New Perspectives on Election Fraud in the Gilded Age

Fabricating votes for Putin: new tests of fraud and electoral manipulations from Russia

“…Our analysis builds on the growing body of "fraud forensics" scholarship, which develops statistical procedures for analysing fraud and specifically for spotting the "fingerprints" of fraud (Argersinger 1985;Beber and Scacco 2012;Deckert and Myagkov 2010;Deckert, Myagkov et al 2011;Lukinova, Myagkov et al 2011;Mebane 2004Mebane , 2010Mebane , 2011Mebane and Kalinin 2009;Myagkov, Ordeshook et al 2005;Myagkov, Ordeshook et al 2009). Since irregularities can take many different forms, 2 the statistical methodology employed by these studies varies, and is often conditional upon prior assumptions that researchers choose to adopt with respect to the distribution of results in hypothetical "clean" elections.…”

“…While fraud can be perpetrated under a variety of political regimes (Argersinger 1985;Leemann and Bochsler 2014), recent research suggests that it is particularly widespread in autocracies, and, specifically, that autocrats are often keen to inflate turnout figures and votes for the winning candidate (Rundlett and Svolik 2016;Simpser 2013;Sjoberg 2014). Myagkov et al (2009) andLukinova et al (2011) report suspicious turnout distributions in some of Russia's regions and smaller rayony (sub-regional districts) where turnout is suspicously high and/or turnout distribution is double peaked, that is, it appears as having two different modes or local maxima.…”

“…Election-day fraud usually refers to ballot-stuffing, tampering with vote tallies, and other forms of interference with voting results (Argersinger 1985;Calingaert 2006;Cox and Kousser 1981;Gerring and Thacker 2004;Lehoucq 2003). Researchers have therefore pointed to limited specificity of last-digit tests as a forensic tool because last-digit tests target a specific type of fraud mostly consisting of the writing in of made-up numbers on precinct return sheets and may not detect cases of forced voting, multiple voting, and ballot stuffing (Enikolopov, Korovkin et al 2013).…”

Illicit Tactics as Substitutes

“…We must distinguish election fraud, which is "a plot to overturn election results," from nonintentional irregularities (Lehoucq & Molina, 2002, p. 17). Although the exact extent and nature of such fraud in the American case remains disputed historically (Allen & Allen, 1981;Argersinger, 1985;Burnham, 1974;Campbell, 2003Campbell, , 2005Converse, 1972;Cox & Kousser, 1981;Gist, 1961;Jensen, 1971;Keyssar, 2000;Mayfield, 1993;Reynolds, 1980Reynolds, , 1993Rusk, 1974;Summers, 2001), according to most observers, the turn of the last century marked the heyday of electoral manipulation (Allen & Allen, 1981;Harris, 1934;Sikes, 1928). Although the exact extent and nature of such fraud in the American case remains disputed historically (Allen & Allen, 1981;Argersinger, 1985;Burnham, 1974;Campbell, 2003Campbell, , 2005Converse, 1972;Cox & Kousser, 1981;Gist, 1961;Jensen, 1971;Keyssar, 2000;Mayfield, 1993;Reynolds, 1980Reynolds, , 1993Rusk, 1974;Summers, 2001), according to most observers, the turn of the last century marked the heyday of electoral manipulation (Allen & Allen, 1981;Harris, 1934;Sikes, 1928).…”

Intermediate Conditions of Democratic Accountability: A Response to Electoral Skepticism

“…Though the academic literature on electoral fraud is relatively thin (Lehoucq, 2003, pp. 236-237), these techniques have been amply attested for the nineteenth-century USA (Argersinger, 1985), nineteenthcentury Spain (Darde, 1996), and the twentieth-century USA (Campbell, 2005), for example. Recent cases of fraud have attracted attention in Russia and Ukraine (Myagkov, Ordeshook, & Shakin, 2009) as well as Great Britain, Mexico, Germany, Taiwan, Spain, and Argentina (Lehoucq, 2003, pp.…”