As you said;
Rove's point here is one of those arguments that sounds sensible at first blush--only 4 votes per precinct doesn't sound like a whole lot, after all. But Carson's total was 17,000 votes (that's around 11.5 votes per precinct), which means than an increase of 6,239 total (or 4 per precinct) would represent a 30+% increase in Carson's vote total. Not plausible!Rove's point also ignores that Carson out-performed both his polling average leading up to the caucus, and his entrance poll numbers. There is simply no support for the idea that Carson lost any support, much less any significant support, due to Cruz's misinformation.
Pings to a few others included...
First, something may be “not plausible” - but that assertion does not make the occurrence not possible.
Second, the “polls” were wrong on just about every assertion - so quoting the polls to back up an argument that favors the same polls is illogical.
Third, whether using Rove’s speculated 4 vote differential or your spread of 11.5 votes for the 17,000 total, neither may be said to be true to reality; since such even distributions do not actually occur in the real world.
Other than knowing the actual individual vote totals for each candidate at each precinct, we have no way of knowing how many votes were persuaded from Carson to Cruz, or to any other candidate. Unless the voters themselves were all going to come forth and state whether they changed their vote and to whom did they switch - and we both know that will not happen. Basically, the entire fiasco is made moot by this fact. There will be no law suit by Trump or Carson, just as there will be no do-over caucus. If anything is done, it will be a decision by the FEC. And, somehow, I get the sense they are not going to touch this.