A Misuse of Statistical Reasoning: The Statistical Arguments Offered by Texas to the Supreme Court in an Attempt to Overturn the Results of the 2020 Election. Issue 1 (4th April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Miao, Weiwen; Pan, Qing; Gastwirth, Joseph L.
• Is Part Of: Statistics and public policy. Volume 9:Issue 1(2022)
• Page Start: 67
• Page End: 73
• Publication Date: 2022-04-04
• Subjects: 2020 Presidential Election -- Control group -- Early voting -- Random sample -- Voter turnout; Policy sciences -- Methodology -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Statistical methods -- Periodicals; Medical statistics -- Methodology -- Periodicals; Statistics -- Periodicals; Medical statistics -- Methodology; Policy sciences -- Methodology; Social sciences -- Statistical methods; Statistics; Periodicals; 320.60727
• DOI: 10.1080/2330443X.2022.2050327
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2330-443X

Abstract

Abstract: In December 2020, Texas filed a motion to the U.S. Supreme Court claiming that the four battleground states: Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin did not conduct their 2020 presidential elections in compliance with the Constitution. Texas supported its motion with a statistical analysis purportedly demonstrating that it was highly improbable that Biden had more votes than Trump in the four battleground states. This article points out that Texas's claim is logically flawed and the analysis submitted violated several fundamental principles of statistics.