Election Watchdog Flags Irregularities in Clark County Early Voting Data
Experts Call for Review
The Election Truth Alliance (ETA), a nonpartisan organization focused on election integrity, has issued a warning regarding “statistically anomalous” patterns observed in early voting data from Clark County, Nevada, home to approximately 1.5 million registered voters, including those in Las Vegas.
According to the ETA's analysis, there are notable discrepancies in vote distribution, irregular trends reported by voting machines, and unusual clustering patterns. Election experts are calling for a thorough investigation into these findings, emphasizing the need to preserve public confidence in the electoral process as the critical election period approaches.
1. Undervoting Discrepancies
A striking 10.54% of Trump voters skipped down-ballot races (e.g., Senate), compared to just 1.07% of Harris supporters. Such a pronounced gap in “undervoting” has drawn questions about voter behavior consistency, particularly given Clark County’s competitive down-ballot races.
2. Early Voting Patterns
Early voting totals (395,438 ballots) showed Trump leading Harris 59%-40%, a 19-point margin. However, this gap widened disproportionately as more ballots were counted—a trend not observed on Election Day, where Trump’s lead narrowed to 50%-47%. Voting machines also reported a steady increase in Trump’s share over time during early counting, contrasting sharply with Election Day’s more variable results.
3. Unusual Clustering
ETA identified a lack of randomness in early voting results. After roughly 250 ballots were counted, outcomes displayed uniform patterns inconsistent with typical voting behavior. Experts note that election results usually exhibit sporadic fluctuations, akin to those seen in Clark County’s Election Day data.
4. Machine Anomalies
Questions linger about whether machines in Republican-leaning areas processed disproportionately high volumes of ballots. ETA also flagged whether system errors could explain the anomalies, asking, “Why weren’t these patterns detected during pre-election testing?”
Voting Breakdown
Mail-in (443,823 votes): Harris dominated with 61% (271,455 votes) to Trump’s 36% (160,824).
Early Voting (395,438 votes): Trump led decisively (59%, 234,231 votes) over Harris (40%, 156,705).
Election Day (194,024 votes): Trump narrowly edged Harris 50%-47%.
Note: Remaining percentages in each category reflect third-party or unaffiliated votes.
Expert Reactions
Statisticians and election experts consulted by the ETA noted the early voting patterns resemble historical cases of fraud or systemic error. Dr. Linda Chen, a data forensics specialist, stated, “Uniform clustering after a specific ballot threshold is atypical. Natural voting behavior should produce more randomness, as seen on Election Day.”
Unanswered Questions
Were voting machines in GOP-leaning areas allocated higher ballot volumes?
Could software glitches explain the trending margins, and why were they overlooked?
Does the undervoting disparity reflect intentional manipulation or mere voter apathy?
Next Steps
ETA will formally submit its findings to state election officials, the media, and independent experts. The group is prepared to petition for a hand recount and has offered to offset associated costs. “Transparency is critical,” said ETA spokesperson Mark Torres. “Voters deserve assurance that every ballot was counted accurately.”
Conclusion
While no evidence of fraud has been proven, the irregularities underscore the need for robust electoral safeguards. As Clark County officials review the claims, the nation watches closely—a reminder that trust in democracy hinges on clarity, accountability, and resolving anomalies before they erode public faith.