You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

a "game" about the 2004 election [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-05 04:29 PM
Original message
a "game" about the 2004 election
Advertisements [?]
Officially, Al Gore received 51.004 million votes in the 2000 presidential election; George W. Bush received 50.460 million; and other candidates received 3.953 million votes (per David Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections).

In the run-up to the 2004 election, it was widely expected that new voters would favor John Kerry, an expectation that seems to be borne out in the exit poll results for 2000 non-voters. (The 2000 non-voters would include both literal new voters -- people who have never voted before -- and people who have voted before but did not in 2000.) Thus, for Bush to defeat Kerry in the 2004 popular vote -- never mind to defeat him by a bit over 3 million votes, as in the official returns -- he would have to overcome Kerry's presumptive lead among returning voters plus any additional Kerry edge from the 2000 non-voters.

This is a problem because the exit polls seem to say that Kerry captured about the same proportion of Bush2K votes as Bush did Gore2K votes, or even higher -- and that Kerry won the DidNotVote2Ks by a solid margin (and the Other2Ks by a huge margin). The weighted exit poll results render Bush the winner only by stipulating that Bush2K voters outnumbered Gore2K voters in the 2004 electorate by a proportion of 43%/37%. As far as I know, we all agree that this did not happen. We disagree about whether massive fraud is the only plausible or the most likely explanation of these and other data. Anaxarchos has proposed a "game" to explore alternative scenarios, of which more below.

some assumptions

TIA reasonably proposes as an analytical starting point the maximum numbers of 2000 voters who possibly could have voted in 2004. He offers a mortality estimate of 0.87%/year, or 3.48% over four years. Absent strong evidence of differential mortality (older respondents tend to skew Democratic, but Anax has some counterpoint that I have forgotten but am sure is reasonable), we apply this attrition rate to the three groups of 2000 voters. (We also discount felon or "felon" purges and the like.) Thus we have approximately

49.228 million Gore2K voters
48.704 million Bush2K voters
3.815 million Other2K voters

The official 2004 returns show 122.293 million total voters (62.040 million for Bush, 59.028 million for Kerry, 1.225 million for others).

Note that if _all_ surviving voters from 2000 turned out, we would need 20.545 million new voters to account for the total official 2004 turnout. It is ridiculous to suppose that 100% of surviving voters turned out, and I am willing to entertain a lower figure. I think we have agreed to assume that Gore2K and Bush2K voters turned out at the same percentage in 2004, whatever that percentage may be.

Please advise of any errors in or even caveats about these assumptions. (It is acceptable to explore alternative assumptions as we go, although we all agree to reject the assumption that Gore2K voters are immortal and/or undead.)

the proposed rules

1) The game is a game of "Best Fit" but the boundaries are subjective. Someone (maybe Descartes?) once said that "mathematics has a soul but it has no heart" (i.e. "conscience"), meaning any value is acceptable in calculation but not necessarily in life. We use a standard of "plausible", stretch our self-discipline to the max, and see where we end up.

2) The game gets played right here and anyone can play. Despite the "crazy" tone we sometimes adopt, there are close to 65000 experts here on what is "plausible" in politics. A few are truly nuts so we identify them early and make them the board of directors.

3) We keep it really simple.

4) This game is only indirectly about Exit Polls and Polling in general. We are actually trying to reconstruct the election of GW Bush, in a "plausible" way.

5) This game is deadly serious for anax and other players, but turning it into a game avoids what is "conceivable" for some, what is "proof", what is "acceptable", and all the rest... the only standards for this game are "reason" and "virtue".

6) First one who says "the real vote count has to be right because it is the real vote count", loses.

Note: anax proposed to "get rid of rule #7," but I'm not sure I got rid of the right one. The original rule 7 was, "I (anax) further agree not to comment on your (OTOH's) serve until we get to the 'double-dare-you' stage." Since I'm not even sure what that means, it wouldn't bind me, and I could not enforce it, I unilaterally waive it. But if the point was to eschew trash talk at least until further notice, then I endorse that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -a "game" about the 2004 election OnTheOtherHand  Aug-21-05 04:29 PM   #0 
  - there are also no Bush 2k Zombies allowed just to be fair n/t  Melissa G   Aug-21-05 04:44 PM   #1 
  - Just a thought, but I'm probably breaking a rule, because I don't  Time for change   Aug-21-05 05:21 PM   #2 
  - TfC, the game began, specifically from your objection.  anaxarchos   Aug-21-05 05:38 PM   #3 
  - So did I win??  Time for change   Aug-21-05 05:45 PM   #5 
  - I thought so.... n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-21-05 05:51 PM   #6 
  - Wait a minute  Time for change   Aug-21-05 05:54 PM   #7 
     - Read the thread...  anaxarchos   Aug-21-05 06:07 PM   #8 
     - I read the rules thoroughly  Time for change   Aug-21-05 06:22 PM   #10 
        - OK TFC..we all think you won which is why we are here in this forum  Melissa G   Aug-21-05 06:27 PM   #11 
           - Ok, I'll get over it.  Time for change   Aug-21-05 06:52 PM   #12 
              - As far as I understand it you have it right.. No one we know of to date  Melissa G   Aug-21-05 07:21 PM   #13 
              - Not ONE mathematical scenario, but many theories and hypotheses  TruthIsAll   Aug-21-05 08:14 PM   #15 
              - Hey, you forgot early women voters (who skewed for Kerry) ;)  tommcintyre   Aug-22-05 01:07 AM   #25 
              - Thank you, Tom.... I think. n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 10:19 AM   #35 
              - Of TIA's listed theories and hypotheses used to support election results  Land Shark   Aug-22-05 08:22 AM   #28 
                 - possibly off-topic, but let me respond  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 09:41 AM   #32 
                 - Objection m'lud!  Febble   Aug-22-05 10:55 AM   #37 
                 - LOL! My fingerprints weren't designed to prove I was there either ;)  tommcintyre   Aug-22-05 09:48 PM   #89 
                    - Re this:  Febble   Aug-23-05 05:51 AM   #111 
                       - Disqualified: Hyperbole (exaggeration) and false appeals to authorities  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 12:19 AM   #149 
                          - It happens to be  Febble   Aug-24-05 01:46 AM   #151 
                          - Febble, your citing ESI (votewatch) to support ESI (votewatch)  autorank   Aug-24-05 02:35 AM   #152 
                          - I didn't cite ESI to support ESI  Febble   Aug-24-05 05:14 AM   #158 
                          - Your "Disclaimer" is a good start  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 03:10 AM   #155 
                             - In turn:  Febble   Aug-24-05 04:28 AM   #156 
                                - There ya go again  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 08:02 AM   #169 
                                   - Enough already  Febble   Aug-24-05 08:35 AM   #173 
                                      - Wow! You really whacked that one out of context, didn't you?  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 09:24 AM   #182 
                                      - Oh, drop it tomm  Febble   Aug-24-05 09:49 AM   #183 
                                      - OK, but that was NOT personal information. Dropped n/t  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 09:56 AM   #186 
                          - Deleted message  Name removed   Aug-24-05 02:36 AM   #153 
                             - Done  Febble   Aug-24-05 04:58 AM   #157 
                                - Wow! You really like to stretch things, don't you?  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 06:06 AM   #161 
                                   - Yes, anyone can search my posts  Febble   Aug-24-05 06:49 AM   #163 
                                      - And...  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 08:43 AM   #175 
                                         - Well, it has seemed  Febble   Aug-24-05 09:19 AM   #181 
                                         - Actually, they would not have deleted the thread for that reason  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 09:53 AM   #184 
                                         - tomm  Febble   Aug-24-05 10:27 AM   #188 
                                         - Here's the proof:  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 09:28 PM   #215 
                                         - Will you stop this, please, tomm?  Febble   Aug-25-05 02:14 AM   #219 
                                         - YOU ASKED FOR PROOF IN A PM TO ME-Glad to stop it  tommcintyre   Aug-25-05 08:29 AM   #221 
              - I didn't say non-mathematical -- just non-exit poll related  Time for change   Aug-21-05 08:20 PM   #16 
              - ah, heck, I'll give you a trophy, but let's play on...  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-21-05 08:05 PM   #14 
                 - You convinced me that wasn't needed...  anaxarchos   Aug-21-05 08:41 PM   #17 
     - there are at least couple of three folks on this forum who believe  Melissa G   Aug-21-05 06:09 PM   #9 
  - Well the attractive thing  Febble   Aug-21-05 05:42 PM   #4 
  - So nice to see you all playing so well in the sandbox for a change!  Bill Bored   Aug-21-05 09:21 PM   #18 
  - OK I'm back.  Bill Bored   Aug-21-05 10:56 PM   #19 
  - Bill, good point . I have always said that if ONE demographic was bogus..  TruthIsAll   Aug-21-05 11:55 PM   #20 
  - Not quite the timeline I had in mind.  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 03:11 AM   #26 
     - A problem with your electoral scenario  Time for change   Aug-22-05 08:46 AM   #29 
     - You are right.  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 12:37 PM   #39 
     - I said nothing here about the 613; "last minute" refers to after 12:22am  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 09:27 AM   #31 
        - That's interesting, TIA  Febble   Aug-22-05 10:11 AM   #33 
        - Technically you are right  Time for change   Aug-22-05 10:41 AM   #36 
           - Fair enough  Febble   Aug-22-05 11:21 AM   #38 
              - Two ways they could have been involved:  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 12:51 PM   #40 
              - Ha!  Febble   Aug-22-05 12:57 PM   #41 
                 - Not saying this happened everywhere.  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 01:22 PM   #46 
                    - A lot of this depends on where you start.  Febble   Aug-22-05 03:15 PM   #51 
                    - Most definitely -- There are at least 4 kinds of fraud that wouldn't show  Time for change   Aug-23-05 06:41 AM   #113 
              - I'm saying a little bit more than that  Time for change   Aug-22-05 01:19 PM   #44 
                 - That I will buy.  Febble   Aug-22-05 03:59 PM   #55 
                    - It's good to know we're on the same page Febble  Time for change   Aug-22-05 05:43 PM   #60 
                       - Greater, I would say  Febble   Aug-22-05 06:02 PM   #62 
                          - Well, if things get much worse here I'd have to consider transporting  Time for change   Aug-22-05 06:40 PM   #64 
                             - And Blair is the leader of the  Febble   Aug-22-05 06:49 PM   #66 
                                - Well that's the guy you actually "voted" for right? nt  Bill Bored   Aug-23-05 12:13 AM   #106 
                                   - Precisely not  Febble   Aug-23-05 03:08 AM   #109 
                                      - I was referring to Brown! You voted for him by voting for the party.  Bill Bored   Aug-23-05 09:49 AM   #122 
                                         - huh?  Febble   Aug-23-05 10:02 AM   #124 
        - TIA, it was well established by MSM and Air America  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 12:59 PM   #42 
           - The reason people decided whether or not to vote had nothing to  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 02:45 PM   #50 
              - Well, perhaps you will be more comfortable with my response to  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 03:41 PM   #53 
  - Or, calling it for what it is:  tommcintyre   Aug-22-05 12:44 AM   #24 
  - yes, I overstated that  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 08:17 AM   #27 
     - Couldn't agree more on your first paragraph...  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 10:18 AM   #34 
     - I like the hybrid scenario  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 01:48 PM   #47 
        - Bill, that's not true. 12:22am 8% Gore to Bush; 10% Bush to Kerry  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 03:50 PM   #54 
           - TIA, I didn't quote this one so how can you say it wasn't true?  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 08:46 PM   #80 
              - Not so. Take a look at the 7:33 poll of 11027  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 10:04 PM   #90 
                 - That's what I said: 90% - 91% Y2K party loyalty. Final version, the same.  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 10:42 PM   #96 
                    - some of us just refuse to let the IMO Lie that Blivet won continue  Melissa G   Aug-22-05 10:56 PM   #98 
                    - Except that Bush went from 8% of Gore votes to 10% in the final.  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 11:08 PM   #105 
                       - You're right and there were probably some rounding errors too  Bill Bored   Aug-23-05 12:17 AM   #107 
  - Here's how to play this: Stick to the facts.  Dynasty_At_Passes   Aug-22-05 12:16 AM   #21 
  - Bush won by 3 million votes, NOT 3.5. n / t  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 12:24 AM   #22 
  - Thanks, edited for clarity. n|t  Dynasty_At_Passes   Aug-22-05 12:26 AM   #23 
  - I'm not sure what you're saying  Time for change   Aug-22-05 08:53 AM   #30 
     - Do we know that for sure?  Dynasty_At_Passes   Aug-22-05 08:16 PM   #77 
        - That's what I'm saying  Time for change   Aug-24-05 07:34 AM   #166 
           - So then why is this called an invisible surge?  Past_World_Doubt   Aug-24-05 09:01 AM   #178 
              - I believe that massive voter fraud was the reason for the Bush "victory"  Time for change   Aug-24-05 10:22 AM   #187 
                 - Whoops -- I meant to say election fraud, not "voter fraud" n/t  Time for change   Aug-24-05 11:33 AM   #192 
  - Bill, I don't think California voters are/were fickle. Here's why...  Peace Patriot   Aug-22-05 01:16 PM   #43 
  - As usual, a lot to consider in your post PP.  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 02:06 PM   #48 
  - Ladies and Gentlemen...  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 01:22 PM   #45 
  - is this a "serve"?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 02:33 PM   #49 
     - That, most definitely, is a serve....  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 03:40 PM   #52 
     - I think that is the basic premise  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 04:13 PM   #56 
        - OK then,... the game has begun n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 04:29 PM   #57 
        - Before I respond, a question....  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 06:56 PM   #67 
        - hmm  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 09:06 PM   #84 
           - 'Snot the point....  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 10:59 PM   #99 
              - whoops, didn't mean to leave you itching  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 04:43 PM   #137 
        - Question here OTOH.. 'You were not really given the assignment'..  Melissa G   Aug-22-05 08:12 PM   #76 
        - we play the game to find out or refine what we think  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 09:08 PM   #85 
           - Sorry OTOH, can't resist...Tried, but can't...  Melissa G   Aug-22-05 10:26 PM   #92 
              - of course you could have resisted  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 08:33 AM   #114 
                 - okay, thanks for the clarification and no, if you give me a hole  Melissa G   Aug-23-05 07:15 PM   #139 
                    - that also seems like pretty circular reasoning to me  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 08:12 PM   #142 
                       - Sure it is easy to have conversations with people who agree  Melissa G   Aug-23-05 10:28 PM   #146 
                          - I'm not denying that those things happened  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 07:54 AM   #168 
                             - OTOH, you are not remotely comparing apples to apples..  Melissa G   Aug-24-05 10:03 PM   #216 
                                - I think you are refuting a point I didn't make  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-05 08:19 AM   #220 
        - This premise is refuted by the exit polls, sort of.  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 08:33 PM   #78 
        - You know how to play this game, BB... n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 11:04 PM   #102 
        - How do you reconcile these NES numbers with 2004 raw exit polls  Time for change   Aug-22-05 09:27 PM   #88 
           - You too, TfC... n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 11:05 PM   #103 
              - Seriously, I don't understand your comment to BB or me  Time for change   Aug-23-05 06:26 AM   #112 
                 - Tfc, I'm not sure I understand your question  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 08:41 AM   #116 
                 - But I don't think we're talking about "4 years later"  Time for change   Aug-23-05 04:16 PM   #135 
                    - I swear, there is nothing up my sleeve here  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 07:18 PM   #140 
                       - Then I think you should specify your scenario in more detail  Time for change   Aug-23-05 10:07 PM   #145 
                          - let's see  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 08:19 AM   #170 
                             - One major problem with this scenario is that it requires  Time for change   Aug-24-05 12:24 PM   #198 
                                - smile (but confused smile)  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 06:15 PM   #206 
                                   - Ah... you two must be SO pleased your game is going so well  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 06:26 PM   #207 
                 - Please forgive me TfC and my rudeness in answering so late...  anaxarchos   Aug-23-05 11:34 PM   #147 
     - The rubber has it the road, OTOH.  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 05:38 PM   #59 
     - let's see...  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 07:07 PM   #70 
     - FALSE RECALL. FALSE RECALL. FALSE RECALL.  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 07:32 PM   #73 
        - facts are stubborn things n/t  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 08:34 PM   #79 
        - Are you disputing OTOH's facts?  Febble   Aug-23-05 03:30 AM   #110 
           - NEWS FLASH! Census 60,000 sample (0.30% MoE): 125.7mm voted in 2004  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 08:42 AM   #117 
           - Nice one, TIA. However....  Febble   Aug-23-05 09:45 AM   #121 
           - Those are not facts. 122.26mm votes, 48.69 max Bush 2000 votes are FACTS  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 09:29 AM   #119 
              - Survey data  Febble   Aug-23-05 09:56 AM   #123 
              - My "FACTS" are more believable than your "FACTS"  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 10:04 AM   #125 
                 - And my cherries are bigger than your cherries....  Febble   Aug-23-05 10:27 AM   #126 
                    - You would LOVE the exit poll evidence to be irrelevant, wouldn't you?  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 11:07 AM   #127 
                       - No, you are wrong  Febble   Aug-23-05 11:52 AM   #128 
              - There is a problem with your assumptions  mgr   Aug-23-05 06:49 PM   #138 
                 - I like this one.  Bill Bored   Aug-24-05 11:03 PM   #217 
                    - Absolutely,  mgr   Aug-25-05 10:13 AM   #223 
        - One more thing. This is what Kerry needed to just TIE Bush  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 08:55 PM   #81 
        - I am astonished  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-22-05 08:59 PM   #82 
     - One thing I don't understand about each of your serves  Time for change   Aug-22-05 06:13 PM   #63 
     - His serves are good  Febble   Aug-22-05 06:48 PM   #65 
        - I don't know what I was thinking about that first serve  Time for change   Aug-22-05 06:57 PM   #68 
           - No, it's still in play  Febble   Aug-22-05 07:10 PM   #71 
           - Don't count on it... n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 10:27 PM   #93 
           - One question...  Chi   Aug-23-05 09:42 AM   #120 
              - Chi lifts his arms and sniffs his armpits....couldnt be that. n/t  Chi   Aug-24-05 09:08 AM   #180 
              - Just realised this was addressed to me  Febble   Aug-24-05 03:54 PM   #201 
                 - I don't think it's possible for Gore voters to have said"have it your way"  Bill Bored   Aug-24-05 11:29 PM   #218 
                    - a few things  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-25-05 11:12 AM   #227 
           - When I said two serves, it was a figure of speech...  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 07:55 PM   #74 
     - Let me get this straight...  Chi   Aug-22-05 10:48 PM   #97 
        - well, the game is a little bit stacked right now  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 12:59 PM   #130 
           - OK...let's see if I can be more constructive....  Chi   Aug-23-05 02:02 PM   #133 
              - fair question, and thanks  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 04:35 PM   #136 
                 - To you, every statistic "sloshes" around except your 600-sample NES.  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 08:08 PM   #141 
                 - actually, I think every survey statistic is somewhat sloshy  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 08:28 AM   #172 
                 - I can see how the party affiliation numbers can be muddy...  Chi   Aug-24-05 08:59 AM   #176 
                    - OK, Gore for Bush04  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 09:53 AM   #185 
                       - Best info still says 14.6% too high, IMHO.  Chi   Aug-24-05 11:31 AM   #191 
                          - it's open to interpretation  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 07:02 PM   #209 
                             - And some things aren't open to interpretation.  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 07:07 PM   #211 
  - We interrupt our normal programming for this SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT  autorank   Aug-22-05 04:42 PM   #58 
  - AND AN MOE CALCULATOR, TO BOOT!  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 05:55 PM   #61 
  - Wow... n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-22-05 07:06 PM   #69 
  - I wonder which way those undecideds will break. nt  Bill Bored   Aug-22-05 07:27 PM   #72 
  - ==>ATTENTION -- RULING FROM THE JUDGES--IT'S OFFICIAL  autorank   Aug-22-05 09:04 PM   #83 
  - I think you can rule false memory out.  Dynasty_At_Passes   Aug-22-05 09:11 PM   #86 
     - Right, and it's just memory from the voting booth to the door.  autorank   Aug-22-05 09:19 PM   #87 
        - Are we done yet?  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 10:36 PM   #95 
        - Do pay attention at the back, there  Febble   Aug-23-05 02:29 AM   #108 
           - Cite some evidence for MAJOR DECISIONS.  autorank   Aug-24-05 03:08 AM   #154 
              - Define "real" evidence  Febble   Aug-24-05 05:55 AM   #160 
                 - Evidence  autorank   Aug-24-05 11:29 AM   #190 
                    - OK, then what is your problem  Febble   Aug-24-05 11:58 AM   #195 
  - I'm an amateur mathematician  StefanX   Aug-22-05 10:04 PM   #91 
  - Touche. It really IS that simple. Simple math. Pure logic. Common sense.  TruthIsAll   Aug-22-05 10:29 PM   #94 
  - As an amateur mathematician and a computer programmer  StefanX   Aug-22-05 11:02 PM   #100 
     - Get the beautiful girls to count the votes. Lots of witnesses then.  autorank   Aug-22-05 11:05 PM   #104 
  - Please return and return often.  autorank   Aug-22-05 11:02 PM   #101 
  - it depends on the value of "you"  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 08:38 AM   #115 
     - Bush was an incumbent with a 48.5% job rating. Envelope, please?  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 08:58 AM   #118 
        - considering some discrepant information  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 12:29 PM   #129 
           - I suggest you look at this..and get back to espousing "false recall"  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 01:00 PM   #131 
              - circular reasoning 101  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 01:36 PM   #132 
  - Return of Service....  anaxarchos   Aug-23-05 03:39 PM   #134 
  - whoa there  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-23-05 08:30 PM   #143 
  - Just who the hell are these mysterious "political scientists" you keep  TruthIsAll   Aug-23-05 08:55 PM   #144 
  - "There are 400 of them, I have a list of their names in my brief case.  autorank   Aug-23-05 11:54 PM   #148 
  - No probs, auto  Febble   Aug-24-05 06:09 AM   #162 
  - actually...  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 06:51 AM   #164 
  - OTOH, how does your model deal with these categories?  TruthIsAll   Aug-24-05 12:42 AM   #150 
  - sorry, is there a question here?  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 06:56 AM   #165 
     - I'm glad you learned something from 43/37, professor.  TruthIsAll   Aug-24-05 08:42 AM   #174 
        - seems disingenuous to me  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 09:02 AM   #179 
  - I will answer this directly (soon)... Real life inervenes.... n/t  anaxarchos   Aug-24-05 02:04 PM   #200 
  - I'm going to have to suspend my participation...  anaxarchos   Aug-24-05 05:23 PM   #204 
  - Below the belt, anax....  Febble   Aug-24-05 05:40 AM   #159 
     - An observation from a very biased poster on this thread..  TruthIsAll   Aug-24-05 08:23 AM   #171 
        - Two small corrections:  Febble   Aug-24-05 09:00 AM   #177 
        - The term "fundie" has been used 7048 topics (GD) since 11-02-04  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 08:49 PM   #214 
        - whoops, we forgot the rule against ad hominems  OnTheOtherHand   Aug-24-05 10:39 AM   #189 
           - It's a 2X2 square, not a syllogism  mgr   Aug-24-05 01:54 PM   #199 
  - "A" "game" about the 2004 Election  Calamity Jayne   Aug-24-05 07:38 AM   #167 
  - RIP Calamity  autorank   Aug-24-05 11:37 AM   #193 
     - And she was such a promising star of DU.  Chi   Aug-24-05 11:43 AM   #194 
        - Good... they are showing up.  anaxarchos   Aug-24-05 12:02 PM   #196 
           - I think we need a 2 syllable limit to attract more 8) n/t  Chi   Aug-24-05 12:11 PM   #197 
  - HALF TIME SHOW! Take a break and take this poll!  Bill Bored   Aug-24-05 04:30 PM   #202 
  - UMMM,.. Anyone know what TIA did to get Tomb stoned?  Chi   Aug-24-05 04:56 PM   #203 
  - As far as I'm concerned, this game is over period as is other Bull Shit  autorank   Aug-24-05 06:13 PM   #205 
  - Then why this post? n/t  mgr   Aug-24-05 06:41 PM   #208 
     - You are truly "amazing" n/t  tommcintyre   Aug-24-05 07:04 PM   #210 
     - Very classy comment  Chi   Aug-24-05 07:50 PM   #212 
     - Not sure where you are going with this  mgr   Aug-25-05 10:52 AM   #226 
        - Hmmm, I don't recall kicking someone in the face...  Chi   Aug-25-05 11:40 AM   #229 
     - .  autorank   Aug-24-05 08:22 PM   #213 
        - Your expressions of contempt aside,  mgr   Aug-25-05 09:48 AM   #222 
        - 2. I had not realized that you posted upstream  mgr   Aug-25-05 10:28 AM   #224 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Aug-25-05 10:29 AM   #225 
  - I sent an email to the Administrators last night about TIA...  Chi   Aug-25-05 11:26 AM   #228 
  - I'm locking this  EarlG   Aug-25-05 12:52 PM   #230 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC