Reply #67: This basically sums it up it seems.

[LightningFlash]

Just have a look below for a change.

http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/exit-polls/USCV_exit_poll_simulations.pdf


One could probably consider this argument moot. There is no integrity to the discussion that a bush response bias can outpace its own data, to the point that the original data Edison-Mitofsky holds no longer is valid in itself. It's what I call double reasoning. Plus on top of that, there's no way that such a sampling on purpose or mistake could be orchestrated at this level. At least not in multiple elections and all using the same affect.

http://www.votefraud.org/News/2000/7/071800.html

I think the theory is effectively dead. Was there response bias, most absolutely. Just none so phenomenonal it somehow lines up exactly with Mitofsky's exit poll statistics. But my real question is, why hasn't Mitofsky given all of the precinct data over to the PHDs and statisticians? Why has he not released it to USCountVotes and the entire team? What is his motive or operandi, that while anyone who comes out of nowhere like ESI and even Liddle can view some of the real data....yet fully hard working and credentialed master PHD scientists like Kathy Dopp, Stephen Freeman, and Ron Baiman can not?

What exactly does he hide? It's needed to be proven Bush won, isn't it? How will anyone know if all the data isn't checked and released? How come Bluementhal and others got to see the data in 2002, 2000, and other elections before when the "responder bias" was documented, yet nobody within the scientific community even got a glimpse?

Wonders will never cease in this day and age.