnews.com/.../president-results



    www.prb.org/.../



     




    If somebody chose not to vote, then they chose not to vote.  Nobody took their rights away from them.  They could have sent in a postal vote if they had wanted to.


    You cannot call an election based on how you think somebody who didn't vote would have voted.  If you did that, then whoever is in charge of running the election would be deciding for themselves who was the winner every time.


  • 0
    I agree with Simon. Many states sent postal ballots to every potential elector (which gave them a bit of additional work to ensure no-one voted both in person and by post) so the elderly have not been disenfranchised. There is not a significant correlation between the states with elderly populations and the election results - if you want to see a much better correlation, look at the states with the highest rates of Covid and the election outcome as there seems to be a pretty clear correlation between high infection rate/republican vote and low infection rate/democratic vote.
  • 0
    The problem of older voters and distant polling stations is not new - though the US is unusual in being a first world country with widely spaced polling stations and long queues to vote, and a highly fragmented system, where each state seems to have it's own rulebook.

    The mistake I suggest, was not to encourage those older voters to trust and to use the postal voting system - it is after all exactly what it is there for. The Democrats strongly endorsed postal voting for those unable or unwilling to travel on the day - the Republicans scorned that process and are maybe reaping some consequence of their decision.

    An unintended consequence of this election may be an update of some of the more arcane mail in voting and counting processes in some states. The results of analysis such as you propose may well feed into that sort of review, once the current dust storm has settled.

    Equally, it is interesting to note that the win would have been even bigger had representation been proportional, instead of quantised into all one way or all the other for a given state, so it would be very brave to argue the result is not fairly representing the opinion of the people of America.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Interesting, how at times of such Ethical Dilemma, the Laws and Legal Processes rectify the issue. Since, the US AG has called for clarifying that there was not any significant "Irregularities" for the election results.

    Significant "Irregularities", as required by the AG, could exist, if under the circumstances of the Pandemic, considerable number of Elderly and other dependent persons, could not get access to Voting, as they would, if the Pandemic did not exist.


    As most Elderly persons would require support to Vote, and that the Elderly are at a higher risk of conceiving the virus, it would be a reasonable ground to check whether fair, un-intimitated and fully accessible methods were available to the Elderly, under the circumstances of the Pandemic. Otherwise, the election could be highly "Irregular" in that the US Constitutional provisions for elections, were critically affected for a significant group of eligible voters under such circumstances, creating an election that would be inherently biased against such a legitimate and eligible group.


    As a check, all US Counties should have provided this access for a fair election result thereby. Counties that did not or could not provide this access, may require such advantages from further appeals.

    https://www.wnct.com/video/countys-election-teams-helping-elderly-voters/5983128/
  • 0
    Were there any US counties that did not make postal votes freely available  for elderly and infirm?

    If so it is a remarkable country.
  • 0
    mapj1:

    Were there any US counties that did not make postal votes freely available  for elderly and infirm?

    If so it is a remarkable country.


    It is a remarkable country in all sorts of ways :)   For example, Tenessee tried to require first-time voters who registered by post to vote in-person to cast their ballot. This would definitely have included some folks who didn't want to expose themselves to the pandemic for health reasons. Tennessee had to fall in line after a court decision in September.


    Elections in the states are almost always litigious - you can see here a list of the most interesting cases ongoing from the current election. I would say that for a race this close the lawsuits are essential to stop speculation. Does anyone remember Florida's infamous hanging chads in 2000? That race was won by around 500 votes in Florida and included court-mandated recounts - all of us FL Nader voters were thoroughly shamed.


    I don't think the outcome of the election was that surprising, considering Biden's lead. Although this year has been unpredictable so I did actually think Trump would win.


Community Rules & Guidelines