This is very interesting indeed! It supports my contention that the shocking success of the Republicans in Georgia last election was much more than it seemed. I'm convinced that the state's switchover to 100% computer voting machines denied the Dems their main tool for manipulating results thus insuring the fair and proper tallying of votes.
Enterprising news sevices were actually able to digitally photograph the posted results at each precint moments after the polls closed. They then tallied and broadcast the results hours before the "official" results were announced. It would have been extremely hard to pull the hanky-panky that some precincts are traditionally noted for here.
Despite all the money spent by the state with the stated goal of preventing another 2000-style debacle and despite the fact that all the changes were administered by the previous democrat regime, the dems are still squealing like stuck pigs because of their losses. Oh, the irony of unintended consequences.
I read the whole article, without poring over Lott's charts or tables overmuch. But his conclusions are, ironically, singularly unconvincing. He says that the only really strong correlation to the number of untallied ballots is occurs when there is a Democrat or, especially, a black Democrat in charge of the election. And that, notwithstanding, he doesn't believe that the Democrats were cheating. Go figure.OTOH he says that the only time Black Republicans' votes don't get undercounted is when oval optical machines are used. And I guess that is the kind that FL is headed toward?