Responses to Eggers and Grimmer’s claims regarding "Simple tests for the extent of vote fraud with absentee and provisional ballots in the 2020 US presidential election"

11 Pages Posted: 3 May 2022

See all articles by John R. Lott

John R. Lott

Crime Prevention Research Center

Date Written: April 27, 2022

Abstract

Addressing Eggers and Grimmer’s claims leaves most of the results largely unchanged. The biggest change is the estimate in Table 9 goes from being negative and statistically significant to being negative and not statistically significant. However, their paper didn’t “replicate” the turnout estimates I provided. Their piece never states that they use a different measure of voter turnout and different control variables. Only by making all these changes can they turn the fraud variable from being consistently positive and statistically significant to being negative and not statistically significant. Simply adopting their measure of voter turnout and using my control variables produces a positive but statistically insignificant result. Since they don’t even mention that they have used a different measure of voter turnout, they never try explaining why their measure is preferable.

These comments involve my paper available here:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988

Keywords: Vote Fraud, absentee ballots, voter turnout rate, provisional ballots, presidential election

JEL Classification: K14

Suggested Citation

Lott, John R., Responses to Eggers and Grimmer’s claims regarding "Simple tests for the extent of vote fraud with absentee and provisional ballots in the 2020 US presidential election" (April 27, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4095558 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4095558

John R. Lott (Contact Author)

Crime Prevention Research Center ( email )

PO Box 2293
1100 W Kent Ave
Missoula, MT 59801
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
45
Abstract Views
320
PlumX Metrics