Nice work. I tend to take high-profile election results over 66% or so in favor of one option as prima facie evidence of election fraud (maybe 75 if there’s some exceptionally strong reason to vote one way or another, like if one of the candidates is dead), but this is certainly damning.
You’d think that the perpetrators of electoral fraud would realize this sort of thing—but I suppose the most likely explanation is that (dons Robin Hanson glasses) elections in these cases aren’t about legitimacy, but rather about proving that one party has enough power to enforce a clearly illegitimate result.
Referenda on things like secession or constitutional change tend to have extreme landslide victories or defeats, even ones generally agreed to have been fair.
Nice work. I tend to take high-profile election results over 66% or so in favor of one option as prima facie evidence of election fraud (maybe 75 if there’s some exceptionally strong reason to vote one way or another, like if one of the candidates is dead), but this is certainly damning.
You’d think that the perpetrators of electoral fraud would realize this sort of thing—but I suppose the most likely explanation is that (dons Robin Hanson glasses) elections in these cases aren’t about legitimacy, but rather about proving that one party has enough power to enforce a clearly illegitimate result.
Referenda on things like secession or constitutional change tend to have extreme landslide victories or defeats, even ones generally agreed to have been fair.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_referendum
Lots of these are in the 80s and 90s.