Reply #39: My bad......

[tn-guy]

Apparently, I'm missing something obvious here and I'm also growing weary of this so this will probably be my final posting on this thread. I'm not going to address this point by point but I will try to show how confused I am.

From post #38

Post 32 needs to be read carefully, which is important to understanding the arguments below.

1. Statement - The TIA argument is based on using the results of the NEP to show that the election was stolen.

TIA: You fail to grasp the mathematical logic.

The FINAL NEP HAD to use MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE weightings for it to MATCH TO THE VOTE and so Bush won the Final NEP, 51-48.

Kerry won the earlier timelines, in which the weights were closer to reality. Look at the numbers. Do the calculations. Can you derive the national vote shares based on the demographic category weightings and percentages? You will understand the logic only if you confirm the calculations displayed in post # 32

From post #32


"We will show that National Exit Poll Bush 2000 weights are
mathematically
IMPOSSIBLE in both the preliminary and final timelines."



I guess my misunderstand comes from thinking that when one says the weights are mathematically impossible in both the preliminary and final timelines one means both "preliminary" and "final". It seems that when one says "both preliminary and final" one actually means only "final" were mathematically impossible and "preliminary" weights were "closer to reality." A further source of confusion is that it seems to me if "preliminary and final" results are mathematically impossible then one should not use either "preliminary and final" results for any further analysis. To put it another way, once we have determined that the NEP "cooked the books" I am unwilling to trust ANY numbers in the NEP. I think deciding to trust some numbers and not trust others is the definition of cherry-picking data.

Of course, I'm not a professional statistician so I'm hardly an expert. However; I am by education and profession and engineer so I am used to numbers and math and sampling and quality control and stuff like that. Were someone to give me a data collection as internally inconsistent as the NEP results when I was trying to diagnose a production problem I'd toss the whole set out. When a set of data points are internally inconsistent one only knows that they are questionable, to start assuming which data are good and which are bad will put you on dangerous ground quickly.