Rumor has it that canvassing will be completed today in Wisconsin's Supreme Court election which will allow the declaration of an official winner.
From a data perspective, it's been interesting. By midnight on election day the incumbent held about a 700 vote lead with 99% of precincts reported. Although the AP wouldn't call the race, pundits said that it was very unlikely that the lead would change based on
past voting patterns in the last 1%.
Did you ever hear the phrase "Past performance is no indication of future returns"? I guess someone should have reminded the pundits. By morning, the challenger turned things around and climbed to a 200+ vote lead with just a
single precinct left to report.
Again, the pundits said that,
based on past patterns in that precinct, the challenger's lead would be cut by about 100 votes leaving her with slightly more than a 100 vote lead, guaranteeing a recount. The last precinct didn't change the lead by more than a few votes.
In spite of the "Past performance is no indication of future returns" disclaimer, this was a statistically interesting result. Any time there is a major change in patterns, it should stand out to statisticians. That's not a statement about vote fraud. It's just a statement that a new pattern emerged.
But then things got even more interesting.